AP study finds $1.6B went to bailed-out bank execs

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: BoomerD


I know LK and some of the other corporation-lovers will come in and defend this practice in one way or another, but this kind of blatant greed is indefensible...and should not be tolerated.

Are you completely clueless?

I've never defended executive compensation.

In 1980 the average CEO had a compensation package 40x the average salary. Now that's more than 400x.

I'm absolutely disgusted by that.

No problem, I do appreciate apologies, they are rare online.

Exec compensation is probably the nastiest, most disgusting, and horribly fucked up blight on the face of corporate America. The fact that any one person thinks they are worth more than 400 other people is absolutely stupid. The fact that corporate boards of directors are so hopelessly powerless is disgusting.

You look at somebody like Warren Buffet, who may be the richest person on the planet, but his entire wealth is centered upon BRK stock that he has owned forever. His personal comp is nothing compared to these guys. He's the one who shouted from the mountaintop against options non-expensing and other things.

These are also the same people who rail against the "death tax", because it harms them the most.

The rich in this country feel like they are entitled to everything and it should absolutely stop.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Before blaming Bush, blame:

a) Fcking moronic Demo-rats in Congress
b) Pssy Repub's in Congress who caved in.
c) Treasury that can bypass Congress (and has) to give out money.

No, Bush should be blamed along with all the others, the plan was as much his as anyone else's.

Honestly though, while this sort of thing makes me mad, it doesn't shock me at all... and it doesn't change my opinion on whether or not we should have put this plan into action. Swift action leads to imperfect action, and I'm okay with that.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Before blaming Bush, blame:

a) Fcking moronic Demo-rats in Congress
b) Pssy Repub's in Congress who caved in.
c) Treasury that can bypass Congress (and has) to give out money.

Try again. Teh Dems wanted limits on Exective pay. Bush was the one that made a small change then used it as a loop hole.


"Congress wanted to guarantee that the $700 billion financial bailout would limit the eye-popping pay of Wall Street executives, so lawmakers included a mechanism for reviewing executive compensation and penalizing firms that break the rules.

But at the last minute, the Bush administration insisted on a one-sentence change to the provision, congressional aides said. The change stipulated that the penalty would apply only to firms that received bailout funds by selling troubled assets to the government in an auction, which was the way the Treasury Department had said it planned to use the money.

Now, however, the small change looks more like a giant loophole, according to lawmakers and legal experts. In a reversal, the Bush administration has not used auctions for any of the $335 billion committed so far from the rescue package, nor does it plan to use them in the future."

 

[CycloWizard]

The bank execs deserve it. They got their banks massive "loans" with no collateral which the banks have no reason to ever pay back. They succeeded in swindling our money away from us and should be rewarded accordingly. The people who don't get it are the idiots throwing money at them. Why would you expect these loans to be repaid when the entire reason they were given is because we can't allow the banks to go belly up to begin with? It's not like you can call a repo man to go take money that isn't there and give it back to the taxpayers.

 

[OrByte]

Federal money, when dolled out to the states, ALWAYS have separate reporting and maintenance attached to it. This is PUBLIC MONEY.

How can this public money not have those provisions!?!

w

t

f



edit: I thought about this some more and if it is a media request then that is different than adhering to any federal guidelines over how this money is spent. I just hope that if the banks are not beholden to the media then lets pray that at least they need to answer to congress. I doubt it though...

 

[Lemon law]

I blame Paulson, who the congress should have forced to resign when he was a sleep at switch as the crisis built, and then came to congress with a plan that basically said trust me, I need 750 billion
now or we will collapse the economy.

But the silly collective congress allowed them selves to be stamped into approving a no strings attached plan. When the first requirement should have been (1) A complete and open accounting for all
money. (2) Any firm that accepts a dime of public bail out money should be absolutely prohibited from paying out any bonuses.

