Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

February 4, 2009
U.S. Plans to Curb Executive Pay for Bailout Recipients
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS and VIKAS BAJAJ
NY Times


WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is expected to impose a cap of
$500,000 for top executives at companies that receive large amounts of
bailout money, according to people familiar with the plan.

Executives would also be prohibited from receiving any bonuses above
their base pay, except for normal stock dividends.

President Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner plan to
announce the executive compensation plan on Wednesday morning at the
White House.

The new rules would be far tougher than any restrictions imposed during
the Bush administration, and they could force executives to accept deep
reductions in their current pay. They come amid rising public fury about
huge pay packages for executives at financial companies being propped up
by federal tax dollars.

Executives at companies that have already received money from the
Treasury Department would not have to make any changes. But analysts and
administration officials are bracing for a huge wave of new losses,
largely because of the deepening recession, and many companies that have
already received federal money may well be coming back.

- - -
$500,000 a year is more than the assholes running failed companies deserve.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

HK wrote:
February 4, 2009
U.S. Plans to Curb Executive Pay for Bailout Recipients
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS and VIKAS BAJAJ
NY Times


WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is expected to impose a cap of
$500,000 for top executives at companies that receive large amounts of
bailout money, according to people familiar with the plan.

When is Giethner going to resign for being a tax cheat?

At least Richardson and Daschle and the CPO nominee had the decency to
resign.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

HK wrote:
February 4, 2009
U.S. Plans to Curb Executive Pay for Bailout Recipients
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS and VIKAS BAJAJ
NY Times


WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is expected to impose a cap of
$500,000 for top executives at companies that receive large amounts of
bailout money, according to people familiar with the plan.

Executives would also be prohibited from receiving any bonuses above
their base pay, except for normal stock dividends.

President Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner plan to
announce the executive compensation plan on Wednesday morning at the
White House.

The new rules would be far tougher than any restrictions imposed during
the Bush administration, and they could force executives to accept deep
reductions in their current pay. They come amid rising public fury about
huge pay packages for executives at financial companies being propped up
by federal tax dollars.

Executives at companies that have already received money from the
Treasury Department would not have to make any changes. But analysts and
administration officials are bracing for a huge wave of new losses,
largely because of the deepening recession, and many companies that have
already received federal money may well be coming back.

- - -
$500,000 a year is more than the assholes running failed companies deserve.
I would like to see a requirement for the Board Members to attend
Etchics in Business 101, Non Creative Accounting for dummies, Moral
Responsibility 100, and American Ideals and Patriotism 100, 102, and a
100 page Thesis on the founding of America.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Feb 3, 11:42*pm, HK wrote:
February 4, 2009
U.S. Plans to Curb Executive Pay for Bailout Recipients
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS and VIKAS BAJAJ
NY Times

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is expected to impose a cap of
$500,000 for top executives at companies that receive large amounts of
bailout money, according to people familiar with the plan.

Executives would also be prohibited from receiving any bonuses above
their base pay, except for normal stock dividends.

President Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner plan to
announce the executive compensation plan on Wednesday morning at the
White House.

The new rules would be far tougher than any restrictions imposed during
the Bush administration, and they could force executives to accept deep
reductions in their current pay. They come amid rising public fury about
huge pay packages for executives at financial companies being propped up
by federal tax dollars.

Executives at companies that have already received money from the
Treasury Department would not have to make any changes. But analysts and
administration officials are bracing for a huge wave of new losses,
largely because of the deepening recession, and many companies that have
already received federal money may well be coming back.

* - - -
$500,000 a year is more than the assholes running failed companies deserve.

It's about time...... Concessions all around, I guess.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 23:42:19 -0500, HK wrote:

$500,000 a year is more than the assholes running failed companies deserve.

Your liberal Democratic buddies running New York don't think this is
such a good idea - it's going to impact their income tax revenue by
20%.

Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money
back along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

--

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good."

