Comments on: Cut exec pay or government stay away?

By: S

Fri, 23 Oct 2009 03:08:36 +0000

Why is it these companies think they should pay out huge salaries plus bonuses when those said companies lost money. Brain Drain, I hardly think so. The so called brain drain of these companies brought said companies to the brink and would have gone under except for said taxpayers. They are lucky to have a job, let alone bonuses.
We don’t have a Kingdom in the United States, why should we be creating little Kingdoms with these huge Salaries with even bigger bonuses to these creatures of Greed. Enough is never enough and yes limits of salaries and bonuses are in order. Capitalism will only last if it is shared amongst all. How soon we forget.

By: AB

AB — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:52:33 +0000

Whatever-
First, I’m truly sorry to hear about yours and your parent’s situation. Now then, if you did everything right as you say you’ve done, then you wouldn’t be in the pickle you’re in now. Think about it. Now before you get on to me about not having a conscience, help me to understand your logic when you said:

“…see that there are so many people that have lost nearly EVERYTHING because they were FORCED to bail out said company with Tax dollars. Legally, yes, those people should have what was promised – but should it be at the expense of the Middle Classes “American Dream”?”

So are you saying that everyone has a right to the American Dream regardless of whether they can afford it? You shouldn’t have to work towards the American Dream; rather it should just be handed to you? Is that the gist of your statement? And while I feel for your neighbor, understand that their $35k job is easier to replace than that of the CEO. And chances are that position actually will cost more (in terms of salary, benefits, etc) over time than the CEO’s. Is it fair, no but it’s the truth. But what do I know? I’m just a cold hearted person without a conscience who made a conscience decision to work for free with people helping them to avoid bankruptcy, foreclosure, & just general financial ruin.

By: just a question

just a question — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:27:31 +0000

hey, whatever

sorry for your parents trouble. my investemnt adviser told me to transfer monies from the market to more stable investments as I got older. There is risk and reward. Higher risk, higher reward. I can absorb it now, not when I am 65. Many failed to head that advice.

the initial reason for the bailouts was that the market is based on confidence and liquidity and we hoped to avoid a run on the banks, as in the great depression.

contracts can be broken if you can demonstrate they were entered into illegally or one party has failed to live up to their end of the agreement. I would have no problems if the justice department, not an unaccountable Czar, found the execs guilty of breach of contract.

And some banks, notably BBT, decided to forego expansion by taking on unecessary risky loans (as mandated by the government).

Suggest you research a bit on the reasons for the housing bubble (not the first time the government caused one)…..

By: whatever

whatever — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:12:07 +0000

Thanks AB. You sure put me in my place. I’ll be sure to tell my aging parents that they lost all of their retirement savings and pensions that they saved for but lost because they were used in the stock market. They saved all of their money, have suffered from Cancer (depleting what was in the bank) and have lost almost everything when the market melted down their pensions that were “Invested” in the market without my parents consent. I sure am thankful that the former president didn’t actually put their social security into the stock market as he had planned on doing, because that would be gone too.
And my rant about FEMA and the sorts was sarcasm, because to us “non educated” peons that the way that it seems. I understand that you have a point about protecting contract law and people deserve to be paid what they are offered, but for gods sake if you are already rich shouldn’t you have a conscience and see that there are so many people that have lost nearly EVERYTHING because they were FORCED to bail out said company with Tax dollars. Legally, yes, those people should have what was promised – but should it be at the expense of the Middle Classes “American Dream”? There are those of us who have fallen on hard times even though we did everything correctly. It makes no sense that my neighbor was laid off from one of the banks that received a large amount of bailout money because they could not afford to keep her @ $35,000 a year but their CEO resigns and gets a $53,000,000 severance??? That fifty three million dollars could pay the salaries of over 1500 people for a whole year. Your argument and point are both valid, I am not debating that or calling you any names – sometimes what is right is not ethical.
I’m sorry but if you take public money then the public has the right to demand it not be squandered!
One other thing amazes me. Why are the people defending a wall street bailout the same people who now despise GM because they took a bailout? Is it because Bush (the uninformed conservatives wildest wet dream) bailed out wall street because of mismanagement under the mantra of “Saving Jobs and Restoring the economy” but when Obama (same uninformed conservatives worst nightmare) bails out another sector that built the American economy that made THE SAME TYPES OF MISTAKES that wall street made it all of the sudden turns out to be a bad thing?
Next year when GM proposes to give their execs compensations built on Tax dollars I hope every single one of you who think its moral and correct when Wall Street Does it feel the exact same way. Wouldn’t want someone calling you a hypocrite. Especially someone like me who needs an economic lecture about honoring what is promised to wall street executives, when I see promises to normal people (”your pension will be safe with us!”) melt away.
I’ve gotta stop typing in this forum. The more upset I get the harder it is to express in a civil fashion that sometimes contracts are made to be broken – especially when its to benefit those who have broken us.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:09:51 +0000

If we have a government czar cutting salaries for banks that took bailout(tax money). Then why doesn’t he cut the salaries for our elected officials as they are driving the government into the financial ditch

By: AB

AB — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:09:18 +0000

Just a question-
Previous comment cheerfully withdrawn.

By: just a question

just a question — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:01:06 +0000

no, not you AB. I agree with what you have said.

It was directed to those who think the government should step in. At what point (as proposed, the entire banking industry) does government intervention stop? Executive pay is an issue, yes, but the government solution in the past (limit CEO pay that can be expensed) lead to the bonus / option fiasco we have today.

By: AB

AB — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:42:01 +0000

Just a question-
Was that remark aimed at me? If so, I’m sorry you loath someone you’ve never and probably will never meet. But I refuse to lower myself to that level. If you’re currently facing financial or employment difficulties, I can certainly relate as I was once in your shoes (mid 20’s, living a champagne life on beer budget, then crash…laid off & out of work for 6 months) but wishing ill on me won’t make you feel better. Again, we only have ourselves to blame for this mess and gov’t intervention will only make it worse.

By: just a question

just a question — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:27:17 +0000

the Fed is now proposing a review of the pay at financial institutions, all the way down to the local level. Hope you work there and get your 90% pay cuts ….

By: AB

AB — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:12:55 +0000

Playthat-
Sorry you’re wrong. Those who got us into this mess are not those on Wall Street, but Mr. & Mrs. Keeping Up with the Jones’ on Main Street. They are the ones who bought a house they knew they could not afford. They are the ones who bought furnishings for said house using credit instead of cash. They are the ones who bought a big fancy SUV again with credit because their old one was “embarrassing”. They are the ones who failed to save money from their paychecks. They did all these things knowing that should one or both of them loose their jobs, that it would all come crashing down. Did the banks act as enablers? Of course. But as I suspect, the mortgage lender, nor car salesman, nor furniture salesman were putting Mr. & Mrs. KUWTJ’s under duress to sign the papers. Now am I one of those Wall Street types? Hardly. But am I smart with my money and let it work for me instead of me working for it? Yes, and for that I’m not ashamed. And please, don’t let your envy of those who were smart and saved and resisted the temptation of excess debt get in your way of seeing the truth. Wall Street didn’t cause this mess we’re in, Main Street did. And until people stop drinking the Washington Kool Aid, the divide between the haves and have nots will only get bigger.