The Brain Drain

[seemingly random]

And the bankers are fairly compensated? So you agree that they're worth 50 - 1000 times what you and most of the rest of us are?

 

[Paddington]

When I was in college I interviewed for a few Wall St. jobs. Most people competing for these jobs had no idea what the positions were even for. It didn't matter much what you knew, only if you could talk. Even better than that was if you were well connected or rich to begin with, because you might grab them a few contracts that way, even if you were otherwise completely useless. These jobs are great. Even in the down economy of post-Sept 11, they were still paying around $70,000 or so, which is a lot for a 22 year old.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

It was fair market that determined their salaries.

That depends on what the meaning of "fair" is. There may have been something to your view while all the companies were raking in big bucks, but the way made those bucks is what set up the crash. There was nothing "fair" about what happened to the life savings of working people and the companies' staff employees when the house of cards those jackasses set up came crashing down.

Right now; the government is attempting to regulate the market.
The fact that the government has $$ invested means the government should act as a shareholder - not the board of directors or management

That means those same lamers now work for US. If their carelessness cost us zillions, they should be the ones to restock the kitty out of their own ill-gotten gains.

Or they can find a real job. Maybe we should give them the list of useful phrases, starting with, "Will there be fries with that?"

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: ebaycj

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
Aren't some of these people the very same people who put the banks into the position they are in today?

NO. That's the whole fucking point of this thread.

I know, I know. I understand the situation. It's just difficult to resist saying what I said. But, consider this:

Perhaps these failed companies deserved to lose these people. Perhaps it's better if these people leave rather than continue supporting the awful upper management that caused this mess. Maybe they'll find jobs working for Hank Rearden instead of Orren Boyle.

Now this, I can agree with. They probably do deserve to lose these people. Only problem is that we the (partial) owners (the taxpayers) now take a hit for them losing these people.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

lol, you're kidding me, right?

The majority of bankers are salaried. Do you understand that? Without a bonus and considering cost of living, while working the same amount of hours, they are getting paid far less than 60% of their former salary per hour.

By the way, what part am I supposed to be kidding about and what does them being salaried have to do with it? I'm salaried also and my "bonus" was getting paid overtime for working my ass off getting jobs done and doing them well. I'm still expected to get them done and do them just as well but not get paid for the extra time spent on them. I had to take one for the team. They could have given up some of their precious bonuses but no...they had to take government money and then spread it around.

If you want to understand where LK is coming from, just read my sig.

 

[miniMUNCH]

Well I'm way late to the ball game but from some of what I read I'll ante in my hat into Legends corner.

As legend said banks have many different sections and departments... some departments have performed very well it the few department in some banks that were stupid and totally fucked themselves over.

Why do you think banks are so eager to pay back the TARP money? I think it is largely due to the fact that they cannot retain their good people under TARP guidelines and are their top staff is getting eviscerated by competing banks or they are concerned about their core staff getting lured away by competing banks.

But on the flip side this may be one of the better thing that Obama's crew did to get the banks to pay back the TARP money sooner rather than later.... i honestly can't say.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Hey maybe we can entice the Canadian bankers who outperformed their US counterparts while getting "pittance" compensation. They could get more money than they earned in Canada, and we could get competent people.

Win/Win

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: miniMUNCH
Well I'm way late to the ball game but from some of what I read I'll ante in my hat into Legends corner.

As legend said banks have many different sections and departments... some departments have performed very well it the few department in some banks that were stupid and totally fucked themselves over.

Why do you think banks are so eager to pay back the TARP money? I think it is largely due to the fact that they cannot retain their good people under TARP guidelines and are their top staff is getting eviscerated by competing banks or they are concerned about their core staff getting lured away by competing banks.

But on the flip side this may be one of the better thing that Obama's crew did to get the banks to pay back the TARP money sooner rather than later.... i honestly can't say.

Obama's goal was to prevent any recovery so he can use this economic crisis to grab and control your life, your money, your health, your liberty, your property and any chance at prosperity. That is the only conclusion, force out the people that could actually help.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: miniMUNCH
Well I'm way late to the ball game but from some of what I read I'll ante in my hat into Legends corner.

As legend said banks have many different sections and departments... some departments have performed very well it the few department in some banks that were stupid and totally fucked themselves over.

Why do you think banks are so eager to pay back the TARP money? I think it is largely due to the fact that they cannot retain their good people under TARP guidelines and are their top staff is getting eviscerated by competing banks or they are concerned about their core staff getting lured away by competing banks.

But on the flip side this may be one of the better thing that Obama's crew did to get the banks to pay back the TARP money sooner rather than later.... i honestly can't say.

