From: Greg Howell - strsbstr@qnis.net
To: American Injustice - comments@fa-ir.org

Good God. The last thing this country needs is another government mandate deciding who can earn what. Wow, I can strike back at the greedy CEO by taking away something from him. Right. When has another law that supposedly was going to help the "average American" ended up doing anything but further miring him in government regulation and increased taxation. The cost is your liberty, one piece at a time. I can imagine the collectivist-statist manifesto delivered in front of the Continental Congress, "I know not what course others may take, but as for me give me equality or give me death." Right. Another step to put us all on the government plantation.

Consider that income taxation is a major player in soaring CEO salaries. If the CEO salary and package wasn't deductible, then the incentive to payout the big bucks would be considerably less. Perhaps bonuses could then be predicated on actual performance . . . amazing concept. Without the artificial profitability of tax avoidance this would likely come into play. The fact is that a tax system based on confiscation of income as ours is, functions to subsidize over-payment of CEO's through their salaries being a deduction against adjusted gross income. By the way, a flat tax on income would not eliminate this subsidy.

From: American Injustice - comments@fa-ir.org
To: Greg Howell - strsbstr@qnis.net

American Injustice does not advocate bigger government or more government controls. However, most CEOs are grossly overpaid.

Gilbert Amelio, is a great example. As The Wall Street Journal noted in its executive pay report, Apple lost nearly $2 billion during Amelio's brief tenure of 17 months. About 3,600 employees lost their jobs. Amelio's golden parachute included $6.7 million in severance pay plus other compensation. Mr. Amelio will never honestly earn the $6.7 million.

Corporations and their CEOs must take the lead in lowering CEO perks on a voluntary basis. Corporate greed is an evil that enslaves the common man. While visiting Cuba, the Pope said it very well - Capitalism without responsibility.
___________________

From: Greg Howell - strsbstr@qnis.net
To: American Injustice - comments@fa-ir.org

The article I read specifically made reference to a bill that would mandate that CEO's could be paid a maximum of 20 or 25 times what their lowest worker earned. This is government in business big time. We in health care are watching the creeping socialism that, unchecked, will also mandate what a maximum reimbursement yearly for a doctor would be.(this has been the case in Canada) I see no difference. It is still socialism. It is still government control. It is still despotism.

If CEO's are overpaid then it is up to stockholders (the company owners) to hold their board of directors to a higher standard. Elimination of the government subsidy for this (income tax deduction for the payout to a CEO) would call this practice into question by stockholders. This is the only way to do this and maintain any semblance of liberty. To put the government into this much control would be the final coffin nail into the rights of private property and our liberty along with it. Private property ownership is the foundation for a free society. The act of huge CEO payouts may be offensive to you or I, yet to mandate through government control something we find offensive is tyranny (even if we are in the majority).

I believe that the spate of overpaid CEOs is another example of the hidden costs of direct income taxation on the average American. The solution is to eliminate taxation on individuals or business income. The subsidy then disappears by causing the CEO's salary to be deducted from the bottom line directly without any secondary benefit.

Should a bill be passed that would mandate CEO salaries, we would likely see many companies flee from the confines of our borders to avoid this restriction along with American jobs at an even greater rate.

My bottom line is this. I do not argue the disparity in income between some CEOs and their workers. I do find the Pope, in a totalitarian country that has mandates religion as an evil, attacking the one system that has done more to give men the liberty to worship as they please to be surrealistic. The Pope, after all, is the head of state of a society that is a remnant of feudalism. What your piece called for was "corporate morality" to be legislated. As many from the left, center, and right have expressed, "you can't legislate morality."I do feel, with considerable historical backing, that government intervention is always the wrong way to accomplish anything other than fighting a war.

Greg Howell - strsbstr@qnis.net