Apple Awards Executives 1,000,000 Shares of Stock to Stay Until 2016

[D*I*S_Frontman]

I am not from the US, I am actually from Singapore.

We don't really have safety nets here either. What passes for social security is paid entirely out of our own pockets (a portion of our monthly salary is taken away, we only get it back upon retirement). The government does help with the poor, but otherwise doesn't really subsidies anything else. For most part, we are on our own.

So yeah, I have been raised in a no-socialism environment and taught to work hard for anything I want. So far, it's worked fairly well. I am not rich by any stretch, but earn enough for a decent living, and I find I am content.

This.

Singapore is the model for REAL free market capitalism. It is also known for having one of the least corrupt governments on the planet. The per capita income is ranked by the IMF, the WB, and the CIA perennially in the top three or four in the world, bested only by Qatar's petrol wealth and Luxembourg. Always better than the US, and FAR better than any socialist nation in Europe. If you want to see the lab experiment for what authentic free market capitalism does, this is it.

Where the US falls short is in the bastardization of free market capitalism--"crony capitalism", in which the federal government becomes entangled in the markets, screwing up their natural self-correcting mechanisms. This part of the OWS complaints are valid IMHO, but the cures they suggest to address the issue are 180º wrong. The solution is not to curb or restrain capitalism--it is to free it up so it works properly.

Oddly enough, the Founding Fathers, if brought back to observe our world today, would probably recognize Singapore as closer to their original intent for economic liberty and responsible government than our own nation. This also proves that Christianity and capitalism are not inextricably linked, as the predominant religion in Singapore is Buddhism (although Islam, Hinduism, Taoism, and Christianity are all well represented).

 

[Piggie]

I thought it was said that we are now in a period of corporatism as opposed to capitalism, where everything is run by and run for big business.

If you can get your brain out of a fixed way of thinking (brainwashing) for a moment, sit back and look at the planet, it's people etc. It really is a vary sad state we have gotten ourselves into.

 

[Goratrix]

I thought it was said that we are now in a period of corporatism as opposed to capitalism, where everything is run by and run for big business.

Corporatism IS capitalism, or more precisely a logical evolution of capitalism. A free market, based on competition, naturally progresses towards eliminating that competition, up to a point when barriers of entry for new emerging competitors are too high, so there remain just a few monopolies.

 

[D*I*S_Frontman]

I thought it was said that we are now in a period of corporatism as opposed to capitalism, where everything is run by and run for big business.

"Corporatism?"

A corporation is a legal entity comprised of a minimum of three people (President, Vice President, and Treasurer) who are starting a company and want their personal assets shielded from liability. It is not a religion nor an ideology.

Big corporations are people, same as small ones. All persons involved--stockholders, employees, BOD's, execs, and customers--voluntarily participate in its operation. Publicly traded corporations are democratic institutions in which stockholders vote for the BOD members that govern the company, who, in turn, direct the executives who actually run the day-to-day operations.

If you can get your brain out of a fixed way of thinking (brainwashing) for a moment, sit back and look at the planet, it's people etc. It really is a vary sad state we have gotten ourselves into.

Really? And that is the fault of corporations?

Most of the worst problems in this world--genocides, poverty, disease, famine, terrorism, poor education, environmental damage, etc.--come from despotism and government corruption in the developing world. Those big corporations you vilify could greatly impact these nations in positive ways if not for corruption.

For an economy to develop and bestow the blessings of wealth and security on its people in a nation, its government must honor the rule of law fairly and effectively, particularly contract law. If that stability is absent, foreign investment will not risk involvement. Why build a factory and train workers only to have the local government radically alter their tax code to fleece you of every penny, or, worse yet, just "nationalize" the enterprise, leaving you with nothing? That keeps the local people poor and prevents the development of new consumer markets for the rest of the world to benefit from. It also encourages the quick fix raping of the environment for mineral wealth and other natural resources, which don't require as much participation by the population to exploit and are easier to maintain autocratic control over, and therefore do not require that population to be educated or productive in order for the oligarchy to benefit from the wealth generated.