The now latest outrage is this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...st_pe/meltdown_secrets

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Before blaming Bush, blame:

a) Fcking moronic Demo-rats in Congress
b) Pssy Repub's in Congress who caved in.
c) Treasury that can bypass Congress (and has) to give out money.

Try again. Teh Dems wanted limits on Exective pay. Bush was the one that made a small change then used it as a loop hole.


"Congress wanted to guarantee that the $700 billion financial bailout would limit the eye-popping pay of Wall Street executives, so lawmakers included a mechanism for reviewing executive compensation and penalizing firms that break the rules.

But at the last minute, the Bush administration insisted on a one-sentence change to the provision, congressional aides said. The change stipulated that the penalty would apply only to firms that received bailout funds by selling troubled assets to the government in an auction, which was the way the Treasury Department had said it planned to use the money.

Now, however, the small change looks more like a giant loophole, according to lawmakers and legal experts. In a reversal, the Bush administration has not used auctions for any of the $335 billion committed so far from the rescue package, nor does it plan to use them in the future."

Have the link for that? Thanks for the info.

 

[Lemon law]

Our mistake, it a nutshell, was to trust the people who broke it to fix it.

Did GWB&co ever fix any of the mistakes they made in Iraq or Afghanistan.-----------short answer no

Then when the GWB economic team failed to over see the banking community, they dismantled all regulations, watched clueless while the baking community and speculators ran a 60 trillion
dollar gambling casino based on bad loans, and unsecured derivatives, and now we trust Henry Paulson, the complete idiot to fix it??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Paulson should have been removed first thing.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Our mistake, it a nutshell, was to trust the people who broke it to fix it.

Did GWB&co ever fix any of the mistakes they made in Iraq or Afghanistan.-----------short answer no

Then when the GWB economic team failed to over see the banking community, they dismantled all regulations, watched clueless while the baking community and speculators ran a 60 trillion
dollar gambling casino based on bad loans, and unsecured derivatives, and now we trust Henry Paulson, the complete idiot to fix it??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Paulson should have been removed first thing.

So explain why the Democrats were in such a hurry to give Bush and the morons he appointed a blank check?

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Before blaming Bush, blame:

a) Fcking moronic Demo-rats in Congress
b) Pssy Repub's in Congress who caved in.
c) Treasury that can bypass Congress (and has) to give out money.

Try again. Teh Dems wanted limits on Exective pay. Bush was the one that made a small change then used it as a loop hole.


"Congress wanted to guarantee that the $700 billion financial bailout would limit the eye-popping pay of Wall Street executives, so lawmakers included a mechanism for reviewing executive compensation and penalizing firms that break the rules.

But at the last minute, the Bush administration insisted on a one-sentence change to the provision, congressional aides said. The change stipulated that the penalty would apply only to firms that received bailout funds by selling troubled assets to the government in an auction, which was the way the Treasury Department had said it planned to use the money.

Now, however, the small change looks more like a giant loophole, according to lawmakers and legal experts. In a reversal, the Bush administration has not used auctions for any of the $335 billion committed so far from the rescue package, nor does it plan to use them in the future."

Have the link for that? Thanks for the info.

here ya go...

When I heard they were putting in lines to block/control exec. pay I was happy. But as you can see it was Bush (Republican) that put a small change in at the last second. Which at first i did not think it be to bad. But then they backed out of doing what they said they would do with the money and now this little line allows them to reap billions in extra pay.

This is the type of BS Bush and Republicans did to cause Obama and Dems to win more seats in the last election.
But if the Dems do the same they will find out the hard way they can be put out as fast as they were put in.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Before blaming Bush, blame:

a) Fcking moronic Demo-rats in Congress
b) Pssy Repub's in Congress who caved in.
c) Treasury that can bypass Congress (and has) to give out money.

Try again. Teh Dems wanted limits on Exective pay. Bush was the one that made a small change then used it as a loop hole.


