Is the bailout working?

[techs]

I'd have to say, up to the this point, the bailout has done what it was designed to do. Which was to prevent a complete meltdown. The market was in danger of a complete collapse, with lows of 4,000 or even less a real possibility. The impact on the economy would have spiraled to 20 percent unemployment, tens of millions of homeless Americans, tens of millions of Americans who no longer had any kind of adequate retirement.
Longer term, I am pretty sure we will see the economic situation get worse. The economy has barely begun to show the effects of the coming major recession, and the market may still go way down over the next couple of years. But the relative stability the bailout created has given many people the time to re-arrange their retirement investments into safer products, given people time to bail out of their homes while still getting some kind of value, etc.

And, if you believe in America, and that the economy will recover in time, the bailout will not only cost nothing, but make a profit.

 

[StageLeft]

Too early to totally conclude, but I suppose things could be worse.

 

[Craig234]

Sometimes, things aren't black and white; for example, you could have the 'legitimate' bailout funds taking up 20% of the spending, with 80% being corrupt 'fat' added on.

That would still solve the problem, but would obviously also have problems.

The jury is out, as far as I've seen, whether it was a 'band-aid' that will delay the worse problems.

 

[halik]

The bailout was passed to restart the credit markets (not equity)
Text

 

[shafeen]

i read somewhere that the bailout could take atleast 2 months to show its effect

 

[bamx2]

Yes , Goldman Sachs is paying out big bonuses .

 

[Ferocious]

I think it will work. But remember that dealt with the credit crisis.

We still have a major economic crisis underway with no end in sight.

The credit crisis unabated could have turned what will be a severe recession into a great depression.

 

[TheSlamma]

It's working great for the CEO's which for republicans means complete success. They get to spend printed off money on anything they want! whoohoo! so conservative!

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: bamx2
Yes , Goldman Sachs is paying out big bonuses .

Well i certainly wouldn't do 100+ hour work week if i wasn't comped for it....

 

[TheSlamma]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamx2
Yes , Goldman Sachs is paying out big bonuses .

Well i certainly wouldn't do 100+ hour work week if i wasn't comped for it....

Rounds of golf and getting sucked off by the Sexrataries doesn't count

 

[SagaLore]

Yes, Goldman Sachs was able to pay their upper management $7B in Christmas bonuses with the $6B in bailout money they received. It worked exactly as planned.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: TheSlamma

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamx2
Yes , Goldman Sachs is paying out big bonuses .

Well i certainly wouldn't do 100+ hour work week if i wasn't comped for it....

Rounds of golf and getting sucked off by the Sexrataries doesn't count

Yeah, that was exactly my life. Try office form 8 till 8 if it's a good day. They don't just hand out money...

I can tell you with 100% certainty that people would peace if their bonus was to be wiped out. Why would i work 100+ hours a week for 60-70K?

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: SagaLore
Yes, Goldman Sachs was able to pay their upper management $7B in Christmas bonuses with the $6B in bailout money they received. It worked exactly as planned.

iirc the Dems wanted to put language into the bill to prevent this, but then Bush wouldn't sign it. iirc Republicans screamed that the Dems would want to limit executive compensation.
However, my thread is about how it stabilized the financial markets and prevented a meltdown, not the negative results of the Bush parts of the bill.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: SagaLore
Yes, Goldman Sachs was able to pay their upper management $7B in Christmas bonuses with the $6B in bailout money they received. It worked exactly as planned.

iirc the Dems wanted to put language into the bill to prevent this, but then Bush wouldn't sign it. iirc Republicans screamed that the Dems would want to limit executive compensation.
However, my thread is about how it stabilized the financial markets and prevented a meltdown, not the negative results of the Bush parts of the bill.

Sounds like snake oil. I'll sell you this tonic, and your cold will go away in about 5 to 10 days, guaranteed.

 

[gar3555]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: TheSlamma

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamx2
Yes , Goldman Sachs is paying out big bonuses .

Well i certainly wouldn't do 100+ hour work week if i wasn't comped for it....

Rounds of golf and getting sucked off by the Sexrataries doesn't count

Yeah, that was exactly my life. Try office form 8 till 8 if it's a good day. They don't just hand out money...

I can tell you with 100% certainty that people would peace if their bonus was to be wiped out. Why would i work 100+ hours a week for 60-70K?

So, everyone who works 100+ hour weeks should get huge government bailout bonuses this year? Where is mine then? I know plenty of construction worker, farmer, blue collar individuals who have never got bonuses, and wouldn't think that they deserve it when the company they work for failed miserably.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: TheSlamma

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamx2
Yes , Goldman Sachs is paying out big bonuses .

Well i certainly wouldn't do 100+ hour work week if i wasn't comped for it....

