$500,000 Limit for Failing Executives

It seems like every news stations yesterday was talking about the $500,000 cap that was going to be forced on corporate executives of failing companies that opted to go on the dole:

The president aimed for a target — extravagant corporate behavior on the public dime — that fit the mood of the day. His $500,000 salary limit on executives from a limited number of companies was part of a broader assault on what he called a "reckless culture" that has helped wreck the economy.

"We don't disparage wealth. We don't begrudge anybody for achieving success. And we believe that success should be rewarded," Obama said. "But what gets people upset — and rightfully so — are executives being rewarded for failure, especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers."

First, let me state, that I'd be willing to take $250,000 a year to run a multi-billion company into the ground, and I would be more than happy to fly commercial, but I would expect to fly first class where the pillows and blankets are still free. If any Board of Directors is interested, I'm sure you can find my profile on Linked-in or Plaxo or Facebook.

Okay, with that said, I think it is pretty amusing that the "salary cap" for these CEO's who have so miserably is a $100,000 more than the leader of the free world and double that away from the person a heartbeat away from being leader of the free world:

The President of the United States earns $400,000 a year. The vice president's annual salary is $221,100.

Then again, to put this all in perspective, it's probably important to remember that a Vice President/CFO position at UNM pays more than being President of the United States:

Months before imposing a partial freeze on hiring and taking other cost-cutting measures, the University of New Mexico gave Vice President and Chief Financial Officer David Harris a $10,000 raise and an extra $50,000 in deferred compensation. The extra money pushed Harris' compensation package for the current fiscal year to $428,000 -- a 16.2 percent increase.

Now, does all of this mean that I'm a big believer in CEO caps for private companies? The answer here is a resounding, "No." But, a company taking billions of dollars in taxpayer funded bailout money is exactly private, is it?