Steven Wright

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 23:42:19 -0500, HK wrote:

$500,000 a year is more than the assholes running failed companies deserve.

Your liberal Democratic buddies running New York don't think this is
such a good idea - it's going to impact their income tax revenue by
20%.

Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money
back along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

Nancy, Harry and Barack's coupe d'etat has failed.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

"Wizard of Woodstock" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 23:42:19 -0500, HK wrote:

$500,000 a year is more than the assholes running failed companies
deserve.

Your liberal Democratic buddies running New York don't think this is
such a good idea - it's going to impact their income tax revenue by
20%.

Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money
back along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.



That's interesting. Hadn't heard that.
I wonder why? The income and bonus cap doesn't apply to those who received
TARP I funds.
It only applies to future TARP money.

Eisboch

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:57:08 GMT, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:



Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money
back along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

Big talk from execs who find gov tit milk a bit sour.
The gov owns these putzes.
Mama gov.
They were full of BS then, and they are now.
Their groveling and whining is getting old fast.
They best STFU and keep sucking gov tit.
Starving is their other option.
Hope that isn't harsh.
I did my best to moderate my views (-:

--Vic

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:57:08 +0000, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money back
along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

So, I guess they didn't need the money after all. Either that, or their
greed is unabated.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 07:07:54 -0600, Vic Smith wrote:

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:57:08 GMT, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:



Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money back
along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

Big talk from execs who find gov tit milk a bit sour. The gov owns these
putzes.
Mama gov.
They were full of BS then, and they are now. Their groveling and whining
is getting old fast. They best STFU and keep sucking gov tit. Starving
is their other option.
Hope that isn't harsh.
I did my best to moderate my views (-:

--Vic

Hey, I'm with you. These are the putzes that just strangled the world's
economy. F'em.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 08:00:28 -0500, BAR wrote:


Nancy, Harry and Barack's coupe d'etat has failed.

Ah, that would be the Bush-Paulson coupe.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 23:42:19 -0500, HK wrote:

$500,000 a year is more than the assholes running failed companies deserve.

Your liberal Democratic buddies running New York don't think this is
such a good idea - it's going to impact their income tax revenue by
20%.

Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money
back along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

--

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good."

Steven Wright


If they are giving the money back, maybe they didn't need it.

Greed. It's sooooo American.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 5 Feb 2009 08:00:59 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"Wizard of Woodstock" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 23:42:19 -0500, HK wrote:

$500,000 a year is more than the assholes running failed companies
deserve.

Your liberal Democratic buddies running New York don't think this is
such a good idea - it's going to impact their income tax revenue by
20%.

Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money
back along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.



That's interesting. Hadn't heard that.
I wonder why? The income and bonus cap doesn't apply to those who
received
TARP I funds.
It only applies to future TARP money.

Eisboch

If they are able to give it back, why did they claim to desperately
need it in the first place?



If I recall correctly, only a few said they "desperately" needed it. AIG
for example. The rest just got in line for the handouts. Why not? Even
GMAC and American Express filed to be declared banks in order to qualify.

Eisboch

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 07:14:10 -0600, thunder
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:57:08 +0000, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money back
along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

So, I guess they didn't need the money after all. Either that, or their
greed is unabated.

Six of the nine "big" banks originally balked at taking TARP funds if
you remember - they didn't ask for it. They were forced into it. They
didn't expect that to happen - they expected the original purpose of
TARP which was the purchase of trouble assets - You know, like it's
name - Troubled Asset Relief Program?

Remember the "locked room" meeting with Geithner and Paulson when this
all happened a few months ago? They were basically told you wll take
the money.

Well, they did and now they want to give it back because they didn't
need it in the first place, didn't want it and were given it anyway.

You guys need to stop watching CNN and watch CNBC. :)


--

Chaos! Panic! Disaster! (My work here is done)

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 08:41:08 -0500, HK wrote:

Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 23:42:19 -0500, HK wrote:

$500,000 a year is more than the assholes running failed companies deserve.