Rounds of golf and getting sucked off by the Sexrataries doesn't count

Yeah, that was exactly my life. Try office form 8 till 8 if it's a good day. They don't just hand out money...

I can tell you with 100% certainty that people would peace if their bonus was to be wiped out. Why would i work 100+ hours a week for 60-70K?

They don't even come close to getting it.

I pulled 14 hour days for the past month, plus an average of 8 hours each day on the weekends.

Nor do they understand that in order to retain people who *ARE* performing they have to be paid. Those people will be paid anywhere they go, so why not maintain the investment the people have put into the companies?

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: TheSlamma

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamx2
Yes , Goldman Sachs is paying out big bonuses .

Well i certainly wouldn't do 100+ hour work week if i wasn't comped for it....

Rounds of golf and getting sucked off by the Sexrataries doesn't count

Yeah, that was exactly my life. Try office form 8 till 8 if it's a good day. They don't just hand out money...

I can tell you with 100% certainty that people would peace if their bonus was to be wiped out. Why would i work 100+ hours a week for 60-70K?

They don't even come close to getting it.

I pulled 14 hour days for the past month, plus an average of 8 hours each day on the weekends.

Nor do they understand that in order to retain people who *ARE* performing they have to be paid. Those people will be paid anywhere they go, so why not maintain the investment the people have put into the companies?

Actually, you don't seem to get it. People are genuinely pissed off that GS is spending more in bonuses than its bailout money. If it had $1B from earnings for bonuses, why did it need $6B more for an emergency assistance to bring its bonus fund up to 7B?

On planet earth, if you work at a company that doesn't have cash, you don't get your bonus. That's why it's called a bonus, because it's not guaranteed. If it was, it would be part of your salary and you'd get it every two weeks.

The argument as I see it from Halik and you is that if a company doesn't have the money for its bonuses, then the government should give it the money it needs to pay those historically huge bonuses.

And who gives a fvck about retention. These people will leave GS if they don't get their bonus? LET THEM. Where are they going? McDonalds? No, they will go to other banks. In fact, to give GS funds that it can retain workers with, artificially, is giving an artificial competitive advantage to them that the market says they don't deserve.

If GS has $7B to give as bonuses it does not need an emergency cash infusion.

Aren't bonuses for a job well done? What well-done job has GS done?

I believe you're exceedingly biased by your role in the industry. There are probably millions who will not get some kind of a bonus or stipend this year that they may otherwise have gotten because of their company's poor performance, and it was much better than GS'.

Further, you've said yourself you're working crazy hours and you'll be getting no bonus, so what makes you different than GS, presuming that you're not going to drop jobs and go open a dive shop on Grand Cayman?

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: gar3555

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: TheSlamma

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamx2
Yes , Goldman Sachs is paying out big bonuses .

Well i certainly wouldn't do 100+ hour work week if i wasn't comped for it....

Rounds of golf and getting sucked off by the Sexrataries doesn't count

Yeah, that was exactly my life. Try office form 8 till 8 if it's a good day. They don't just hand out money...

I can tell you with 100% certainty that people would peace if their bonus was to be wiped out. Why would i work 100+ hours a week for 60-70K?

So, everyone who works 100+ hour weeks should get huge government bailout bonuses this year? Where is mine then? I know plenty of construction worker, farmer, blue collar individuals who have never got bonuses, and wouldn't think that they deserve it when the company they work for failed miserably.

No, but if your business division made money, you should get some of that money. You're acting as if Goldman made no money this year.

I'm sure the people in MBS division (whoever is still around) are getting no money. My former roommate (also at GS ) got canned already...

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: TheSlamma

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamx2
Yes , Goldman Sachs is paying out big bonuses .

Well i certainly wouldn't do 100+ hour work week if i wasn't comped for it....

Rounds of golf and getting sucked off by the Sexrataries doesn't count

Yeah, that was exactly my life. Try office form 8 till 8 if it's a good day. They don't just hand out money...

I can tell you with 100% certainty that people would peace if their bonus was to be wiped out. Why would i work 100+ hours a week for 60-70K?

They don't even come close to getting it.

I pulled 14 hour days for the past month, plus an average of 8 hours each day on the weekends.

Nor do they understand that in order to retain people who *ARE* performing they have to be paid. Those people will be paid anywhere they go, so why not maintain the investment the people have put into the companies?

Actually, you don't seem to get it. People are genuinely pissed off that GS is spending more in bonuses than its bailout money. If it had $1B from earnings for bonuses, why did it need $6B more for an emergency assistance to bring its bonus fund up to 7B?

On planet earth, if you work at a company that doesn't have cash, you don't get your bonus. That's why it's called a bonus, because it's not guaranteed. If it was, it would be part of your salary and you'd get it every two weeks.