Obama's goal was to prevent any recovery so he can use this economic crisis to grab and control your life, your money, your health, your liberty, your property and any chance at prosperity. That is the only conclusion, force out the people that could actually help.

Sorry spidey, but you deserve this!

:shocked:

 

[spidey07]

I'm a little broader though!

But think about it. Anybody with an ounce of common sense knew this was going to happen, so why in the world would you enact this crap if you knew it would harm the banks? Why? What possible motive could there be? Jealousy from the populace? Wealth redistribution? Control over the private sector?

 

[Blackjack200]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
I predicted this would begin to happen the second the USG stepped into the role of dictating free market pay. People who DO perform and DO deserve good compensation, because they perform, are not going to sit around accepting pittance. It just doesn't work like that.

Many said "where else are they going to go" with regards to AIG and TARP banks. Well, now you know. They are going to foreign banks, boutique firms, and private equity, all of whom will pay for performance. Now what did our taxpayer dollars buy? Soon to be empty husks of formerly competitive banks, all because you punished the unguilty.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/2...postversion=2009062311

You are 100% right LK, but it doesn't matter. The US government has no clue how to run a financial institution, and they cannot permit 7 and 8 figure bonuses, it's a political non-starter. Remember that the purpose of the bank bailouts was less to save the banks and more to stablize the entire industry and stop the dominoes from falling. It worked. If the government had business savvy, they would continue to invest in the talented individuals, and they would either turn a profit on their equity infusions, or they would at least mitigate their losses.

But what you said will happen: as long as any financial institution is hamstrung by Government money, they will lose their top talent and gradually deteriorate. I think that's the main reason why banks that are still in somewhat rough shape are desperate to return the money.

Insisting that no-one at an unhealthy institution should get a bonus makes as much sense as insisting that no-one at a profitable institution should be fired or demoted. But look at this thread, it's all torches and pitchforks, and I think it's a reflection of public sentiment. I've given up trying to explain this to my own family members (most of whom I consider pretty intelligent, too), they start foaming at any suggestion that people should still be highly compensated at AIG or Merrill. At my firm, we've canceled sales conferences that we don't even pay for because the "optics" weren't right.

It hurts our business, it hurts the economy, and it damn sure doesn't save any money when you cancel hotel conference rooms that you've already paid for. But the alternative is reading about your firm's extravagant event on the front page of the times, followed up by an editorial about how your company has not learned anything in the last 18 months, and how the taxpayers are funding your excess.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: Hacp

OK, then move to another company. The sense of entitlement in that post is so thick, you can cut it with a knife. If your company is being saved from bankruptcy by a government bailout, you don't get a bonus, just like employees at other struggling companies didn't get a bonus this year. Just be happy you got a job. If you think you can get a better offer, by all means get one. There are plenty of unemployed financial workers out there to take your spot.

I whole heartily agree. Now if you could apply that attitude to some other overcompensated workers(like union members), we'll be seeing eye to eye.

Why such a hard on for union workers? Did you get diddled by one when younger?

SOP for GOP

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Obama's goal was to prevent any recovery so he can use this economic crisis to grab and control your life, your money, your health, your liberty, your property and any chance at prosperity. That is the only conclusion, force out the people that could actually help.

Further proof you are officially a tinfoil hat loon.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: spidey07
Obama's goal was to prevent any recovery so he can use this economic crisis to grab and control your life, your money, your health, your liberty, your property and any chance at prosperity. That is the only conclusion, force out the people that could actually help.

Further proof you are officially a tinfoil hat loon.

So why would obama do this if anybody with an ounce of common sense knew and could easily predict the outcome? Seriously, it didn't take much intelligence to know what would happen and I remember many threads where I and others told you this was what was going to happen.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: spidey07
I'm a little broader though!

But think about it. Anybody with an ounce of common sense knew this was going to happen, so why in the world would you enact this crap if you knew it would harm the banks? Why? What possible motive could there be? Jealousy from the populace? Wealth redistribution? Control over the private sector?

lmao

 

[da loser]

let's see the economy was built largely on bullcrap. and the so-called successful bankers rode the wave and made huge sums of money. and now that the house of cards fall. these bankers are supposed to be compensated the same. where is all this magical money going to be made in a depression?

if these people were so valuable, how come they couldn't save their own companies?
because they're not worth a damn. they clearly don't produce enough to be a major factor in keeping these companies alive.

instead the most valuable employees these financial companies have is the american taxpayer. those are the people, who will be working for decades to pay off the loans.

to give the sports analogy. paying people a ton of money doesn't necessarily give you results. look at the yankees. tom brady takes a discount so his team can win, why can't these "masters of the universe" do the same?

making a team from a bunch of greedy fvcktards with no values will not build a championship team. no, you need people that love the game.

weakening the american financial industry is the best thing that could happen. let more people go into real businesses that create things, not push around paper.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: da loser

weakening the american financial industry is the best thing that could happen. let more people go into real businesses that create things, not push around paper.

