They are capping wall street execs

[TheDude]

The players are effectively, if somewhat loosely, capped. Rookie salaries are fixed within a certain range and the salary cap means that there is a limit that any one player can receive.

So posters who agree with the system as is are agreeing to capping salaries by definition. And the fact that the gov't allows the NFL to do what it wants means that this is, in some sense of it, gov't sponsored wage fixing.

So all you libertarians should just make the switch to being European soccer fans where, ironically enough, sports are conducted almost entirely by free market principles.

You can make the arguement that the salary cap hurts the quality football.

You might only have 4-8 teams, but the talent on those 4-8 teams would be elite. Thus the games would provide be of better pure football quality and skill as Cory Proctor likely would have a restraining order to come near a football field. That said, the cap is there to provide smaller franchises to be able to compete with larger ones in the guise of "for the greater good". It is a form of socialism, you have to live with not seeing the best atheletes on the field at one time. And Owners must live with mandated rules even if they would like to get evry player they could afford. This works if you enjoy football as it is . But I don't think it translates into real world economics.

I won't get into that unless you really want to debate it

 

[Doomsday]

A lot of CEOs of the wall street banks should be in jail. They were told no bonuses, but they gave them out anyhow under different names. Then they are going to collect TONS of tax payer money to payoff their debt from their greedy *** choices. So, basically a huge part of your tax dollars did nothing but pay bonuses to people who were so skilled they lost billions.

I think if they rode the subway with me, I would push them onto the tracks! :laugh2: (I'M KIDDING!) ...maybe!

So put them in jail, the government has no business or right to limit how much a person or company can make. That goes against the very fiber of this country.

If anything someone needs to cap the BS the government is allowed to get away with. Talking about over stepping your boundaries.

 

[fanfromvirginia]

You can make the arguement that the salary cap hurts the quality football.

You might only have 4-8 teams, but the talent on those 4-8 teams would be elite. Thus the games would provide be of better pure football quality and skill as Cory Proctor likely would have a restraining order to come near a football field. That said, the cap is there to provide smaller franchises to be able to compete with larger ones in the guise of "for the greater good". It is a form of socialism, you have to live with not seeing the best atheletes on the field at one time. And Owners must live with mandated rules even if they would like to get evry player they could afford. This works if you enjoy football as it is . But I don't think it translates into real world economics.

I won't get into that unless you really want to debate it

Nah, I don't really want to debate it although I doubt we're actually that far apart. I think wage and price controls, for whatever reason, can work pretty well if done well in sports (as is arguably the case in the NFL) but terribly in the real world and I'm fine with the contradiction although I've got no ability or inclination to explain the contradiction.

 

[jterrell]

A lot of CEOs of the wall street banks should be in jail. They were told no bonuses, but they gave them out anyhow under different names. Then they are going to collect TONS of tax payer money to payoff their debt from their greedy *** choices. So, basically a huge part of your tax dollars did nothing but pay bonuses to people who were so skilled they lost billions.

I think if they rode the subway with me, I would push them onto the tracks! :laugh2: (I'M KIDDING!) ...maybe!

stop trying in inject real info into a rantfest

 

[TheDude]

Nah, I don't really want to debate it although I doubt we're actually that far apart. I think wage and price controls, for whatever reason, can work pretty well if done well in sports (as is arguably the case in the NFL) but terribly in the real world and I'm fine with the contradiction although I've got no ability or inclination to explain the contradiction.

I kinda thought that with the way you phrased that.

Cheers

 

[jterrell]

So put them in jail, the government has no business or right to limit how much a person or company can make. That goes against the very fiber of this country.

If anything someone needs to cap the BS the government is allowed to get away with. Talking about over stepping your boundaries.

They are only trying to limit it for those corporations who collected government funds.

Any corporation that refuses gov't funds can and should pay whomever they want whatever they want. But don't ask for bailout funds or stimulus funds then hand out huge bonuses.

 

[Doomsday]

They are only trying to limit it for those corporations who collected government funds.

Any corporation that refuses gov't funds can and should pay whomever they want whatever they want. But don't ask for bailout funds or stimulus funds then hand out huge bonuses.