I am not saying that big corporations don't make short-sighted or cynical decisions from time to time. They do. But globally they are NOT the worst problem, and could be a major component of the solutions to these ills if government corruption could be curtailed.

 

[divinox]

Fun < (Fun + $40 million)

Actually, there is research showing how extrinsic incentives can crowd out intrinsic incentives, thus creating a situation where fun > fun + cash. Doubt they did a study with 40 mn, but still :- )

 

[divinox]

The thing is that all these "rights" aren't entirely without costs of their own.

Looking at the EU, their socialism doesn't exactly come free of charge. It is fueled through high taxes, and even then, it appears (to me at least) that the whole system is at risk of imploding under its own bloated mess. Just look at France as an example, and all the hurdles their president has to jump through just to enact a seemingly straightforward legislation extending the retirement age.

Not to mention that considering the state of affairs Europe is currently in, I would hardly use them as a sterling example of how a country ought to be governed.

Looking at the EU, we have the nordic and northern european countries that have been doing fairly well - better than most in fact. Ironically, the most socialist of countries are the ones that have done the best. Just as much, if not more, of the tanking of some is due to liberal (free market) thinking - Irish (paper) tiger being a prime example.

Then we have Greece. A country that has had "democracy" for what? Like 20 years. A country thats anything but socialist, a country in which corruption is sky high and the rich, well... get away. Italy... dont even get me started there. Berlusconi is hardly a poster boy for red thought. Nor is the mafia, the real culprit behind the crap they're in.

So yeah. Some how all the strongest nations in the EU are more red (socialist) than the not so strong ones. Go figure. Heck, UK being behind the pack fits the model too. After all, they're way bluer (market trusting) than Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland etc.


Oh and yeah, as for France. They're just being french... :- )

p.s.

based on how the nordic countries are, and have been run, the OECD actually made them into a stirling example of how to run a country, thus in part abandoning the formerly sacred anglo-saxian (UK/US) model.

p.s. 2

Doesnt the US have the same public debt per capita as Greece?

 

[jamesryanbell]

...or you could listen to the lady at my local mall recently...which went something like this:

"No matter what you do, in any capacity, there should be a hardline salary cap at $1,000,000 per year. No one should need more than that. I mean come on...that's a lot of money."

Talk amongst yourselves.

 

[iStudentUK]

Heck, UK being behind the pack fits the model too. After all, they're way bluer (market trusting) than Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland etc.

Yes the UK seems politically and geographically slightly off the European mainland. We get a lot of the rights of other EU countries, but often watered down a bit. I think we are closer to typical European politics than US, but I do sometimes feel we could do with do with aligning ourselves more with our closer neighbours.

Oh and yeah, as for France. They're just being french... :- )

I always like how no matter how much people argue they can always unite in their dislike of the French.

 

[divinox]

This.

Singapore is the model for REAL free market capitalism. It is also known for having one of the least corrupt governments on the planet. The per capita income is ranked by the IMF, the WB, and the CIA perennially in the top three or four in the world, bested only by Qatar's petrol wealth and Luxembourg. Always better than the US, and FAR better than any socialist nation in Europe. If you want to see the lab experiment for what authentic free market capitalism does, this is it.

Where the US falls short is in the bastardization of free market capitalism--"crony capitalism", in which the federal government becomes entangled in the markets, screwing up their natural self-correcting mechanisms. This part of the OWS complaints are valid IMHO, but the cures they suggest to address the issue are 180º wrong. The solution is not to curb or restrain capitalism--it is to free it up so it works properly.

Oddly enough, the Founding Fathers, if brought back to observe our world today, would probably recognize Singapore as closer to their original intent for economic liberty and responsible government than our own nation. This also proves that Christianity and capitalism are not inextricably linked, as the predominant religion in Singapore is Buddhism (although Islam, Hinduism, Taoism, and Christianity are all well represented).

Actually, if i were a capitalist i'd think twice before using Singapore as my poster-child. Second, if everywhere were like Spore, you'd - for obvious reasons - have a dilution effect where many of the things that made Spore look so great are dispersed thus making Spore no longer look as great (and more so, a lot of new places not looking great at all).

