What I'm saying is the same thing Bogle is / has been saying - that the line about executives putting the shareholders' interests first is crap. And fiduciary responsibility ( by the board members, as well as money managers ) is FOR THE INVESTORS, the ones who put up money in the first place. If true fiduciary standards were the LAW, and that law had teeth to punish those who strayed from it, American investors in aggregate would be much richer. You know it and I know it. The executives are hired to run the company, they don't own it. I believe many Americans don't even understand that. SEC laws and fiduciary standards laws aren't set up to enrich executives, they are to protect investors. Your claim that executives " looking out for themselves first " is the foundation of fiduciary responsibility and SEC rules is FALSE !!! ( This is what I take issue with in your statement ).That is exactly what Bogle has been saying all these years - that existing laws are watered down by corporate lobbyists and don't go far enough to protect investors. ( I'm quite sure you know fully well and have profited by the " system " as it now exists. I suspect many of the readers here don't understand what's been keeping their hard-earned, invested dollars from bringing them more returns on their investments in their 401-k's, IRA's, mutual funds ). I know ............ " buyer beware ". Another pus-ridden, rotting phrase.
Why do most company executives in this country fight so vehemently against those improved law proposals ?? Because it would shrink their huge compensation packages to some degree and that money would rightfully come back to shareholders - for those who don't understand this point. I know you do KPJ. I'm sure many Americans don't know there have been shareholder meetings at various companies where shareholders showed up in greater numbers than usual to protest the huge compensation packages and practices of the companies they had their money invested in, only to be kept out or removed once they voiced their concerns. The executives didn't want anyone to " rock their boat ". Why or how this can happen is a subject worthy of gigantic media coverage. Regardless of political affiliation, race, religion, ethnicity, this kind of behavior affects all of our collective retirement / college / home-buying accounts.
Fiduciary standards and corporate governance laws currently on the books, though making some despicable practices legal, don't make such practices - or lack thereof - right or just. Suppression of investors' voices by having them removed or limiting average investors to only a few at shareholder meetings amounts to an autocratic, self-serving system where only the top executives take the bulk of the profits. Bogle has said in an article a few years back that the system is rigged so that the few top executives take the cream off the top and the average investor gets what's left. For this reason, the last thing the aggregate group of corporate executives want is more light to be shed on the problems of corporate governance and fiduciary duty for investors, and for more stringent laws to protect investors. Their worst nightmare is an enlightened voter / electorate.
I'm not sitting here fuming over your words and I'm not angry. I just try to enlighten as many folks as I can about how the " system " is not working in their best interest. Hiding facts, fostering deception, and telling half-truths are all still lies.
