Populist outcry may argue that anyone would be lucky to earn annual compensation of $500,000. But in reality, many talented Americans who are driven by ambition and the possibility of unlimited upside would not enter a situation where that upside were capped.
Dave Krasne, NYTimes blogs (via master-of-none) (via billda)
This is silly. If you’re so ambitious, go work for a company that
wasn’t partly responsible,didn’t/doesn’t accept federal bailout money. Test your true worth in the open market. Part of the point of this is to punish the corporations, it’s not aimed at punishing ambitious individuals far removed from the heart of this mess.(via michaelikesit)
That’s the point - that is why the salary cap is damaging. The best and brightest, those that are ambitious, don’t want to go work for a bank that caps their salary. They’ll go to unregulated hedge funds, they’ll go off shore, they’ll start their own firms. At a time when we need nothing short of brilliance to save our bailed out banking system, a salary cap severely damages our banks’ ability to retain and attract top talent.
Further - “part of the point is to punish corporations”? No. The entire point is to fix the economy as quickly as possible, not to punitively exact revenge for past wrongs. What I don’t understand is why the government insists on severely hobbling the very institutions that the taxpayers are now SIGNIFICANT shareholders in. You want the taxpayers to realize a return on their investment? Get the banks back on their feet - as soon as possible.
Source: master-of-none