----------

Yes the UK seems politically and geographically slightly off the European mainland. We get a lot of the rights of other EU countries, but often watered down a bit. I think we are closer to typical European politics than US, but I do sometimes feel we could do with do with aligning ourselves more with our closer neighbours.



I always like how no matter how much people argue they can always unite in their dislike of the French.

Well, i cant say i know much about the UK really, but historically there has been a clear gap when it comes to sociologic thought. Then, of course, you have the whole imperialist and post-imperialist legacy too, which i guess mattered in its own way.

But-eee... ze french ar-eee ver-y sophisticatud peupell...

 

[bpaluzzi]

Makes you wonder, America is not quite the "greatest country in the world" anymore.

This part is up for debate. Can find logical arguments on both side.

In fact, it's behind a lot of other westernized countries. (Germany, France, UK, Australia, Canada, Italy, Switzerland, Norway, Belgium)

But this part is laughably false on some of those countries.

The Pittsburgh Left it still legal in western PA and most of Ohio!

Uh. No. It's very much illegal (at least in Western PA)

 

[Kaibelf]

Ugh seriously

Too many people whining about how much THEY think someone "should" make as a reward for a great career, while doing too little to work on their own. I'll simplify for all of you. What's the difference between the exec team sharing ~$400m in stock, and them sharing about $15m in stock? The answer is: nothing at all, the number of shares is the same. It's largely due to the efforts of this team that the stock is worth $400 these days instead of around $15 when a lot of them had every reason in the world to go somewhere else. They didn't. They stuck around and busted their butts to make Apple into what it is today, bringing themselves great wealth, bringing jobs AND job security to tens of thousands of people, and enriching countless shareholders and pension funds.

So what exactly are you complaining about? Ah, yeah, you're complaining that someone who didn't get in when times were tough isn't being rewarded for coming in after the fact and getting freebees. There's always an exit door for the lower-level workers. They can go and start their own Apple. They just need to find like-minded entrepreneurs and put in the work that these people did. But then, it's a lot easier to complain on MR about how unfair it all is. A site that even exists because of the efforts and planning skills of these people, when you think about it.

 

[akadmon]

...or you could listen to the lady at my local mall recently...which went something like this:

"No matter what you do, in any capacity, there should be a hardline salary cap at $1,000,000 per year. No one should need more than that. I mean come on...that's a lot of money."

Talk amongst yourselves.

Good idea. In this type of system, a situation like the one we're discussing here would never happen. Google or Facebook would not be able to lure the top Apples with promisses of more money, because they could not, by law, do so. As for the incentive to work harder, it would be to keep your 1 million dollar job, or be demoted to the mailroom, which would not only hurt your wallet, but would also look bad on your CV, if you decided to quit and go looking for another 1 millon dollar job elsewhere, rather than work your way back to the top.

 

[jackc]

Good idea. In this type of system, a situation like the one we're discussing here would never happen. Google or Facebook would not be able to lure the top Apples with promisses of more money, because they could not, by law, do so. As for the incentive to work harder, it would be to keep your 1 million dollar job, or be demoted to the mailroom, which would not only hurt your wallet, but would also look bad on your CV, if you decided to quit and go looking for another 1 millon dollar job elsewhere, rather than work your way back to the top.

God forbid another company would lure someone with evil stacks of cash, they must be stopped! What other voluntary, mutually beneficial transactions do you want to outlaw?

People want massive government intervention in business and then they wonder why we have crony capitalism.

 

[NumberNine]

no one deserves that kind of money.....

Jealous

 

[Bug-Creator]

Lets not forget that none of the managers carry personal risks like the owner of any small shop would do.

If they fail, they get a golden handshake only to then to sue for outstanding payments.

One also has to ask who decides on what these people get as bonus (on top of their allready quite good salaries), not Joe Schmok owning 5 Apple-shares but other managers sitting in high places themselves.

