| Author | Message | ||
     Greenlantern |
Dinosaurs were the "too big to fail" entities of their time. Brought down by the Mexicans, Importing unstable asteroids.  | ||
| Fast1075 |
 | ||
| Court |
Wait till the word gets out that if you get a "bonus" of $100,000 or greater and see what begins to happen to the talent at the Fortune 500 companies. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Only those who already have it will be "wealthy". If you want to start a business and become wealthy, you won't be able to. The deck with be stacked against you. A distribution from a PC will be considered a "bonus". A K-1 distribution from an S-Corp or LLC will be considered a "bonus". | ||
| Greenlantern |
Wait till the word gets out that if you get a "bonus" of $100,000 or greater and see what begins to happen to the talent at the Fortune 500 companies. I was thinking about "talent" at such companies which made me think of Apple and the years of "talented" CEO's that went through their ranks from the time Steve screwed up his attempted coup till well.........He came out of exile( "I sold Pepsi so I totally get cutting edge technology!" "I can make a speech for 3 hours and not say a single thing!"). My point is, I know the larger segment of these folks are talented people who landed where they are by hard work and getting results,but reality and common sense tells me a large segment of these "wizards" snuck in under the "halo effect" and clearly can be replaced, which makes me wonder.... How many young, energetic, talented and hungry go getters (who would be happy with a meager salary of 6 figures and a chance to get their foot in the door) would you think are ready to take advantage of this opportunity, jump starting and and truly inspiring self substainabilty in the financial sector? Even the Beatles played for a piece of the door once.  | ||
| Reepicheep |
There is a subtle but elegant irony here... 1) Government says "the free market failed, so we have to bail you out Big Bank". 2) Big Bank says, "clearly, we need that money". 3) Government says "well, we gave you that money, so now here are all the strings attached to it". 4) Big Bank says "dis we say we clearly needed it? Now that we think about it, we didn't need it after all, but thanks". Showing once more, that socialism is simply an incredibly inefficient and bloody way to go from capitalism to capitalism. | ||
| Hootowl |
I don't understand why some folks think socialism is the way to go. It has failed every society that has ever tried it. Anyone see the "B movie" that Seinfeld put out last year? Remember his bee character crashing into the window over and over? "This time...this time...this time..." Socialism has throughout history turned to fascism, and has thrust poverty upon everyone. It just doesn't work. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
Now, now, lets not leave out the communists, gotta love their failed experiment. | ||
| Court |
>>>>How many young, energetic, talented and hungry go getters (who would be happy with a meager salary of 6 figures and a chance to get their foot in the door) would you think are ready to take advantage of this opportunity, jump starting and and truly inspiring self substainabilty in the financial sector? Why I don't disagree entirely with that . . . those young pups need folks like me with lots of education tempered with practical experience. My greatest value to my employer ($13.8B 2008 Revenue) is not what I EARN them but what I SAVE them. On one recent project I got credited with saving them over $2.5M as a result of my efforts. Maybe what I need to be doing is working on commission.  When you limit the "upside" . . . . expect innovation and creativity to suffer. During the 20 years I owned my own firm the carrot ahead of my personal cart was always finding a better way to do it. Governments involvement rots the carrot and makes it non-chase-worthy. | ||
| Greenlantern |
When you limit the "upside" . . . . expect innovation and creativity to suffer. I agree, but what i was getting at was not limiting upside, but eliminating parity for parity's sake. Corporations like individuals seem to easily accept complacity following success and growth too often these days. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The true growth and innovation doesn't come from old, established, huge corporations that you have heard of. The problem is that when you place the kind of limiters on return (income) that are being proposed, you destroy the incentive to innovate. We only hear about the multi-million dollar incomes of the Fortune 500's CEOs. What we don't hear about are the folks who build up businesses from scratch and become wealthy doing it. I have mentioned before the couple I worked with in Alabama. They started a dry wall company and because the majority owner was the wife, they were able to bid on minority contracts with the government. They have been able to create efficiencies in their business that allow them to bid jobs at a better rate than other companies. This husband and wife pull down about $1.5M a year in net income. A salary cap of $500,000 would suck the guts out of any desire to become more efficient and effective. | ||
| Court |