Your liberal Democratic buddies running New York don't think this is
such a good idea - it's going to impact their income tax revenue by
20%.

Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money
back along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

If they are giving the money back, maybe they didn't need it.

Greed. It's sooooo American.

Ah yes - the Orwellian left rearing it's ugly head once again.

They never asked for it in the first place.

--

Math illiteracy affects 8 out of every 5 people.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Thu, 5 Feb 2009 11:04:36 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 5 Feb 2009 08:00:59 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"Wizard of Woodstock" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 23:42:19 -0500, HK wrote:

$500,000 a year is more than the assholes running failed companies
deserve.

Your liberal Democratic buddies running New York don't think this is
such a good idea - it's going to impact their income tax revenue by
20%.

Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money
back along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

That's interesting. Hadn't heard that.
I wonder why? The income and bonus cap doesn't apply to those who
received
TARP I funds.
It only applies to future TARP money.

If they are able to give it back, why did they claim to desperately
need it in the first place?

If I recall correctly, only a few said they "desperately" needed it. AIG
for example. The rest just got in line for the handouts. Why not? Even
GMAC and American Express filed to be declared banks in order to qualify.

Let's not confuse two issues.

A majority of the "big" investment banks didn't want TARP funds as it
eventually morphed. What they wanted was help with the toxic assets
they had on their books - admittedly their own fault, I'm not arguing
that point. But they didn't need capital - what they needed was for
the government, much like the Resolution Trust fund, to buy up the bad
assets, repackage the more performing assets as securities and sell
them, then hold the bad assets for a while until the economy recovered
when those would be securitized and marketed. What that would have
done is bring the capital to debt to deposit ratios back in line and
with a restructuring of debt lending standards, but everything back on
track.

Which by the way, was the way it was sold to Congress in the first
place.

Paulson changed the rules because he became convinced that more
lending was needed - not a contraction of lending, but more lending
which, as much as I like Paulson's performance up to this point, was
the dumbest thing EVAH!!!

AIG is not a "bank", but an insurance, reinsurance and investment fund
and was in trouble because of it's insurance and reinsurance took
huge hits in the mortgage default (PMI) industry. However, it was
still solvent in the sense that it had the capital to back it up, but
it lost investor confidence and took a huge hit from hedge funds short
selling it's stock. There wasn't time for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy and
the only other option was Chapter 7 so the Feds stepped in - again -
and offered an easy out.

As much as I hate to admit it, Paulson and Bernacke screwed the pooch
on this one and the rest just steamrolled.

--

Time flies when you are sick and psychotic.

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:22:01 GMT, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:



Well, they did and now they want to give it back because they didn't
need it in the first place, didn't want it and were given it anyway.

You guys need to stop watching CNN and watch CNBC. :)

Oh, poor wittle bankers were "forced" to the gov titty.
But oddly enough,
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...toM&refer=home
"Declined Government Funds
More than 30 banks refused to sell preferred shares and warrants to
the government under TARP. Joe Conners, chief financial officer of
Philadelphia-based Beneficial Mutual Bancorp Inc., said his bank
declined TARP money in part because of the amendment."

The reality appears to be that no bank was "forced" to take money.
That's bank PR to keeps share prices up.
But it ain't working too good.
They took the money because they are in trouble with toxic assets.
Those toxic assets are now OUR problem.
Easy solution anyway for the whining banks.
QUIT WHINING AND PAY THE F**KING MONEY BACK.
I got no problem with that.
But they won't/can't.
All the lying and whining by the money crowd attached to the gov titty
is shrill to the ears. Very unbecoming.
The whole TARP idea just was just another Wall Street scam anyway,
whatever its original intended method to bail out the banks.
They should have been left to fail, and solvent, honest, conservative
lenders would have filled in, with gov funds if liquidity was needed
to keep things from getting bad faster than they already have.
Credit was never frozen because of lack of capital.
Good borrowers were gone - and still are - because EVERYBODY HAS
TAPPED OUT THEIR CREDIT.
The borrowers are TAPPED OUT.
Oh, there are some qualified borrowers, but not nearly enough to
maintain the fantasy money bubble.
I won't even get into consumer debt - anybody can google to find out
what a hole the U.S. population is in.
I think it's close to $3 trillion, and that doesn't include mortgages.
Paulson is a f**king idiot, which makes him an ideal representative
for Wall Street. Can't even identify its holdings.
The money party is over, my friend.
Time to pay the piper.
The chickens have come home to roost.
What goes around comes around.
The U.S. is now officially a welfare state.
Socialism is here.
But, you can blame it on Canada.
Of course I may be all wrong here.
So there's still hope!