Bout capitlism vs. "socialism" :

Rule 1:
Money falls upwards

Rule 2:
Rule 1 is still valid


If you let such a system run unchecked you'll end up with a feudal society:

A very small group of people owning pretty much all. Only these have full access to education, medicene etc making it extra hard for others to get into that group.

A somewhat bigger minority making a descent living on things they borrowed from the "owners"

A faceless mass of peasants, made to serve and live in poverty.


Thats everything but not "free market" and any goverment that really works for "the people" needs to make sure that they wealth does infact not stay with that 1%. Yes that means taxes, both on the living and the recently deceased.

Current goverments act like they are in the 2nd group, borrowing more and more money by the rich, a system that had to explode sooner or later.

The US tries to delay that explosion by printing more and more money but in the end it will end in a bigger explosion.


Or another way, think of the emporer's new clothes:

Someone shouted "Mr Greece is naked"
Everybody in the EU is now nervous cos someoneelse might shout "Mr Italy and Mr. France only wear underpants".

Noone dares to admit that Uncle Sam has even skinned himself long ago.

 

[Hagrid]

Well said

i was equating marxism/leninism with campy cinema villainy, in the stereotypical way movie monsters seem to "come back" from what would seem to be certain death blows. Way to "awfulize" the analogy into some grand statement of murderous intent against the left by the tea party. The extent to which ows protestors embrace marxism is the extent of that comparison, really. Marxism, for all its academic rigors, has been debunked as a workable economic model in every way possible, and yet it won't die. The only reason it "works" in china is because they don't operate like idealistic marxists--they use the mechanisms of capitalism to facilitate their autocracy. Certainly they aren't clamping down on the bold free markets in cities like hong kong and shanghi! For some reason marxism still gives some well-to-do american college kids the warm fuzzies to fantasize about. If i were to hazard a guess, i would chalk that up to a mix of motivations: Misguided altruism, intellectual elitism, a bid for personal validation and attention, and an effective way to piss off their parents.

Btw, while i am sympathetic to the tea party, i have never attended a rally or donated a dime to their cause. Your posts might drive me to finally do it, however.:d

time will tell. I would be interested in knowing how you could ever make a statement like that. The threshold for being a 1%-er in the us is currently about $350k of adjusted gross income. How close am i to that line, and what do my prospects look like for the next year or two? How would you know?

Do you actually believe that "club" claptrap? Do you think there is actually a bouncer at the 1% door, turning $350k earners away?

And how do you know my environmental positions? One can be a free market capitalist and still understand that reasonable environmental regulations are a valid role for the federal government to play, so long as the mandates are founded in solid science and not shrill, hyperbole-driven emotional overreactions.

Here is an example of what i mean by that. I live in suburban chicago. If i were to purchase an electric car (fully electric, mind you, not a hybrid), people would judge me a wonderfully "green" person, a responsible member of society keeping mother earth pristine and denying the evil oil companies™ their filthy lucre. And they would be wrong.

The additional environmental damage that mining for the rare earth metals that huge electric batteries require is significant, so the initial construction of the vehicle is less "green". But what about when the car is on the road? Matters are even worse. Chicago's electrical power comes from a coal burning plant. I see scores of coal cars cross our tracks daily. If you operate a fully electric passenger vehicle in chicago, illinois, you are actually, for all intents and purposes, running your car on coal. Coal! Far dirtier than a gas combustion engine, and iirc the burning of coal globally releases more radioactive material into our atmosphere on an annual basis than the entire nuclear industry has in its entire operational history.

Fwiw i drive a vw diesel. Even with 120k on the engine i get over 50mpg on the highway, the environmental cost to make it were far less damaging than those that would be required for a hybrid (let alone a fully electric vehicle), and our diesel fuel here is usually a petrol/bio diesel blend of about 80/20. So my occasionally "sooty" diesel is far, far "greener" than an electric car at every stage.

So that's what i am talking about--real environmental consciousness and not "i want to be validated for my wonderful green-ness" groupthink.


I'll leave it to our readers to determine which of us is not thinking for his/herself. Or "different."

+1

 

[Popeye206]

Wow... lots of wild and silly comments. Heaven forbid a company takes care of their top people to keep them.

