Fed wants to limit ALL banks compensation practices

[spidey07]

So what say P&N? The rally cries against 'excessive' compensation, the justification was "they're TARP recipients, burn them!". I kept telling you that Obama's goal if you listened to his campaign was to limit ALL compensation. Hell I even posted his goals from like april of '08. A 'pay czar'? Little by little, industry by industry that's what he is doing.

Wake the fuck up people.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...tml?hpid=moreheadlines

"The Federal Reserve is moving to restrict compensation practices at the nation's banks, expanding its regulatory reach to oversee how tens of thousands of bank employees ranging from chief executives to loan officers are paid. "

 

[Cuda1447]

Absolute, complete bullshit if true. I think its safe to say Obama is in favor of big government control over our lives. In nearly every facet. I, as well as many other Americans, are vehemently opposed to this. But instead of addressing the concerns, we are called racists. This country and the defenders of our fucked up government make me sick. It's just a matter of time until freedom is a word in the history books.

 

[spidey07]

I cited the washington post specifically so the source couldn't be attacked. It's VERY real. Pay attention people.

This story is like 12+ hours old. I was surprised to see not a thread talking about it all day. I kept waiting for one to appear.

 

[WHAMPOM]

About time something shook Olympus and knocked the mighty heads of Capitalism back down to earth. Just as long as you know in 2008 a record bonus amount of Thirty Billion Dollars was paid out by the three major(already known to be bankrupt)lenders. Spare me the crocodile tears please.

 

[bctbct]

When the tax payers have to bail out a free market because they are greedy pigs, they need rules.

 

[Vic]

The OP didn't read his own article.

The Fed, acting under its existing powers as a bank regulator, aims to curtail pay practices that can encourage bank employees to take the kinds of irresponsible risks that may have led to the financial crisis. It is not seeking to set caps on the amount any individual employee can be paid, said sources familiar with the plans.

Fed officials and many private analysts have concluded that pay practices emphasizing short-term performance contributed to the near-collapse of the financial system last year.

For example, a trader who receives bonuses based solely on one year's performance might make bets that pay off in the short run but cause vast losses in the long run. A loan officer paid only based on the volume of loans issued might not pay enough attention to the quality of those loans. Under the approach envisioned by the Fed, the two dozen or so largest banks would have to explain these pay practices to their regulator, and adjust them if examiners think they endanger the safety and soundness of the bank, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the policy is not yet final.

edit: BTW, it is the Fed proposing this, not the administration as the OP suggests. Congress will still have to approve it.

 

[babylon5]

Taxpayers kept them in business. Wall Street is out of control, and something has got to be done.

 

[JKing106]

Originally posted by: bctbct
When the tax payers have to bail out a free market because they are greedy pigs, they need rules.

+++

Fuck them, and fuck anyone who defends them.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Vic
The OP didn't read his own article.

The Fed, acting under its existing powers as a bank regulator, aims to curtail pay practices that can encourage bank employees to take the kinds of irresponsible risks that may have led to the financial crisis. It is not seeking to set caps on the amount any individual employee can be paid, said sources familiar with the plans.

Fed officials and many private analysts have concluded that pay practices emphasizing short-term performance contributed to the near-collapse of the financial system last year.

For example, a trader who receives bonuses based solely on one year's performance might make bets that pay off in the short run but cause vast losses in the long run. A loan officer paid only based on the volume of loans issued might not pay enough attention to the quality of those loans. Under the approach envisioned by the Fed, the two dozen or so largest banks would have to explain these pay practices to their regulator, and adjust them if examiners think they endanger the safety and soundness of the bank, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the policy is not yet final.

No - just setting how compensation is calculated. Nice try though.

"limit" = to control. As a loan officer you are affected by this Vic. Hope the government dick in your ass doesn't hurt too much, best of luck mate.

 

[bctbct]

Originally posted by: spidey07


No - just setting how compensation is calculated. Nice try though.

"limit" = to control. As a loan officer you are affected by this Vic. Hope the government dick in your ass doesn't hurt too much, best of luck mate.

ha, I dont know Vic, but I doubt a loan officer is in the position that the gov't is going to regulate his million dollar bonus' for losing money :laugh:

 

[PJABBER]

Ed Yingling, chief executive of the ABA is a hind tit sucker. It is time for him to go out to pasture.

A lot of funds at risk are firm capital. You get bonused if you make your company wealthier. You fail and you get fired.

The more I think about what politicians get paid for doing jack these days, the more I think we need one term limits and minimal pay packages for them.

It should be a job you do for a short time because you are passionate about service to your country, not a power grab with a long tenure leading to an oh so comfortable retirement. You want that, go work for GM. Oh yeah, that is a government job, too. My bad.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Vic
The OP didn't read his own article.

The Fed, acting under its existing powers as a bank regulator, aims to curtail pay practices that can encourage bank employees to take the kinds of irresponsible risks that may have led to the financial crisis. It is not seeking to set caps on the amount any individual employee can be paid, said sources familiar with the plans.

Fed officials and many private analysts have concluded that pay practices emphasizing short-term performance contributed to the near-collapse of the financial system last year.

For example, a trader who receives bonuses based solely on one year's performance might make bets that pay off in the short run but cause vast losses in the long run. A loan officer paid only based on the volume of loans issued might not pay enough attention to the quality of those loans. Under the approach envisioned by the Fed, the two dozen or so largest banks would have to explain these pay practices to their regulator, and adjust them if examiners think they endanger the safety and soundness of the bank, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the policy is not yet final.