:thumbsup:

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: da loser

weakening the american financial industry is the best thing that could happen. let more people go into real businesses that create things, not push around paper.

:thumbsup:

I can't believe there is so much idiocy in this thread. Where is the capital going to come from to start those businesses?

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: spidey07
But think about it. Anybody with an ounce of common sense knew this was going to happen, so why in the world would you enact this crap if you knew it would harm the banks? Why? What possible motive could there be? Jealousy from the populace? Wealth redistribution? Control over the private sector?

Financial Armageddon.

 

[fskimospy]

Honestly I don't feel bad at all. In any normal business that wasn't an investment bank like these, you know how much money these guys would have gotten? Zero dollars. That's what happens when the business you work for goes bankrupt. They may very well not have done anything wrong, but the line worker at a factory that did his job well every day didn't do anything wrong either and he's screwed too when his factory goes under.

I for one sincerely doubt that these banks will become noncompetitive due to TARP restrictions on bonuses.

 

[da loser]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: da loser

weakening the american financial industry is the best thing that could happen. let more people go into real businesses that create things, not push around paper.

:thumbsup:

I can't believe there is so much idiocy in this thread. Where is the capital going to come from to start those businesses?

financial people don't create capital. they merely act as an avenue to connect investors to producers.

their only value is in making the connection more efficient. but instead the financial industry's solution has been to just give everyone capital with the explosion of credit.

so the problem is not sources of capital, but not enough good companies to make that loan worthwhile. why are all those financial companies shifting their money to China???

shifting more of these superintelligent beings to producers will create more capital, and make efficiency less of a problem, since more companies will be better run. so you have any moron dole out the capital.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: da loser

weakening the american financial industry is the best thing that could happen. let more people go into real businesses that create things, not push around paper.

:thumbsup:

I can't believe there is so much idiocy in this thread. Where is the capital going to come from to start those businesses?

Who said anything about ALL banks failing or leaving? How about the strong survive? To answer your question, I guess it depends on what shape the bank is in. If they are "thriving" (bubble or not), the bank can then provide the capital. Otherwise, when being bailed out, the government (John Q. Taxpayer) is providing it.

I don't buy the bullshit that the bad banks can't fail leaving the strong ones behind to pick up the slack and thrive later.

and I'm sorry...if your company is about to go under, you can give a little to help keep it alive or you can join your friends on the unemployment line when the bank folds, especially after taking taxpayer money....period.

/last post in this thread. My position is noted and well known.

 

[seemingly random]

Is there such a thing as morality in banking?

Should there be?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: da loser

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: da loser

weakening the american financial industry is the best thing that could happen. let more people go into real businesses that create things, not push around paper.

:thumbsup:

I can't believe there is so much idiocy in this thread. Where is the capital going to come from to start those businesses?

financial people don't create capital. they merely act as an avenue to connect investors to producers.

their only value is in making the connection more efficient. but instead the financial industry's solution has been to just give everyone capital with the explosion of credit.

so the problem is not sources of capital, but not enough good companies to make that loan worthwhile. why are all those financial companies shifting their money to China???

shifting more of these superintelligent beings to producers will create more capital, and make efficiency less of a problem, since more companies will be better run. so you have any moron dole out the capital.

Acting as an avenue in the financial sector is a form of capital. Additionally, banks create investment vehicles and services that can make profits for themselves and their customers. So they do create capital; highly important capital.

It's easy to lash out at the financial industry and blame the current economic woes on them. Let's be honest though. This all started on the ground floor. There was a large percentage of greedy bastards trying to turn a quick buck and living beyond their means in the process. It's their failure that caused investments to go bad and got the snowball rolling. If people would've continued paying their financial obligations we wouldn't be trying to extricate ourselves from these doldrums right now.

 

[wkabel23]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: da loser

weakening the american financial industry is the best thing that could happen. let more people go into real businesses that create things, not push around paper.

:thumbsup:

a "real" job?

Push around paper?

Incredible. Such animosity...

Perhaps we can establish a government office that will categorize all jobs and rate them as "real" or fake. People who work real jobs should have advantages over those at fake jobs.