"Congress wanted to guarantee that the $700 billion financial bailout would limit the eye-popping pay of Wall Street executives, so lawmakers included a mechanism for reviewing executive compensation and penalizing firms that break the rules.

But at the last minute, the Bush administration insisted on a one-sentence change to the provision, congressional aides said. The change stipulated that the penalty would apply only to firms that received bailout funds by selling troubled assets to the government in an auction, which was the way the Treasury Department had said it planned to use the money.

Now, however, the small change looks more like a giant loophole, according to lawmakers and legal experts. In a reversal, the Bush administration has not used auctions for any of the $335 billion committed so far from the rescue package, nor does it plan to use them in the future."

Have the link for that? Thanks for the info.

here ya go...

When I heard they were putting in lines to block/control exec. pay I was happy. But as you can see it was Bush (Republican) that put a small change in at the last second. Which at first i did not think it be to bad. But then they backed out of doing what they said they would do with the money and now this little line allows them to reap billions in extra pay.

This is the type of BS Bush and Republicans did to cause Obama and Dems to win more seats in the last election.
But if the Dems do the same they will find out the hard way they can be put out as fast as they were put in.

Nice find. That is ridiculous that Bush was allowed to put that in there... jesus.

 

[trenchfoot]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Before blaming Bush, blame:

a) Fcking moronic Demo-rats in Congress
b) Pssy Repub's in Congress who caved in.
c) Treasury that can bypass Congress (and has) to give out money.

Try again. Teh Dems wanted limits on Exective pay. Bush was the one that made a small change then used it as a loop hole.


"Congress wanted to guarantee that the $700 billion financial bailout would limit the eye-popping pay of Wall Street executives, so lawmakers included a mechanism for reviewing executive compensation and penalizing firms that break the rules.

But at the last minute, the Bush administration insisted on a one-sentence change to the provision, congressional aides said. The change stipulated that the penalty would apply only to firms that received bailout funds by selling troubled assets to the government in an auction, which was the way the Treasury Department had said it planned to use the money.

Now, however, the small change looks more like a giant loophole, according to lawmakers and legal experts. In a reversal, the Bush administration has not used auctions for any of the $335 billion committed so far from the rescue package, nor does it plan to use them in the future."

Have the link for that? Thanks for the info.

here ya go...

When I heard they were putting in lines to block/control exec. pay I was happy. But as you can see it was Bush (Republican) that put a small change in at the last second. Which at first i did not think it be to bad. But then they backed out of doing what they said they would do with the money and now this little line allows them to reap billions in extra pay.

This is the type of BS Bush and Republicans did to cause Obama and Dems to win more seats in the last election.
But if the Dems do the same they will find out the hard way they can be put out as fast as they were put in.

Nice find. That is ridiculous that Bush was allowed to put that in there... jesus.

But....but.....but....no matter what, I've just been Rove-erized into believing that the Dimocrats made Bush do it. So it's too late for me to believe that Bush had ANYTHING to do with the lavish give away. And now I'm also not able to believe that in the end, Paulson got what he wanted, and his rich buddies got theirs too. And now I'm also not able to believe that all the bailout did was to make Paulson's fellow banker crooks even greedier and richer still.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: cubby1223
Just further proof that this forum will never "get it" and should put an immediate end to all discussion of the topic.

When ANYONE's pay is NOT based on performance, it is a scam rate designed to benefit only one person, the receipient.
Retention bonuses is a fancy name for "greenmail". Bullshit.

 

[Linux23]

Well, you gotta give it to the rich. They managed to rape the american public and escape prosecution at the same time. Nice.

Can someone pass the lube my way?

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: Slick5150
And yet we made the auto companies beg and plead to get $14 billion with all sorts of strings attached, and congress still said no because THAT would be irresponsible. Ridiculous.

And they were begging and pleading for a LOAN, not a bailout! :disgust:

 

[SMOGZINN]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
But if the Dems do the same they will find out the hard way they can be put out as fast as they were put in...