Gotcha, I have no problem with caps on companies that receive bailouts.

 

[YosemiteSam]

So put them in jail, the government has no business or right to limit how much a person or company can make. That goes against the very fiber of this country.

So you think it's ok that these guys should be getting paid undeserved bonuses from tax payer money? :bang2:

 

[YosemiteSam]

They are only trying to limit it for those corporations who collected government funds.

Any corporation that refuses gov't funds can and should pay whomever they want whatever they want. But don't ask for bailout funds or stimulus funds then hand out huge bonuses.

The problem is, they are collecting the monies from the government and still playing the bonuses. They are just calling them something different. I have a friend that works for a huge bank that is receiving lots of govenment money, but the bonuses being paid out are not being called bonuses this year. They are now being called "Retention Fees"!

 

[Doomsday]

So you think it's ok that these guys should be getting paid undeserved bonuses from tax payer money? :bang2:

No, I missed the part about it only applied to companies receiving bailouts. Like I said they should be capped and held accountable. I never would of bailed em out to begin with.

 

[SkinsFan28]

Whatever to all that.
It is definitely all Jerry and Dan Snyder's fault!!!!

/sarcasm]

 

[TwoDeep3]

So when socialism is the order of the day. And everyone makes the same money.

Where is the incentive to go the extra yard?

Wanna kill the human spirit?

Enact socialism today.

The liquor companies will love this idea.

 

[TheDude]

The problem is, they are collecting the monies from the government and still playing the bonuses. They are just calling them something different. I have a friend that works for a huge bank that is receiving lots of govenment money, but the bonuses being paid out are not being called bonuses this year. They are now being called "Retention Fees"!

So you think a struggling firm should pay no bonuses to their top 10 revenue producers who exceed their goals, knowing that if they don't, those employees take their clients to a competitor?

It's just part of the territory, you have to retain your revenue producers to help you get out of the problem quicker.

It's not great, but part of the territory. I do not have a problem with Exec/C-level employees being capped if the took gov't money. But capping everything is counterproductive.

 

[dallascowboyfanboy]

So you think a struggling firm should pay no bonuses to their top 10 revenue producers who exceed their goals, knowing that if they don't, those employees take their clients to a competitor?

It's just part of the territory, you have to retain your revenue producers to help you get out of the problem quicker.

It's not great, but part of the territory. I do not have a problem with Exec/C-level employees being capped if the took gov't money. But capping everything is counterproductive.

easy for you to say about not having qualms about execs who benefit from gov't Tarp, having a salary cap since you do not live in NYC. Our salaries should not be capped because of the tax revenue NYC inherently receives from us several hundred million in tax revenue was lost in 2008. Mayor Bloomberg has already a tax for plastic grocery bags!
I doubt what ever town you live in will have a tax for grocery bags. The city's budget deficit is so great about 13,000 public school teachers will be layed off along with less Police and less health and human services.

but i digress

 

[fanfromvirginia]

So you think a struggling firm should pay no bonuses to their top 10 revenue producers who exceed their goals, knowing that if they don't, those employees take their clients to a competitor?

It's just part of the territory, you have to retain your revenue producers to help you get out of the problem quicker.

It's not great, but part of the territory. I do not have a problem with Exec/C-level employees being capped if the took gov't money. But capping everything is counterproductive.

I don't think anybody's calling for them being universally capped. So far what we're looking at is capping salaries for CEOs who ran their companies far enough into the ground to warrant bailout money.

Having said that, I wonder if there wouldn't be a way to legally tie bonuses to profits going forward. Corporations that see profits past a point could pay their CEOS anything they wanted; corporations that lost X amount of money would not be allowed to pay bonuses.

The danger from one side would be that it would become bureacratized and socialistic (the rightwing/libertarian critique) and from the other that it would be loophole-ized (the lefty critique).

Oops. I said I didn't wanna get into it...

