Should Obama have created the limit on executive pay?

People need bread,

That is not what I'm suggesting. Merely that with the totally private banks still offering salaries of millions of dollars a year, it would be unwise for Obama to declare that executives in the government-financed banks will never earn more than $500,000. The Civil Service does not have this problem, as no Civil Servant earns $40 million.

Yes, but these imbeciles have proven that they are not worth $40million a year. If another "totally private" idiot bank wants to employ them at this rate they can have them. (Christ knows what their shareholders will think when the bank announces it is going to employ one of these geniuses for $40million a year)

There are plenty of people on this planet who are capable enough to run a bank (perhaps even without posting quarterly losses in the tens of billions) and would be pleased to do it for $500,000 a year.

Essentially, your objection is an economic one. That the people who are able enough to run a bank are in such short supply that there will always be enough demand to ensure a $40million pay package somewhere else. I doubt you're right. There are a lot more people able to run a bank than you think. There are a lot more people willing to do it for $500,000 a year than you think too.

No, that is unconstitutional.

There are a lot more people able to run a bank than you think. There are a lot more people willing to do it for $500,000 a year than you think too.

I severely doubt this. I do not think that it is a coincidence that the majority of banks in the world have encountered the same problems. I think it is incredibly naive to believe simply that they all had bad management at the same time.

Not at all. They all followed a poor business model. None of them could see what was around the corner. Hence they are not worth $40million a year.

There are 1000's of borderline geniuses in this world who don't get $500k a year - nobel prize winning economists, Harvard professors, (and me actually) - there's absolutely no shortage of people who could run a bank (and not **** it up nearly as badly) as these imbeciles for $500k a year.

Sorry, I think you have missed my point. I was merely asking why you believe that if it is so easy to run a bank, most of the Chief Executives of the world's major banks have been unable to do it succssfully in the past few years.