>>>>Corporations like individuals seem to easily accept complacency following success and growth too often these days. I agree. It's also the reason I NEVER, in all the years I owned the company, gave bonuses at Christmas. It takes but once before they become "expected" and you can really tick folks off if they don't get it. In fact, I went the other way. I say down with all my General Foreman for a day each November and THEY made the plan for the following year. I needed to make my return on my investment, pay for the building, the cranes, trucks and plane and they were even understanding about the collection of motorcycles . . . But once we got to that number they had the ability to make some serious scratch. They came up with the number, they decided where they thought we could be most competitive (that's how we started our offices in Dallas and Sacramento) and how they'd run the work. I told them where the goal line was, they called the play and once they got to the goal line they participated in profits at an exponentially increasing rate. It's what I love about American business. We had our competitors best and brightest begging to go to work for us and our guys took pride in declaring that when they finished a project it was perfect. In fact I did a really ballsy thing on a major job in Dallas once that I'd have never tried without these guys. It was part of what got is the Small Business of the Year award and on the cover of quite a few magazines. I'm addicted to business . . . gads . . . my palms get sweaty just thinking about it. . . I thrive on competition . . . I may start another business but it damn sure won't be under this administration. | ||
| Crusty |
After asking Abe Askenazi about Right Side Scoops, and hearing what he had to say about them; there's no way I'd put one on my XT. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
I have both the right side scoop and a stunt cage ready to install on the CityX... Flying in the face of corporate wisdom | ||
| Ducxl |
I'm wondering what will happen next,now that the bill has passed to tax 90% of bonuses by companies who've accepted more than 5B in bailout monies? I hope we can recoup the monies.I also do not believe for a second that this is a slippery slope.A slope where some say they'll start pointing fingers everywhere and taxing "Joe average" income. This is a chance to right a wrong.No matter Dem or Rep,the bonuses represent the worse greed in a company crippled. Let this be a lesson going forward.Some say this is a smokescreen.I wonder how? | ||
| Court |
While I agree . . . . in the spirit of the national outrage about the bonuses . . . I find myself more concerned that Congress (the same folks who stopped the stimulus package and INSISTED the bonus provisions be added) can so blatantly make a mockery of the constitution, The 90% tax will be ruled unconstitutional, The folks who got the bonuses will return them (the largest one has already been returned) and Wall Street has learned the "new" rules of the game on how to act while the kooks are in the kitchen. Anybody else see the documentary about the Robert Byrd Highway last night . . . . $3,000,000,000+ of your dollars and the thing goes nowhere . . . . just place to name after him with lots of bridges named after him.
The crew filming the piece stood on "his" 4 lane highway for 3 hours and never saw a car. These folks are great! More HERE. The folks in his state must have a real elevated tolerance for graft. (Message edited by court on March 20, 2009) (Message edited by court on March 20, 2009) | ||
| Benm2 |
The house vote on the bonuses was all for show, for the public, to show their outrage. I'll be shocked if it makes it through the senate & the president, but I wouldn't put it past the lawmakers to allow the buck to stop at the Supreme Court. That they all can claim to be champions of the American taxpayer, but the Constituion says it really isn't allowed. | ||
| Sayitaintso |
Hell, graft is the state industry in WV. The whole time my brother was at WVU he would talk about how the local media bragged about the bacon Byrd was bringing home to WV. Mining and gov't projects, thats all there is. The sad part is that once the old buzzard dies that state is in for some rough times.....not that things have ever been economically robust in WV. Right now the biggest boom int he state is where the DC suburbs have grown out to WV.....and even thats growing on taxpayers backs... indirectly b/c they are mostly Federal gov't employees moving out there. (Message edited by sayitaintso on March 20, 2009) | ||
| Ducxl |
kooks  | ||
| Midknyte |
I hope we can recoup the monies... | ||
| Court |
If you were one of the 400 folks at AIG scheduled for a bonus in March 2010 . .. how "devoted" would you be to staying with AIG? | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
So do folks at AIG not get bonuses until every single cent of bailout money is repaid? Was that the requirement for Chrysler? What is the end game benefit for being a "devoted" employee. You work hard and help to pull AIG out of the ditch. What do you get? | ||
| Benm2 |
If AIG had gone bankrupt, would they have been more loyal in the future? Based on the 'sky is falling' sales pitch that went along with telling the public that they COULDN'T fail, I would guess their bonuses would have evaporated like brakleen on a hot driveway, and we'd all be walking the streets asking "brother, can you spare a dime?" If AIG can pull itself out of the ditch, and return to profitability, I'd suspect those that stayed (and contributed in a worthy manner) would likely receive bonuses that dwarf those currently being argued about. If they're so good, they should have no trouble finding work elsewhere. It also provides AIG an opportunity to lower their personnel costs to become more competitive with the Japanese-domestic auto-workers. | ||
| Court |
