Now isn’t this interesting. Goldman Sach’s wants to repay all of the $10 billion dollars of the TARP funds. Is it because of Obama $500,000 cap on executives? After all, paying it all back would allow executives to gain back bonuses and stocks incentives. This might be why other TARP whores passed out bonuses in December 2008 ahead of Pres. Obama election.
Funny how the lost of possible revenue motivates people to act. It works this way with congress too. Fail to perform your elected duties and the people will voice their displeasure during the election. Who'd thought?
Snip-it; Goldman Sachs's (NYSE: GS) CFO announced that the firm wants to repay all $10 billion of the TARP funds injected last October, saying that "Operating our business without the government capital would be an easier thing to do … We'd be under less scrutiny and under less pressure. " Well, yeah. One thing's clear: Public anger is increasingly calling the shots at these big banks … as it probably should. Outrage erupted after Bank of America's (NYSE: BAC) Merrill Lynch rushed its bonuses out in December, Citigroup (NYSE: C) tried to push through a new private jet, and news leaked of a viva Las Vegas getaway for Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC). (The latter two plans were eventually scrapped.) If Goldman doesn't need the money, why not pay it back? Holding bailout funds you don't need is like confessing to a crime you never committed. Goldman isn't completely innocent – the shareholders down 50% in the past year can attest to that -- but it's certainly in vastly better shape than its peers, as verified by Berkshire Hathaway's (NYSE: BRK-B) vote of confidence last fall. It's nice to see at least one company acknowledging the downside of taxpayer aid. Bailouts shouldn't be a boon that relatively healthy companies eagerly exploit. They should be onerous and demanding, with every penny of expenses scrutinized while they're held.
IP: Logged
02:06 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
The UAW over the last 3 contracts have taken concessions. They have taken cuts in pay, benefits and more over the last few contracts. Retirees have been made to pay more for their medical coverage at every contract.
Yet.
The management has not. They keep getting more money every year, even though they are the ones making the decisions that are running the company down.
Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
The UAW over the last 3 contracts have taken concessions. They have taken cuts in pay, benefits and more over the last few contracts. Retirees have been made to pay more for their medical coverage at every contract.
Yet.
The management has not. They keep getting more money every year, even though they are the ones making the decisions that are running the company down.
Steve
The management at the top said they would forgo a salary. The UAW refused to give anything. That's why Congress didn't give them a dime and Bush did the end around and went straight to treasury for the bail out loans.
Not that I expect you to understand that. No you will instead go on about things from years ago. You are a good little union toady. Always saying exactly what they want you to.
IP: Logged
02:15 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
Same goes for these bank executives. They are the ones who are making the most, making the decisions that ran the banks down yet their pay is still the same even though it is costing the banks money, and us.
Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
IP: Logged
02:16 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
And no CEO is entitled to a multimillion dollar salary when his company is going bankrupt.
And no banker is entitled to a million dollar salary when they lose your life savings.
Steve
Says who?
Jeez Steve how many times do we have to repeat that YOU do not make the rules!
The owners (stock holders) of the companies decide what they are willing to pay their CEO. YOUR sense in inequity is irrelevant. If I own a company and want to pay a top manage $10M a year to run things, that is MY business, not yours!
Sheesh!
IP: Logged
02:21 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
Jeez Steve how many times do we have to repeat that YOU do not make the rules!
The owners (stock holders) of the companies decide what they are willing to pay their CEO. YOUR sense in inequity is irrelevant. If I own a company and want to pay a top manage $10M a year to run things, that is MY business, not yours!
Sheesh!
No Todd the board of directors do.
The CEO’s blow buddies.
No stock holders have any real say in the CEO’s salary.
Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
The only one who doesn’t understand is you Phranc.
We were in the beginning talking about the banks CEOs who are the creators of this problem.
Steve
Yup it is all their fault because you are told it is and like a good little toady you don't know any better. We have time and again pointed out there are many players at fault but lackey toadies like you keep forgetting or don't want to remember.
Can some one explain to toady Steve who pushed for banks to make bad loans?
