Back to business as usual

#1
lawgator1

lawgator1

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
72,701
Likes
42,913
#1
#2
#2
lawgator1 said:
Treasury says 10 of nation's largest banks can repay $68 billion in bailout money -- OrlandoSentinel.com

What is intriguing is how quickly these firms worked to be able to pay back the money so that they could go back to the bonus and executive compensation they are used to. A reflection one would think of where they place their fiduciary duty to shareholders (and depositing customers) relative to their own paychecks.
Click to expand...

Sure, that's it. They simply wanted to gouge shareholders. :crazy:

Couldn't have anything to do with excessive government control and future micro-managing could it? Nah...
 
#3
#3
The department on Tuesday said the banks, which were not named, will be allowed to repay the money they received from the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program created by Congress last October at the height of the financial crisis.
Click to expand...

The firms now have the right to purchase the warrants Treasury holds in their firm "at fair market value."
Click to expand...

I bet some of these were the firms that were forced to take TARP money in the first place.
 
#4
#4
volinbham said:
Sure, that's it. They simply wanted to gouge shareholders. :crazy:

Couldn't have anything to do with excessive government control and future micro-managing could it? Nah...
Click to expand...

They couldn't wait to cut GM a loan that would be repaid for pennies on the dollar!
 
Last edited:
#5
#5
Well, I knew I'd get a reaction, lol. I don't pretend to know the indiovidual circumstances of each of the banks involved. Probably a lot of different stories out there for each one. But I do htink it worth noting that a number of these surely took the money - whoa management found out they could not pay themselves like they used to -- and then lo and behold they find a way out.

Surely at least a couple of them turned things around because of management's self interest.
 
#7
#7
I highly confident that management looking out for their self interests is better for shareholders than government looking out for its self interests is for shareholders. Examples: AIG, GM, Chrysler, etc.
 
#9
#9
lawgator1 said:
Well, I knew I'd get a reaction, lol. I don't pretend to know the indiovidual circumstances of each of the banks involved. Probably a lot of different stories out there for each one. But I do htink it worth noting that a number of these surely took the money - whoa management found out they could not pay themselves like they used to -- and then lo and behold they find a way out.

Surely at least a couple of them turned things around because of management's self interest.
Click to expand...

Why would ANY private institution voluntarily remain under the government's thumb if they had the means to get out from under it? I mean, why would there even have to be a suspicion of ulterior motive?
 
#10
#10
personally i'd much rather own a not tarp company. when i look at how legitamate producers are getting screwed here i wonder what the talent drain will be at the tarp ferms.
 
#11
#11
lawgator1 said:
Well, I knew I'd get a reaction, lol. I don't pretend to know the indiovidual circumstances of each of the banks involved. Probably a lot of different stories out there for each one. But I do htink it worth noting that a number of these surely took the money - whoa management found out they could not pay themselves like they used to -- and then lo and behold they find a way out.

Surely at least a couple of them turned things around because of management's self interest.
Click to expand...

I think it probably had more to do with them wanting to retain the best and the brightest in their respective positions and not end up losing them to other firms that weren't under the government thumb.
 
#12
#12
Lawgator seems to assume this is all about the executives wanting their bonuses but in reality most executive compensation packages are in stock. it's the key employees who are getting screwed here.
 
#13
#13
LG has seriously gone off the deep end. between election time and now his views have turned a lot more lib
 
#14
#14
if the shareholders are ok with the execs making ridiculous money (by LG theory) why do we care? don't buy the stock in the company if you have a problem with it.
 
#15
#15
volinbham said:
I highly confident that management looking out for their self interests is better for shareholders than government looking out for its self interests is for shareholders. Examples: AIG, GM, Chrysler, etc.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more.
 
#16
#16
Vol Mania 21 said:
LG has seriously gone off the deep end. between election time and now his views have turned a lot more lib
Click to expand...
The democratic mainstream has done the same thing...which will just continue to polarize the other side.
Bring on the libertarians!
 
#17
#17
Vol Mania 21 said:
LG has seriously gone off the deep end. between election time and now his views have turned a lot more lib
Click to expand...


No, no. This is a direct response to the claim that it was the poor people borrowing too much money that caused the housing crisis. We saw the defenders of the banks and Wall Street investors claiming that was the cause of this and that bonuses in the tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars weren't to blame.

Some of the banks took the federal money.

Then when strings attached included limiting compensation, they acted very quickly to give the money back.

It just suggests to me that executive comensation is a part of the problem. Its not the whole problem. But just as the issue of too much lax borrowing contributed, as was lack of meaningful regulatory oversight, so has been some corporate greed at the very top.

It all came together, along with general market problems and of course the spike in fuel prices.
 
Last edited:
#18
#18
lawgator1 said:
Wnd then when strings attached included limiting compensation, they acted very quickly to give the money back.

It just suggests to me that executive comensation is a part of the problem. Its not the whole problem. But just as the issue of too much lax borrowing contributed, as was lack of meaningful regulatory oversight, so has been some coroproate greed at the very top.
Click to expand...

so you honestly believe a company should just allow the gov't to set their pay scale?
 
#19
#19
lawgator1 said:
Wnd then when strings attached included limiting compensation, they acted very quickly to give the money back.
Click to expand...

Some/many of the banks were pressured into taking the money. They've been trying to give it back since the beginning but the Treasury has balked at allowing them to return it.

I would bet of these 10, most never wanted the money and have been trying to give it back ASAP but the Treasury wouldn't allow it.
 
#20
#20
utvolpj said:
so you honestly believe a company should just allow the gov't to set their pay scale?
Click to expand...


Of course not. But see above -- neither do I think you can categorically say that executive compensation was irrelevant to the problems we are having now.
 
#21
#21
lawgator1 said:
No, no. This is a direct response to the claim that it was the poor people borrowing too much money that caused the housing crisis. We saw the defenders of the banks and Wall Street investors claiming that was the cause of this and that bonuses in the tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars weren't to blame.

Some of the banks took the federal money.

Then when strings attached included limiting compensation, they acted very quickly to give the money back.

It just suggests to me that executive comensation is a part of the problem. Its not the whole problem. But just as the issue of too much lax borrowing contributed, as was lack of meaningful regulatory oversight, so has been some corporate greed at the very top.

It all came together, along with general market problems and of course the spike in fuel prices.
Click to expand...

executive compensation accounted for 1/1000th of the losses at these banks. edit: and many of these banks wanted to give the money back months ago but obama wouldn't let them.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top