CEO Council Demands Cuts To Poor, Elderly While Reaping Billions In Government Contracts, Tax Breaks.

WASHINGTON -- The corporate CEOs who have made a high-profile foray into deficit negotiations have themselves been substantially responsible for the size of the deficit they now want closed.

The companies represented by executives working with the Campaign To Fix The Debt have received trillions in federal war contracts, subsidies and bailouts, as well as specialized tax breaks and loopholes that virtually eliminate the companies' tax bills.

The CEOs are part of a campaign run by the Peter Peterson-backed Center for a Responsible Federal Budget, which plans to spend at least $30 million pushing for a deficit reduction deal in the lame-duck session and beyond.

During the past few days, CEOs belonging to what the campaign calls its CEO Fiscal Leadership Council (see pdf pages below listing memebrs) -- most visibly, Goldman Sachs' Lloyd Blankfein and Honeywell's David Cote -- have barnstormed the media, making the case that the only way to cut the deficit is to severely scale back social safety-net programs -- Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security -- which would disproportionately impact the poor and the elderly.

As part of their push, they are advocating a "territorial tax system" that would exempt their companies' foreign profits from taxation, netting them about $134 billion in tax savings, according to a new report from the Institute for Policy Studies titled "The CEO Campaign to ‘Fix’ the Debt: A Trojan Horse for Massive Corporate Tax Breaks" -- money that could help pay off the federal budget deficit.

Yet the CEOs are not offering to forgo federal money or pay a higher tax rate, on their personal income or corporate profits. Instead, council recommendations include cutting "entitlement" programs, as well as what they call "low-priority spending.

As my buddy JOG would say, "I hope there's a special place in Hell for em."

but if the company is successful then everyone should benefit.


AaaaaMEN


& If its Not successful, the First action taken should be pay cuts at the top, not layoffs at the bottom,.

THats Incentive.,

BTW that 250 X should include all the contract and temp and part time and the transient workers's take home hourly wage ... you cant by pass that by putting in a bunch of janitors that are contractors wo whom you pay nothing ... but count your 250 X off the mid level exec, who is the lowest level employee you actually have. Jamie Dimon is the most famous example of doing this, though he said he only makes some number of times the average ... but he had stacked the deck toward a higher average by putting in a lot of low wage employees as temps.

Cool.
Srinath.

When I first joined Apple Computer in 1980 they had profit sharing based on a simple formula.   The net profit, after manufacturing, R&D, facilities, utilities, equipment purchases, etc., was divided among the employees.   There was a factor in the formula that adjusted your personal check to your wage bracket, but otherwise the money was divided in an equitable manner.   The fiscal accounting system was quarterly, and I was a young engineer making about $25k annually.   Profits were variable, of course, but I remember getting occasional checks for $1500 - not too shab for something unexpected out of the blue!

In those days all of us were happy campers and not only pulled our weight, but were happy to do the occasional extra hours required to make shipments, etc.   Years later the MBAs came in and eventually phased out employee profit sharing.    It didn't happen overnight, but the formula kept getting more and more complicated (and checks less and less) until we didn't get anything at all.

LostArtist wrote on 12/01/12 at 04:32:39:



They are clueless and evil.I can understand them getting the same multiple of the common worker as they did in the 70's ... and they used to pay more taxes then as a percentage ... Now, they have a larger multiple, and they pay less % in taxes cos they are "capital gains" Screw that, first off, dont call it capital gains ... call it "really low tax" cos capital gains tax sounds like its a big %, and then make sure no one who isn't a real business man with a long term development and return on investment can get that rate.

CEO isn't a buisnessman, he's an employee ... or she is an employee. Treat them as such in the tax code.

Cool.
srinath.