Obama caps executive pay tied to bailout money

#51
#51
droski said:
how many executives have gotten ridiculous severance packages? a couple of dozen max?

and of course it's about how much money they are making. you aren't bitching about the tellar who works for citibank keeping her $10 an hour job.
Click to expand...

This is silly. What does the teller's job have to do with the company failing? It is the executives and talent that were steering the ship. If execs get paid millions of dollars in bonuses and perks, I could not care less. But when they still expect it when they fail, and tax dollars are what's keeping the company afloat, then yes I am going to b!tch. The teller didn't make any bad decisions, and had no control over the direction of the company. These people did, and now we are expected to hand out millions of dollars to people to fix the problem because that is the way the market has dictated the pay structure in the past. It's completely insane.

And I'm sure those poor execs that did suffer the attrition aren't waiting in line for unemployment benefits now. They are doing just fine.
 
#52
#52
once again most of the current execs came in after they started losing billions. so they weren't stearing the ship anymore than the millions of lower level employees who are keeping their jobs too.

and it isn't the past market that these salaries are based on. it's NOW. you think bofa would be giving retention bonuses to merrill brokers if those guys couldn't get the same from somewhere else? we arent' talking about people who would be unemployed if citi or bofa went under. they'd just be employed elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
#53
#53
BigPapaVol said:
Oh, I see. We're back to the John Q. Average schtick.
Click to expand...


I don't claim to speak for anyone else. Its just the sense I get that people are flat out furious at the notion that someone who ran or was a highly placed official in an investment bank that needs $100 billion to make ends meet will get a "bonus" of millions of dollars. The perception is that the millions of dollars are coming, ultimately, out of the taxpayers' pocket. And at the same time the taxpayer's 401k has lost 40 percent of its value with the perception again being that its the investment bankers who caused that to happen.

Is that a correct world view? Hell, no. But its what people are thinking, at least the ones I talk to. And as long as they think its rigged that way, they aren't real thrilled with the prospect of investing again.

The disgust with the perceived relationship between investment bankers and politicians is palpable. Whether its right or wrong, surely you can see some value in terms of market stability and promoting investment if people can be assured that the system is on the up and up?
 
#54
#54
the day we start designing public policy to make stupid people feel better is the day this country is officially headed to the sh!thole.
 
#55
#55
lawgator1 said:
I don't claim to speak for anyone else. Its just the sense I get that people are flat out furious at the notion that someone who ran or was a highly placed official in an investment bank that needs $100 billion to make ends meet will get a "bonus" of millions of dollars. The perception is that the millions of dollars are coming, ultimately, out of the taxpayers' pocket. And at the same time the taxpayer's 401k has lost 40 percent of its value with the perception again being that its the investment bankers who caused that to happen.

Is that a correct world view? Hell, no. But its what people are thinking, at least the ones I talk to. And as long as they think its rigged that way, they aren't real thrilled with the prospect of investing again.

The disgust with the perceived relationship between investment bankers and politicians is palpable. Whether its right or wrong, surely you can see some value in terms of market stability and promoting investment if people can be assured that the system is on the up and up?
Click to expand...

it's not hard for people to perceive it because for over 40years the dems have been preaching class warfare and convincing America that the government is the savior. people don't realize that it is the private sector that pays the taxes. it's really a shame too.
 
#56
#56
droski said:
the day we start designing public policy to make stupid people feel better is the day this country is officially headed to the sh!thole.
Click to expand...


That seems a short-sighted view. If you accept the premise that a key component, if not THE key component, in investment is confidence, then why not do something to, oh I don't know, shore up some confidence?
 
#57
#57
lawgator1 said:
That seems a short-sighted view. If you accept the premise that a key component, if not THE key component, in investment is confidence, then why not do something to, oh I don't know, shore up some confidence?
Click to expand...

i really fail to see how limiting salaries for corporate execs shores up confidence in the system. unless that system is communism.
 
Last edited:
#58
#58
droski said:
i really fail to see how limiting salaries for corporate execs shores up confidence in the system.
Click to expand...


Its not "limiting salaries." Its capping them while a company takes taxpayer money and then tying their success to the success of the company, and therefore to the ability to pay back the taxpayer.

It makes perfect sense to forbid the use of taxpayer money to pay an elite salary or bonus unless the company is able to pay back the taxpayer, first. Look at it this way: you know how debt gets paid, first, and then equity (i.e. bonds before stock)?

Well, this is just a higher priority of investment, to be paid back before bonds or stock. Or bonuses or salary.
 