--Vic

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

"Wizard of Woodstock" wrote in message
...


Let's not confuse two issues.

A majority of the "big" investment banks didn't want TARP funds as it
eventually morphed. What they wanted was help with the toxic assets
they had on their books - admittedly their own fault, I'm not arguing
that point. But they didn't need capital - what they needed was for
the government, much like the Resolution Trust fund, to buy up the bad
assets, repackage the more performing assets as securities and sell
them, then hold the bad assets for a while until the economy recovered
when those would be securitized and marketed. What that would have
done is bring the capital to debt to deposit ratios back in line and
with a restructuring of debt lending standards, but everything back on
track.

Which by the way, was the way it was sold to Congress in the first
place.

Paulson changed the rules because he became convinced that more
lending was needed - not a contraction of lending, but more lending
which, as much as I like Paulson's performance up to this point, was
the dumbest thing EVAH!!!

AIG is not a "bank", but an insurance, reinsurance and investment fund
and was in trouble because of it's insurance and reinsurance took
huge hits in the mortgage default (PMI) industry. However, it was
still solvent in the sense that it had the capital to back it up, but
it lost investor confidence and took a huge hit from hedge funds short
selling it's stock. There wasn't time for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy and
the only other option was Chapter 7 so the Feds stepped in - again -
and offered an easy out.

As much as I hate to admit it, Paulson and Bernacke screwed the pooch
on this one and the rest just steamrolled.



Good points. I had forgotten the details of AIG. However, as the tune
changed, more and more banks lined up. Bank of America went on an
acquisition spree and accepted bailout money.
And, as I mentioned, American Express and GMAC filed the legal paperwork to
become a bank, so that they qualified for bailout money.

Eisboch

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...


The U.S. is now officially a welfare state.
Socialism is here.
But, you can blame it on Canada.
Of course I may be all wrong here.
So there's still hope!


Keep the faith. Some are trying desperately hard to prevent the final nail
from being driven.

Eisboch

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Feb 5, 3:50*pm, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
.. .

The U.S. is now officially a welfare state.
Socialism is here.
But, you can blame it on Canada.
Of course I may be all wrong here.
So there's still hope!

Keep the faith. *Some are trying desperately hard to prevent the final
nail from being driven.

Eisboch

Oh? What are you doing?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Exposing Obama for the lying, coke snorting, smoking, bought and paid
for con artist he is..

Pay Cap Wednesday for Bailed Out Corporations
 

On Thu, 5 Feb 2009 19:24:56 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:

Meanwhile, the stupid newsgroups are still screwed up. You posted this at
3:50pm. I got it at 7:23pm.

I talked to the tech guy at Easynews and he said there was a routing
glitch that is affecting all news providers. They know what the
problem is, they don't know what is causing it.

It's somewhere along the major traffic circuits and apparently it's
not a big priority for the major traffic carriers to find and fix.

By the way, that NatGeo show on the icebreaker/container ship is
really interesting.

--

"Far better it is to dare mighty things,
to win glorious triumphs even though
checkered by failure, than to rank with
those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor
suffer much because they live in the gray
twilight that knows neither victory nor
defeat."

Theodore Roosevelt