I'll bet your right. Problem is that AIG, for better or worse, really was too big to let fail. Face it, if GM fails . . . it'll be ugly for a while. If AIG failed, we'd have years of an economy that would rival the Great Depression. Few appreciate how big and global they are. It is unfortunate that the feds have decided to play class envy with the bonuses. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the bonues but the word is speading fast that a bonus CONTRACT (that legally binding document that so underpins our system) is no longer worth the paper it is written on. My wife and most her family are on Wall Street and as an example, her cousins annual bonus runs around $650,000. She has been there long enough that she, at 38, can take early retirement and have the firm pay her pension for years AND she gets 2 years salary as a "buy out". She's critical to their Stock Loan operation in NYC and London but she's seen the writing on the wall and will be bailing. My wife hasn't worked in 10 months and has found it better to do due diligence consulting and trade her own portfolio rather than accept an offer with a "bonus" that may or may not really be there. Good news is that the firm she is consulting with is up 22% for 2009 thru the end of Feb. Her deal now is "cash on the barrel head, screw your bonus". By the way. . . some of these "bonuses" are really most their years pay in a deferred account. Bottom line is that congress has declared that law, contracts and promises mean nothing. Business will be effected. | ||
| Ducxl |
is no longer worth the paper it is written on. IFYou're at the same time accepting Federal bailout money.When you turn a profit we talk Bonuses.I don't care who you feel ultimately responsible.Complicity | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The problem is that the "contract" is between the Federal Government and AIG. It is NOT with the employees. If the employees can find another job with another company paying bonuses, they will. The key to recovery is the employees not the bailout money. When a company with a nonqualified deferred compensation plan goes into bankruptcy, the judge must decide what compensation package is fair and conducive to that company regaining stability. RARELY would a judge touch the compensation packages of the executives responsible for bringing the company back. Why? Because killing the compensation packages ensures that those people will leave. Once they are gone, it is virtually impossible to hire someone to replace them. If you were a smart, skilled, capable person at another company, why the hell would you go to AIG to work knowing that you'd not be compensated for your efforts? If you were a smart, skilled, capable person at AIG and you knew you'd not be compensated for your efforts, why the hell would you stay? This BS is ridiculous. The new law ensures the complete and utter destruction of AIG. You are about to see a talent hemorrhage like you haven't seen since Arthur Anderson. | ||
| Madduck |
My big concern with this congressional action is AIGs foreign competitors. This company is so big that has many parts and contracts worth "stealing/liberating". Congress now has a huge pool of "inside talent" with a huge incentive for "mischief/fraud". Current management will not know for years what they do going out the door to new employers who won't be playing by rules set up in Basil. Thinking hedge funds and cap firms run by say Saudis and or UAE. Hell this thing is so big the Russian mob is probably interested in taking a hunk out of their hide. Make this many insiders feel like crooks, call them that to their face; expect a few to return the favor as they head for the door. | ||
| Reepicheep |
DucXL, why on earth would you think this precedent, now set, would be limited to companies that took bail out money? Why not those companies that directly benefited from bail out money? How about those that indirectly benefit. How about those that "emit carbon dioxide"? How about those that own corporate jets? How about those that make "too much money" during a time of economic recession? If a business contract is subject to politically driven congressional whims, we are in serious trouble. There's no problem so bad that a little government involvement can't make it worse.... | ||
| Ducxl |
Hysteria | ||
| Court |
If in fact it is hysteria . . . it seems to have some real life consequences. I watched a fellow in Connecticut today crying in his driveway, with the paparazzi there, as he explained that his children had received death threats. AIG is a company in a competitive market. I expect (not sure I expect, but I won't be surprised to see) an exodus of honest, very talented people. In fact, the word is already out that their competitors are recruiting. I also expect to see the very company that the feds, who own 80% of AIG, were hoping to bail out loose some massive accounts to large foreign competitors, Hong Kong has the ability and commercial poop, with AIG now weakened, to peel off some of their showcase customers. Outsourcing jobs is bad . . . outsourcing billion dollar (those dollars coming to America from overseas) account s is also bad. Be mindful that the same bozos driving the train are the ones who suggested that "stimulus" money directed toward construction should be available not to "traditional while male construction workers" but "chronically unemployed women and minorities" who "deserve the fat paychecks. I've had some fat paychecks in construction but never did I feel like I didn't earn it or that I was displacing a woman in the Bronx. I think micro-management could lead to major chaos. There are lots of folks, who after earning big bucks on Wall Street, who are perfectly willing to say "screw it" and walk. |