#59
#59
once again if it makes it less likely we will pay back the loan because of this does this make sound economic sense? if this was warrenn buffett giving $35 bil to citi rather than the govt you can bet he wouldn't do anything as stupid as limiting salaries and eliminating bonuses for your top performers.

and in a debt reorganization salary claims have priority over equity or preferred equity holders.
 
#60
#60
droski said:
i really fail to see how limiting salaries for corporate execs shores up confidence in the system.
Click to expand...

it quells the anger and jealousy. the uneducated are thinking it's great that those rich people are finally getting whats coming to them. though it really does nothing.
 
#61
#61
BHO is giving money to Hollywood, will he tell actors they can only make 500K for a movie?
The government telling private business what they can pay/make is wrong.
 
#62
#62
T-TownVol said:
BHO is giving money to Hollywood, will he tell actors they can only make 500K for a movie?
The government telling private business what they can pay/make is wrong.
Click to expand...

an excellent point. how many gov't workers are there making well above $500k a year (on top of their guaranteed pensions)? isn't that FAR more egregious?
 
#64
#64
joevol320 said:
it quells the anger and jealousy. the uneducated are thinking it's great that those rich people are finally getting whats coming to them. though it really does nothing.
Click to expand...


Its not "what's coming to them." Its a matter of assuring the taxpayer making $75,000 a year that his tax money isn't going to go to pay for a $10 million bonus for a guy who is high up in a bank that, in the eyes of the taxpayer, ran his 401k into the ground.

Again, you guys are missing the point. The issue isn't whether its a correct assessment by the taxpayer. Its all a question of perception.
 
Last edited:
#65
#65
lawgator1 said:
Its not "what's coming to them." Its a matter of assuring the taxpayer making $75,000 a year that his tax money is going to go to pay for a $10 million bonus for a guy who is high up in a bank that, in the eyes of the taxpayer, ran his 401k into the ground.

Again, you guys are missing the point. The issue isn't whether its a correct assessment by the taxpayer. Its all a question of perception.
Click to expand...

The issue is that our governemnt fails at every thing that it touches.
 
#66
#66
T-TownVol said:
The government telling private business what they can pay/make is wrong.
Click to expand...

Why would you think that business receiving government money to stay around is private?

And I don't know if he is saving Hollywood from going out of business like TARP was supposed to be used.
 
#67
#67
lawgator1 said:
Its not "what's coming to them." Its a matter of assuring the taxpayer making $75,000 a year that his tax money isn't going to go to pay for a $10 million bonus for a guy who is high up in a bank that, in the eyes of the taxpayer, ran his 401k into the ground.

Again, you guys are missing the point. The issue isn't whether its a correct assessment by the taxpayer. Its all a question of perception.
Click to expand...

what taxpayer thinks it's the banks fault that their 401k is in the toilet?
 
#68
#68
Socialization of losses. Privatization of gains. The taxpayer gets screwed, and the elite don't miss a beat.
 
#71
#71
rjd970 said:
Socialization of losses. Privatization of gains. The taxpayer gets screwed, and the elite don't miss a beat.
Click to expand...

once again how have the elite benefited in any way from this situation? i guess the tens of thousands of job losses for high income earners just on wall street means nothing?
 
#72
#72
T-TownVol said:
The government telling private business what they can pay/make is wrong.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. However, these are corporations and companies who are receiving government assistance, which, technically, makes the gov't part owners in the companies.

Do I like having us spend an excruciating amount of money on businesses who were stupid with what they did? No. But, if we're going to temporarily have control over these banks, why not impose a few regulations? I don't want a business getting govt assistance to hand out a $20 million dollar bonus to a CEO who couldn't tie his own shoelaces without losing money.
 
#73
#73
droski said:
once again how have the elite benefited in any way from this situation? i guess the tens of thousands of job losses for high income earners just on wall street means nothing?
Click to expand...

Because you are all hear arguing that million dollar bonuses should be business as usual to get us out of this mess. There is every reason to believe that without the cap this is what we would see. It is what we saw last year with $18 Billion in bonuses and ridiculous severence packages.

I would love to make it to a point where I get paid millions of dollars for making stupid decisions.
 
#74
#74
rjd970 said:
It is what we saw last year with $18 Billion in bonuses and ridiculous severence packages.
Click to expand...

link?

and once again these people will just get these bonuses elsewhere so these people wont benefit one way or another. do you really think a public company wants to give millions to guys who have no other options?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top