No - just setting how compensation is calculated. Nice try though.

"limit" = to control. As a loan officer you are affected by this Vic. Hope the government dick in your ass doesn't hurt too much, best of luck mate.

You're none too bright. The best argument against this is that most banks have already instituted these kinds of changes on their own. For example, loan officer compensation at many lenders now is no longer strictly determined by loan volume, but also on an audit of the quality of those loans originated (and on how well they perform). This has already happened. And even more to the point, it is not something new or revolutionary, but simply a return to the ways things used to be before the boom. Hell, in the real old days, loan officers had to collect on the loans they made.

 

[BoomerD]

These pigs are feeding at the public trough. If they want/need US taxpayer money to bail them out, they need to rein in the greedy practices that put them in jeopardy in the first place.

Pure, unbridled capitalism would have let them fail.

The practice of "privatizing profits and socializing losses" puts them in the position of having to play by different rules.


"We the People" are tired of giving banks billions of $$$ then having them pass it out like it's "free money."

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: spidey07


No - just setting how compensation is calculated. Nice try though.

"limit" = to control. As a loan officer you are affected by this Vic. Hope the government dick in your ass doesn't hurt too much, best of luck mate.

ha, I dont know Vic, but I doubt a loan officer is in the position that the gov't is going to regulate his million dollar bonus' for losing money :laugh:

Actually, I'm a loss mitigation manager for a major mortgage servicer at this time.

And once again, this is being proposed by the Fed.

 

[Ronstang]

Why does the government always want limits on everything....except itself?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Vic

Actually, I'm a loss mitigation manager for a major mortgage servicer at this time.

And once again, this is being proposed by the Fed.

Your bull is getting gored and yet you continue to cheer it on. Amazing.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Vic

Actually, I'm a loss mitigation manager for a major mortgage servicer at this time.

And once again, this is being proposed by the Fed.

Your bull is getting gored and yet you continue to cheer it on. Amazing.

"My bull" gored itself. And I predicted it would years ago when guys like you would proclaim such 'doomsday' talk was tantamount to treason. Then, as now, you don't have a fscking clue what you're talking about, but you sure do know how to kneejerk.

 

[PJABBER]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Vic

Actually, I'm a loss mitigation manager for a major mortgage servicer at this time.

And once again, this is being proposed by the Fed.

Your bull is getting gored and yet you continue to cheer it on. Amazing.

That is amazing. You have a tough job and it is only going to get tougher. I am surprised at where you are coming from in your opinions, but maybe you are just Hoping for some Change.

Look, the Fed is WAY over its head in getting all of these new mandates. The Governors are bright people. I've spent time with Kevin Warsh and I think he is a very thoughtful guy. But they are oriented toward being central bankers and doing monetary policy and are now writing the book on the fly for everything else.

These are areas where you really want to take some time, get a long commentary period and not move precipitously. The dynamic is not allowing this, so I am expecting we are going to be visiting with the law of unintended consequences again Real Soon Now.

It is like another kind of Boom hysteria really and look where that got us.

 

[Vic]

It's always nice when partisan hacks respond to their skewed ideological interpretation of what you posted instead of to what you actually posted :roll:

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Vic
It's always nice when partisan hacks respond to their skewed ideological interpretation of what you posted instead of to what you actually posted :roll:

You have to forgive Spidey07..he has not taken his meds for days and believes that any other factual representation of what he posted is BS!!

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Vic

Actually, I'm a loss mitigation manager for a major mortgage servicer at this time.

And once again, this is being proposed by the Fed.

Your bull is getting gored and yet you continue to cheer it on. Amazing.

"My bull" gored itself. And I predicted it would years ago when guys like you would proclaim such 'doomsday' talk was tantamount to treason. Then, as now, you don't have a fscking clue what you're talking about, but you sure do know how to kneejerk.

So in your wisdom, what industry is next to control compensation by law?

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: JKing106

Originally posted by: bctbct
When the tax payers have to bail out a free market because they are greedy pigs, they need rules.

+++

Fuck them, and fuck anyone who defends them.

An embarrassment to civilization that these people are still free and not behind bars

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: spidey07
So in your wisdom, what industry is next to control compensation by law?

I think you should actually bother reading the article in your own OP first, then reply on topic to what the article actually says and to what I've actually posted, and not according to your agenda.

 

[bfdd]

What is with you idiots in this thread "we had to bail them out!" No we didn't, we could of let them die. We the tax payers didn't have to do shit. We would of moved along and been over this by now, but instead this is like a dog chasing it's tail. Every single cent we gave to any company in the form of a subsidiary or "bail out" is stupid and anyone who backs it you should be ashamed.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: bfdd
What is with you idiots in this thread "we had to bail them out!" No we didn't, we could of let them die. We the tax payers didn't have to do shit. We would of moved along and been over this by now, but instead this is like a dog chasing it's tail. Every single cent we gave to any company in the form of a subsidiary or "bail out" is stupid and anyone who backs it you should be ashamed.

We could have let them die, and we could have faced a sharper downturn of the economy because of it. As far as I understand it, if we let all these big banks collapse, the money supply would shrink and it would hurt everyone.

To the original article:
Spidey - read the damn article. It is speaking of putting rules in place on how compensation (ie: what criteria to use) can be calculated instead of allowing it to continue like it did during the housing boom. It is not placing some kind of cap on total compensation like the TARP provisions did (and which is what I seem to remember you predicting, not someone just putting regulations in place on how what criteria should be used to calculate compensation).

Another words, once again you're full of shit.