IP: Logged
02:29 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
We were in the beginning talking about the banks CEOs who are the creators of this problem.
Steve
let's get back to the subject at hand.
Why is Goldman Sach's wanting to repay the TARP money? Is there a connection between what Pres. Obama regarding the $500.000 salary cap or is it because Goldman Sach's is just fulfulling their TARP duties? Discussion please....
[This message has been edited by madcurl (edited 02-06-2009).]
IP: Logged
02:37 PM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
well, we can hope this will be "lesson learned" to those who decide what they will pay executives. or - maybe not. who is actually hurt by the current idiocracy?
maybe next time, the stock holders who chose the executives should impose some performance clauses.
IP: Logged
02:39 PM
madcurl Member
Posts: 21401 From: In a Van down by the Kern River Registered: Jul 2003
Well, we can hope this will be "lesson learned" to those who decide what they will pay executives. or - maybe not. who is actually hurt by the current idiocracy?
maybe next time, the stock holders who chose the executives should impose some performance clauses.
x 100%
Any body else with some ideas why Goldman's change of venue?
IP: Logged
02:44 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
Better to run the company into bankruptcy than take a pay cut.
Steve
Better run the company like a company instead of another government failure. Like Social Security.
Did you know that under the federal control the CEOs will actually make more money in stock options and the sooner they get out from under the feds the less they will make in the long run. Of course you didn't. You don't any thing about CEOs, what they do and how they get paid.
IP: Logged
03:26 PM
PFF
System Bot
pokeyfiero Member
Posts: 16189 From: Free America! Registered: Dec 2003
What about Wells Fargo canceling their employee gathering in Las Vegas? Paying back TARP money will free them from guilt thus making way for unbridled leisure and private jet get-a-ways.
snip-it: You've probably heard by now: Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC) abruptly canceled an employee gathering in Las Vegas earlier this week after various media outlets and politicians stomped their feet in objection. And why not? Wells Fargo is the recipient of $25 billion in TARP funds provided by taxpayers last fall. Amid the furious (and justified) criticism flung at AIG (NYSE: AIG) and Citigroup (NYSE: C) for basking in the luxury of weekend junkets and private jets, it should have known better. No one disagrees: Every bank should be exercising restraint these days, if only because we're flirting with an economy rivaling the Great Depression. Factor in that most banks -- including Wells Fargo -- are padding their books with taxpayer money, and just discussing the possibility of lavish corporate spending seems absurd.
Wells Fargo didn't need TARP money and was told if they didn't take it now then never ever ask for it in the future when you do need it because you wont get it.
IP: Logged
03:49 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
So lets get this straight because you own a company you know exactly what a CEO’s job entails.
You have a few employees not thousands and you own the company, no stock holders so I don’t think you know all you think you do either.
Steve
Yes I do know exactly what a CEO does because I am one. I am also a COO and a CFO. But I don't expect a lackey like you to understand anything about management duties.
IP: Logged
06:19 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
See that is just it you are arrogant. You know all. You see all. You do all.
You are just a genius.
Aww whats wrong bitter boy? It must really suck not knowing what you are talking about and getting exposed for being ignorant. You have never amounted to anything more then an uneducated peon. That's why you hate people who have made more of them selves in life then have like people in management and people who have a higher education. You don't have the first clue about what a CEO does. I do. I am one. So if being right and having an insight you will never achieve makes me arrogant then so be it. Not that I expect you to admit you are just an ignorant toady. Much like how you couldn't admit that the UAW didn't make one single move to give anything up and screwed them self from getting a senate backed loan.
IP: Logged
06:38 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
WTF is wrong with you? Do you have a personality disorder? Or are you just nuts? As said before the thread is about the bankers, not the UAW and GM. And especially not about you or me. Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
WTF is wrong with you? Do you have a personality disorder? Or are you just nuts? As said before the thread is about the bankers, not the UAW and GM. And especially not about you or me. Steve
Yes it is about CEOs. Something you know absolutely nothing about but like to pretend you do. So lets get back to bank CEOs. Do you think you can add anything more then your typical whining about people who have amounted to more then you have in life? Or will you just keep calling them jerks because they make more then you by doing things you don't have the first clue about? Maybe you can add something more then how they don't deserve to be paid more because you think all they are is paper pushers.