...and put the Republicans back in! And if they mess it up we will put the Dems back in, and if they mess it up...

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

This was planned to fail from the beginning.

 

[sao123]

absolutely disgusting.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
How the hell a corporation that's losing so much money that it needs the bail-out can justify payin bonuses is beyond me.

Pay bonuses for running a company into the ground?

Oh! But they needed to give out the bonuses so that they could retain their "talent". They don't want the "talent" that helped drive their companies into the ground to go elsewhere (like that's going to happen so easily in an economic depression).

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: BoomerD
How the hell a corporation that's losing so much money that it needs the bail-out can justify payin bonuses is beyond me.

Pay bonuses for running a company into the ground?

Oh! But they needed to give out the bonuses so that they could retain their "talent". They don't want the "talent" that helped drive their companies into the ground to go elsewhere (like that's going to happen so easily in an economic depression).

LOL!!! Who was the moron in here that said that?

 

[alchemize]

This money has to be paid back if they don't go bankrupt, you know. Even if they go bankrupt, I would guess that the govt gets first dibs on assets...

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: BoomerD
How the hell a corporation that's losing so much money that it needs the bail-out can justify payin bonuses is beyond me.

Pay bonuses for running a company into the ground?

Oh! But they needed to give out the bonuses so that they could retain their "talent". They don't want the "talent" that helped drive their companies into the ground to go elsewhere (like that's going to happen so easily in an economic depression).

LOL!!! Who was the moron in here that said that?

There's a bunch of them that said that here.

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: tweaker2
Bush's going away gift to his pals sure has gotten the economy back on track, just like how Halliburton and Blackwater is winning the war for us in Iraq. Bush just keeps on giving and giving. Too bad he's doing it at the taxpayer's expense.

He must've finally figured out a way to keep the bailout money for the auto industry in the wallets of his executive buddies there and away from the workers on the factory floors too.

It's barely a month old and already the revisionists are trying to blame this on Bush.

Do you remember which party rushed the bailout through congress?

Democrats you fucking tool.

Oh boy... This is rich!

Do you remember it didn't pass and WHO pushed it the second time?

Who did the signing to make it happen and push it the first go around?

Wow.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: BoomerD
How the hell a corporation that's losing so much money that it needs the bail-out can justify payin bonuses is beyond me.

Pay bonuses for running a company into the ground?

Oh! But they needed to give out the bonuses so that they could retain their "talent". They don't want the "talent" that helped drive their companies into the ground to go elsewhere (like that's going to happen so easily in an economic depression).

LOL!!! Who was the moron in here that said that?

In news reports I'm pretty sure that the bonuses were reported as having been rationalized as being for the purpose of retaining the banks' talent.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: wetech

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
Government money abused by the companies?

I'm shocked, absolutely shocked.

Check your dates again.

"Banks that are getting taxpayer bailouts awarded their top executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses, and other benefits last year, an Associated Press analysis reveals.

Maybe it is you that should check your calendar?

From Goldmann-Sachs own annual reports:

Our diluted earnings per common share ere $24.73 for 2007 compared ith $19.69 for 2006. During 2007, e achieved record results in the Americas, Europe and Asia, and derived over one-half of our pre-tax earnings outside of the Americas. Return on average tangible common shareholders? equity (1) as 38.2% and return on average common shareholders? equity as 32.7% for 2007.

.........

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (NYSE:GS) today reported net revenues of $22.22 billion and net earnings of $2.32 billion for the year ended November 28, 2008. Diluted earnings per common share were $4.47 compared with $24.73 for the year ended November 30, 2007.

Now, once again, explain how a company that loses 80% of its share value should be rewarding its top executives with 7 and 8 figure bonuses? Also, you should realize that the fiscal year and the calendar year are completely different and "last year" actually ended a month ago to a very big majority of corporations.