The argument as I see it from Halik and you is that if a company doesn't have the money for its bonuses, then the government should give it the money it needs to pay those historically huge bonuses.

And who gives a fvck about retention. These people will leave GS if they don't get their bonus? LET THEM. Where are they going? McDonalds? No, they will go to other banks. In fact, to give GS funds that it can retain workers with, artificially, is giving an artificial competitive advantage to them that the market says they don't deserve.

If GS has $7B to give as bonuses it does not need an emergency cash infusion.

Aren't bonuses for a job well done? What well-done job has GS done?

I believe you're exceedingly biased by your role in the industry. There are probably millions who will not get some kind of a bonus or stipend this year that they may otherwise have gotten because of their company's poor performance, and it was much better than GS'.

If someone was offering you a loan at 0%, would you not take it because you don't need it?

And yes, Goldman hasn't done bad in 08, thus the bonus. The way the bonuses are determined as follows:
1. How did the firm do
2. How did your division do
3. How did you you do (based on the 360 degree review)

If goldman wasn't making money, they would not hand out bonuses.

 

[StageLeft]

So the question is why did GS get any bailout money then? Certainly it seems irreconcilable with the 1. point in Halik's bonus structure.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
So the question is why did GS get any bailout money then? Certainly it seems irreconcilable with the 1. point in Halik's bonus structure.

Now that is the more relevant question.
From what I've heard on NPR it's all corporate strategy. Opportunity cost of not taking it is too big and the terms are favorable, whether you need it or not.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: TheSlamma

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamx2
Yes , Goldman Sachs is paying out big bonuses .

Well i certainly wouldn't do 100+ hour work week if i wasn't comped for it....

Rounds of golf and getting sucked off by the Sexrataries doesn't count

Yeah, that was exactly my life. Try office form 8 till 8 if it's a good day. They don't just hand out money...

I can tell you with 100% certainty that people would peace if their bonus was to be wiped out. Why would i work 100+ hours a week for 60-70K?

They don't even come close to getting it.

I pulled 14 hour days for the past month, plus an average of 8 hours each day on the weekends.

Nor do they understand that in order to retain people who *ARE* performing they have to be paid. Those people will be paid anywhere they go, so why not maintain the investment the people have put into the companies?

Actually, you don't seem to get it. People are genuinely pissed off that GS is spending more in bonuses than its bailout money. If it had $1B from earnings for bonuses, why did it need $6B more for an emergency assistance to bring its bonus fund up to 7B?

On planet earth, if you work at a company that doesn't have cash, you don't get your bonus. That's why it's called a bonus, because it's not guaranteed. If it was, it would be part of your salary and you'd get it every two weeks.

The argument as I see it from Halik and you is that if a company doesn't have the money for its bonuses, then the government should give it the money it needs to pay those historically huge bonuses.

And who gives a fvck about retention. These people will leave GS if they don't get their bonus? LET THEM. Where are they going? McDonalds? No, they will go to other banks. In fact, to give GS funds that it can retain workers with, artificially, is giving an artificial competitive advantage to them that the market says they don't deserve.

If GS has $7B to give as bonuses it does not need an emergency cash infusion.

Aren't bonuses for a job well done? What well-done job has GS done?

I believe you're exceedingly biased by your role in the industry. There are probably millions who will not get some kind of a bonus or stipend this year that they may otherwise have gotten because of their company's poor performance, and it was much better than GS'.

Further, you've said yourself you're working crazy hours and you'll be getting no bonus, so what makes you different than GS, presuming that you're not going to drop jobs and go open a dive shop on Grand Cayman?

And you still have no fucking clue why the rescue plan was needed. I won't try and explain it to you, since it's been tried multiple times.

 

[gar3555]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

And you still have no fucking clue why the rescue plan was needed. I won't try and explain it to you, since it's been tried multiple times.

No, he is arguing about the appropriation of the bailout. If GS made a profit, why are they paying out bonuses using money intended to bail out a struggling company/prop up credit?

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: gar3555

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

And you still have no fucking clue why the rescue plan was needed. I won't try and explain it to you, since it's been tried multiple times.

No, he is arguing about the appropriation of the bailout. If GS made a profit, why are they paying out bonuses using money intended to bail out a struggling company/prop up credit?

BSC, LEH, nor Goldman, ever really needed a bailout. They just needed positive publicity.

 

[brandonbull]

Companies should not be allowed to take any of the "bailout" money if they plan to pay any bonuses or dividends. If people don't like not getting a bonus, they can quit and see how they like getting no money.

Anyone claiming they are working 100+ hours a week is an idiot. Working that much puts you at about a 2 on the 1- 10 productive scale.