 

[TheDude]

easy for you to say about not having qualms about execs who benefit from gov't Tarp, having a salary cap since you do not live in NYC. Our salaries should not be capped because of the tax revenue NYC inherently receives from us several hundred million in tax revenue was lost in 2008. Mayor Bloomberg has already a tax for plastic grocery bags!
I doubt what ever town you live in will have a tax for grocery bags. The city's budget deficit is so great about 13,000 public school teachers will be layed off along with less Police and less health and human services.

but i digress

In general, I do not agree with salary caps in any way shape or form. However, once you go to the government asking for help or you go bankrupt, then I can live with that. I tried to say that the cap shouldn't be company wide.

I will say this, the government made Wells Fargo and JPMorgan TAKE bailout money as to not show which firms were in the worst shapes. Of course, its obvious now who they were.

However, as to tax issues, that is NYC for one. The other is that losing 200,000 jobs from Lehman, Bear, Citi, etc going completely out of business. If the CEOs need capital from the govt but have to live with Exec salary capped, I can live with it. Don't like it, but its all about leverage.

 

[Beast_from_East]

1st.....Player salaries are capped (in the aggregate), it is called a SALARY CAP.

2nd.....The Wall Street execs that are having their salaries capped are from financial institutions that received government money under TARP.

This idea that the government is trying to control the private sector is just ridiculous. You dont get free money without strings attached, thus if the financial institutions dont want any restrictions then they need to give the money back.

3rd.......NFL teams are not using taxpayer money from the federal government to pay player salaries. Romo's $67 million is being paid by Jerry Jones, along with every other player on the team.

That is why it is so funny reading post after post on here that Jerry needs to step down as GM, Jerry needs to retire from Football, Jerry needs to cut this player of that player, Jerry needs to........................


Its Jerry Jone's team and he can do whatever the hell he wants since its his money that is paying for everything.

 

[AbeBeta]

easy for you to say about not having qualms about execs who benefit from gov't Tarp, having a salary cap since you do not live in NYC. Our salaries should not be capped because of the tax revenue NYC inherently receives from us several hundred million in tax revenue was lost in 2008. Mayor Bloomberg has already a tax for plastic grocery bags!
I doubt what ever town you live in will have a tax for grocery bags. The city's budget deficit is so great about 13,000 public school teachers will be layed off along with less Police and less health and human services.

but i digress

Stop complaining and bring a freaking reusable bag. It really isn't that difficult now is it?

 

[TheDude]

I don't think anybody's calling for them being universally capped. So far what we're looking at is capping salaries for CEOs who ran their companies far enough into the ground to warrant bailout money.

Can't argue, its all about leverage. If that is what makes the gov't infuse capital, live with it if you ran it/caused it

Having said that, I wonder if there wouldn't be a way to legally tie bonuses to profits going forward. Corporations that see profits past a point could pay their CEOS anything they wanted; corporations that lost X amount of money would not be allowed to pay bonuses. I believe there are some mandates on dividends, but I see where you're going and it is seems sound

The danger from one side would be that it would become bureacratized and socialistic (the rightwing/libertarian critique) and from the other that it would be loophole-ized (the lefty critique).

Oops. I said I didn't wanna get into it...

Cynicaly, I think there will be a way around it vis a vie restricted stock, deferred com, company perks, etc. It is a nasty situation that the govt helped create (FNMA, FRE), so the outcome is going to be nasty

 

[TheDude]

1st.....Player salaries are capped (in the aggregate), it is called a SALARY CAP.

2nd.....The Wall Street execs that are having their salaries capped are from financial institutions that received government money under TARP.

This idea that the government is trying to control the private sector is just ridiculous. You dont get free money without strings attached, thus if the financial institutions dont want any restrictions then they need to give the money back.

3rd.......NFL teams are not using taxpayer money from the federal government to pay player salaries. Romo's $67 million is being paid by Jerry Jones, along with every other player on the team.

That is why it is so funny reading post after post on here that Jerry needs to step down as GM, Jerry needs to retire from Football, Jerry needs to cut this player of that player, Jerry needs to........................


Its Jerry Jone's team and he can do whatever the hell he wants since its his money that is paying for everything.

The unfair thing to Jerry, is that no matter what new idea he gets to bring in more Revenue, he has to give a portion to the lazy owners (Mike Brown).

Oh well, back to wrk