Would You, or Wouldn't You?

“You might suppose that the stars are in near-perfect alignment for major reform of CEO pay. The mammoth pay and disastrous performance of Countrywide Financial's Angelo Mozilo, Citigroup's Chuck Prince, and Merrill Lynch's Stan O'Neal should be enough to make the public furious. Each CEO departed with $100-million-plus compensation after misadventures with subprime mortgages. Now add the economic slowdown to the mix; ordinary Americans are worried about making ends meet while failed pooh-bahs rake it in. Then throw in one more element -- a presidential election. Put it all together, and how could change not be imminent?

“The answer is that whatever remedies reformers enact, corporate boards can always find a way to pay the boss whatever they like. Over the past 25 years CEO pay has risen regardless of the economic or political climate. It rises faster than corporate profits, economic growth, or average workforce compensation. A recent study by the compensation consulting firm DolmatConnell & Partners found that CEO pay in the companies of the Dow Jones industrials increased at a blowout 15.1% annual rate over the past decade.

“A more sensible alternative to the current compensation system would require CEOs to own a lot of company stock. If the stock is given to the boss, his salary and bonus should be docked to reflect its value…

“Meanwhile, let the reformers battle on. One of the most prominent, Nell Minow of the… Corporate Library, which rates board effectiveness, says, ‘My colleagues and I have found that there is no more reliable indicator of investment, litigation, and liability risk than excessive CEO compensation.’”

(“Rewarding Failure.” Geoff Colvin. Fortune: April 28, 2008. pg. 22)

AND ENRON'S MANAGEMENT were the smartest guys in the room.

And who has the power -- the smart? the lucky? the wise? the fool? the favored? Where would you stand?