Amazing.

 

[scoobydoo99]

It sadly seems many Americans have been trained to view any kind of regulation helping people (and themselves) to be unacceptable socialism.

A couple of pages ago I pointed out how workers in the US often get a bad deal compared to employment rights in the EU, and was told I was lazy. It's sad some people have been trained to think like that.

Yes, it is. Americans are actually quite gullible compared to much of the rest of the world. They can be quite easily convinced of even the most ludicrous claims by simply presenting them on television. The media and the government work together to obfuscate the truth and perpetuate the current system. The lobbying, public relations, and marketing firms that handle the polictical "spin" for corporations and politicians are experts. Critical thinking is not something that the vast majority of Americans do. They watch CNN and feel like they're "informed", then they run around spouting off whatever the talking heads on TV told them to think. The financial meltdown of 2008 is a great example. The concept of "too big to fail" and the trillion dollar bailout was an outrageous perversion of capitalism (which the extremists on this board claim to support) - yet ordinary Americans were able to be convinced that somehow "bad things" would happen to them personally if we didn't bail out the corporations that had lost all their money through bad investments (aka gambling in the markets). Thus the idea of public risk, private reward was born - the corporations can gamble on risky investments and if they win, they get to keep the money - if they lose, the taxpayers must cover the losses.

My warning to you is this: American corporations are expanding their global reach. The european model of workers' rights and reasonable paid time off are NOT acceptable to American corporate executives who want to maximize profits. They will be trying (overtly or covertly) to undermine those protections to bring your country more in line with U.S. practices. Be prepared to fight.

Time will tell. I would be interested in knowing how you could ever make a statement like that. The threshold for being a 1%-er in the US is currently about $350k of adjusted gross income. How close am I to that line, and what do my prospects look like for the next year or two? How would you know?

I do NOT believe the top 1% is the problem. It is more like the top .5% or maybe even .1%. I agree that $350K, while a nice living, is not exorbitant. From UC Santa Cruz:

"The net worth for those in the lower half of the top 1% is usually achieved after decades of education, hard work, saving and investing as a professional or small business person. While an after-tax income of $175k to $250k and net worth in the $1.2M to $1.8M range may seem like a lot of money to most Americans, it doesn't really buy freedom from financial worry or access to the true corridors of power and money. That doesn't become frequent until we reach the top 0.1%."

So you're right, I should have clarified that I meant I don't think you will be in the ranks of the super-rich to whom I am referring. (1% is very much in vogue now, so I continue to use it as shorthand. Thanks for forcing the distinction.)

Do you actually believe that "club" claptrap? Do you think there is actually a bouncer at the 1% Door, turning $350k earners away?

Yes. Let me give a couple of examples.
1) We are taught in school that anyone can grow up to be President in this great free country of ours. If you work hard, get educated, excel at public speaking, have ideals that strike a chord with most Americans, articulate good policy platforms, etc etc you might have a shot. What are the odds that a father AND son would BOTH just happen to have all the qualities to become President?
2) Many in this thread have stated emphatically that with the same attributes (education, hard work, etc) one could rise to a position on a Board of Directors. Yet, by virtue of serving as Vice President of the United States, Al Gore makes it into the fold.
3) Dick Cheney became CEO of Halliburon in 1996 with NO previous business experience. His previous experience included White House Chief of Staff and Secretary of Defense. By 2000, under Cheney's watch, Halliburton had moved up from #73 to #18 on the Pentagon's list of top contractors.

All of these examples have one thing in common - they players are all in "the club" as I termed it. They move in the same social circles. They often attend the same ivy league schools. They keep it "in the family" (sometimes literally). Jumping between high-level positions in government and industry is how these positions get filled - NOT by giving them to hard working people like you who "rose up" through the ranks. If you don't believe that power is a self-perpetuating force in American society you must be truly naive. I don't think you are. (btw, I threw in Democrat and Republican examples, and I have NO allegiance to either party - the idea that there's a difference is another myth they want you to believe).