IP: Logged
07:20 PM
madcurl Member
Posts: 21401 From: In a Van down by the Kern River Registered: Jul 2003
Exhibit A Washington Mutual CEO Kerry Killinger took home $88 million in the seven years preceding the collapse of the bank, which was later handed over to JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) at a 95% discount to prior highs. Killinger apparently designed a gimme-gimme culture fueled by reckless urgency and deceit. He hasn't returned a dime of his compensation. Exhibit B After leading AIG's (NYSE: AIG) credit-default swap unit, which lost $11 billion in one year, Joseph Cassano was allowed to keep $34 million in bonuses for the year. He was then hired for $1 million per month to consult the company on its maze of transactions. In total, Cassano was rewarded with more than $280 million for helping to destroy the world's largest insurer. Exhibit C During a 15-year period as CEO of Lehman Brothers, Richard Fuld lapped up hundreds of millions in rewards. That includes a $22 million retirement pay package in the year his company went under. Exhibit D A year ago, John Thain was given a $15 million signing bonus to take over at Merrill Lynch; in 2008, the company posted losses of $27 billion. Today, Merrill is widely considered a bankrupt subsidiary of Bank of America (NYSE: BAC). Yet this December, Thain lobbied hard to be paid a $10 million bonus. And why not? His predecessor, Stanley O'Neal, received a $160 million retirement package after posting writedowns of $8 billion in a single quarter. Hard as it may be to believe, there is no law that mandates the return of compensation when an executive's actions destroy a corporation. There's also no law that says you can't be heartless. Being soulless isn't criminal. And having no shame isn't actionable. To take legal action, federal authorities have to prove that these and other bankers had an intent to deceive. For example, if they can prove that Thain misled Bank of America before the acquisition, or that Thain and BofA misled regulators about the condition of the bank to secure bailout money, those points would be cause for prosecution.
IP: Logged
07:39 PM
PFF
System Bot
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
Originally posted by Phranc: Yes it is about CEOs. Something you know absolutely nothing about but like to pretend you do. So lets get back to bank CEOs. Do you think you can add anything more then your typical whining about people who have amounted to more then you have in life? Or will you just keep calling them jerks because they make more then you by doing things you don't have the first clue about? Maybe you can add something more then how they don't deserve to be paid more because you think all they are is paper pushers.
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
IP: Logged
08:23 PM
Toddster Member
Posts: 20871 From: Roswell, Georgia Registered: May 2001
So it is not the board of directors who set the CEO’s salary?
It is not common for many on the board of directors to sit on each others boards?
What is wrong in that statement?
The second and third points mostly. You know the whiny bitter ignorant parts. And stock holders do have a say. They even have these cool little meetings you can to and find out all kinds of neat information and take votes on stuff. Votes that sometimes include things like compensation packages for CEOs.
IP: Logged
08:53 PM
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35467 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
The dollar number of pending derivative bankruptcies is the size of the mountain of garbage paper issued by just those who are to be bailed out. That number is greater than the total world economies.
There simply isn't enough money in the world for central banks to buy up the mountain of worthless paper sold by those who need bailouts; all of which made fortunes for their directors, officers and key people.
The whole World could be in for a heap of hurting.
IP: Logged
10:21 PM
Feb 7th, 2009
Toddster Member
Posts: 20871 From: Roswell, Georgia Registered: May 2001
Why is Goldman Sach's wanting to repay the TARP money? Is there a connection between what Pres. Obama regarding the $500.000 salary cap or is it because Goldman Sach's is just fulfulling their TARP duties? Discussion please....
Don't need to discuss it. The answer is a simple yes.
Goldman Sach’s wants to repay all of the $10 billion dollars of the TARP funds. Is it because of Obama $500,000 cap on executives? 
It works this way with congress too. Fail to perform your elected duties and the people will voice their displeasure during the election.
Who'd thought? 
let's get back to the subject at hand.