And how do you know my environmental positions? One can be a free market capitalist and still understand that reasonable environmental regulations are a valid role for the federal government to play, so long as the mandates are founded in solid science and not shrill, hyperbole-driven emotional overreactions.

I don't dispute your comments on the environmental damage that electric cars contribute. I never mentioned them.

 

[guzhogi]

I wonder what they'll actually do with all this money? So many people are asking why they deserve this money, but no one seems to asking what they plan on doing with it now that they have it.

 

[k995]

This.

Singapore is the model for REAL free market capitalism. It is also known for having one of the least corrupt governments on the planet. The per capita income is ranked by the IMF, the WB, and the CIA perennially in the top three or four in the world, bested only by Qatar's petrol wealth and Luxembourg. Always better than the US, and FAR better than any socialist nation in Europe.

Yeah if only the Luxembourg Socialist Workers' Party wasnt socialist, in the gouvernement or luxemburg in europe.

The whole of europe isnt greece.

Where the US falls short is in the bastardization of free market capitalism--"crony capitalism", in which the federal government becomes entangled in the markets, screwing up their natural self-correcting mechanisms. This part of the OWS complaints are valid IMHO, but the cures they suggest to address the issue are 180º wrong. The solution is not to curb or restrain capitalism--it is to free it up so it works properly.

Funny how some people always find reason to blame the gouvernement.

The only error the USA made was let the financial institution regulate themsleves. They took away most of the restrictions and ended up with a huge mess .

That "self correction" mechanism is nice in theory but in reality it brings countries and its citizens to its knees , most of wich had nothing to do with those companies.



[qutoe]Oddly enough, the Founding Fathers, if brought back to observe our world today, would probably recognize Singapore as closer to their original intent for economic liberty and responsible government than our own nation. This also proves that Christianity and capitalism are not inextricably linked, as the predominant religion in Singapore is Buddhism (although Islam, Hinduism, Taoism, and Christianity are all well represented).[/QUOTE]
I doubt it, it was a different time and place, its also always strange to see the USA fascination with people and the opinions they had centuries ago in a different time and place.

 

[Popeye206]

I wonder what they'll actually do with all this money? So many people are asking why they deserve this money, but no one seems to asking what they plan on doing with it now that they have it.

Probably what others do with that kind of money... invest it. But remember, they don't actually "have the money"... they have the stock options... not the same until they vest and are cashed in.

 

[scoobydoo99]

I just found a pretty succinct bullet list that addresses the reasons I believe the rich control America:

"I will try to demonstrate how rule by the wealthy few is possible despite free speech, regular elections, and organized opposition:

• 
  "The rich" coalesce into a social upper class that has developed institutions by which the children of its members are socialized into an upper-class worldview, and newly wealthy people are assimilated.

• 
  Members of this upper class control corporations, which have been the primary mechanisms for generating and holding wealth in the United States for upwards of 150 years now.

• 
  There exists a network of nonprofit organizations through which members of the upper class and hired corporate leaders not yet in the upper class shape policy debates in the United States.

• 
  Members of the upper class, with the help of their high-level employees in profit and nonprofit institutions, are able to dominate the federal government in Washington.

• 
  The rich, and corporate leaders, nonetheless claim to be relatively powerless.

• 
  Working people have less power than in many other democratic countries."

This is from:
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/class_domination.html

 

[MacAudioPro]

I wonder what they'll actually do with all this money? So many people are asking why they deserve this money, but no one seems to asking what they plan on doing with it now that they have it.

That's none of your business....

 

[Aspasia]

All of these examples have one thing in common - they players are all in "the club" as I termed it. They move in the same social circles. They often attend the same ivy league schools. They keep it "in the family" (sometimes literally).

Well, I can think of two who don't fit that stereotype:

Herman Cain. Barak Obama.

 

[Goratrix]

I wonder what they'll actually do with all this money? So many people are asking why they deserve this money, but no one seems to asking what they plan on doing with it now that they have it.

They didn't get any "money". They got shares. Apple doesn't pay any dividend, so there's no real money involved in this at all. Only when they sell the shares, which they can in 2013 or 2016. What they will be worth at that point is anyone's guess.