The Glade 4.0
https://gladerebooted.net/

The Fed to review pay caps and compensation on lots of banks
https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=624		 Page 1 of 4
Author:  Elmarnieh [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 5:56 pm ]
Post subject:  The Fed to review pay caps and compensation on lots of banks
So we increase the fascism in the nation by expanding wage controls to an entity that is unconstrained by Congress and reports to no one. At least the banking queen is happy.


Washington's bank pay crackdown
Federal Reserve proposes sweeping review of pay plans at 28 largest U.S. banks. 'Pay czar' expected to issue demands to cut executive pay at biggest bailout firms.

See all CNNMoney.com RSS FEEDS (close) By David Ellis, CNNMoney.com staff writer
Last Updated: October 22, 2009: 2:21 PM ET


10 biggest CEO paychecks
Including salary, bonuses, stock and options, these public company CEOs took home pay packages last year worth up to $104 million.
View photos
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Washington launched its biggest offensive yet against runaway Wall Street pay practices Thursday, taking aim at everyone from senior executives to high-flying traders of complex securities.

The Federal Reserve proposed a sweeping review of pay policies at 28 of the nation's largest banks as part of an effort to make sure employees are not tempted to make the kinds of bets that could put their company at risk of going under.

"The Federal Reserve is working to ensure that compensation packages appropriately tie rewards to longer-term performance and do not create undue risk for the firm or the financial system," Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said in a statement.

The nation's central bank said it also planned to review compensation practices at the thousands of regional lenders that make up the bulk of the U.S. banking industry as part of its standard review process.

Separately, the Obama administration's "pay czar," Kenneth Feinberg, is expected to unveil sweeping pay cuts for 175 top executives at the seven biggest bailed-out companies.

Feinberg is expected to demand that Citigroup (C, Fortune 500), AIG (AIG, Fortune 500), Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500), Chrysler, General Motors, GMAC and Chrysler Financial slash compensation packages for its top 25 most highly-compensated employees 50%, on average, a senior administration official told CNN.

The lion's share of those cuts are expected to come from annual salaries, which are expected to fall 90%, on average, the official said.

Thursday's activity, which first started to surface just a day earlier, perhaps represent the most sweeping push against Wall Street pay practices.

Certain shareholder groups and other social activists have long campaigned for banks and other financial firms to do more to align executive pay with a company's performance, but those efforts have made little headway.

0:00 /02:25Bank chiefs defend executive pay
But some compensation experts have warned that actions taken by the Obama administration could have a disastrous series of unintended consequences, including the loss of top employees to companies that are not hindered by government restrictions.

Bailed-out firms such as Citigroup and Bank of America have already lost dozens of key employees to rivals such as JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500) and Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500), both of which got out from under the government's thumb over the summer.

There have also been fears that letting talented employees leave could derail efforts aimed at nursing these companies back to health and ultimately returning bailout money to taxpayers.

Even as he has tried to strike a balance between compensation and risk taking, Feinberg has shown little restraint during the first part of his broader review of compensation packages for the 100 highest-paid employees at each of the seven biggest bailout firms.

Last week, outgoing Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis said he would not accept a salary or bonus for 2009, and the bank said the decision came after Feinberg "suggested" it to Lewis.

The administration stood behind Feinberg ahead of any announcement.

"We all share an interest in seeing these companies return taxpayer dollars as soon as possible, and Ken today has helped bring that day a little bit closer," Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in a statement.

The initial reaction among some lawmakers was one of encouragement.

"I think we got from Ken Feinberg exactly what we were hoping to get," said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who chairs the powerful House Financial Service Committee. "I think it will speed up TARP repayment, which I'm all for."
Author:  Lydiaa [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Fed to review pay caps and compensation on lots of banks
Let me get this straight, you guys gave a massive amount of money to 'save' these failing private business and are now working to ensure that the competition which weren't failing in the first place gets further advantage over them by capping their employee salaries, essentially ensuring that they fail in the long run due to lack of talent anyways, negating any 'saving' you guys did in the first place by wasting a lot of money.

wow.. /head exploads
Author:  Elmarnieh [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
Yup - this is why we have guns because we know the stupid is going to get to a certain point.
Author:  Lydiaa [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
Personally I'm just waiting for our dollar to be above yours before next Blizzcon so I can come and buy all the goodies >=D

On topic though. I'm going to use the evil word and say that you guys are moving more towards the idea of communism by the day... subconsciencely.
Author:  Micheal [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
Being mercilessly drug toward it by the people in power whether the people want it or not. Kind of like when your government fluffed up one tragic miurder and took all your firearms away.
Author:  Lydiaa [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 8:00 pm ]
Post subject: 
That's a common misconception Michael. The only firearms banned in all forms are automatic weapon and some semi automatic. It is still legal if you are part of a gun club to be able to keep fire arms (no concealed carrying). There are just a lot more hoops to jump through if you want one.
There are also laws in place where you have to apply reasonable force in defending your home. (e.g. a thief coming into your home with a 2 inch blade can not be shot). Then there's the announcing your intention law (tell them you're armed and your intention to shoot). Basically it makes it very hard to shoot someone in the home who is not threatening you with a gun, but it does not equate to the banning of all fire arms which everyone seems to have the idea of.

The example you gave was drummed up by those who had antique semi automatics (which didnt have a good safety) who tried to make it look that way.

If I had to guess, I'd say 50%? of the rural familys have some sort of fire arm, and hunting kangaroos are usually a must. This is why we have Kangaroo open seasons hehe.

Banning guns have being a long time coming prior to that incident however and since we don't really have your amendments and our belief of rights are quite different to yours, we went the democratic way and voted for it.
Author:  Rorinthas [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 8:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Lydiaa wrote:

(e.g. a thief coming into your home with a 2 inch blade can not be shot). [/b]


Don't take this wrong way, but doesn't this concern you? A determined man with a box cutter can take over an air plane, he can do far worse to a unarmed person at home.
Author:  Elmarnieh [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 8:17 pm ]
Post subject: 
A 2 inch blade can only pierce the heart, lungs, and brain of an average person.

Thats only three vital organs!
Author:  darksiege [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 8:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Lydiaa wrote:
(e.g. a thief coming into your home with a 2 inch blade can not be shot).


That says nothing of bludgeoning the crap out of said invader with a club of some sort though... do Aussie's play cricket?
Author:  Micheal [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 8:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quite well some of my old Aussie friends told me. They're usually in the hunt for the top ranks in the game.
Author:  Lydiaa [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:02 pm ]
Post subject: 
Nope, baseball bats, cricket bats, metal poles... hell meat clevers are fair game. Just no guns cause ya know it's not as much fun.. er.. I meant not fair =P

However once you have over powered your attacker, any further un-necessary injuries should not be cause or could be sued for. =(
Author:  Elmarnieh [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:10 pm ]
Post subject: 
Dude, Lame.

I thought Australia was supposed to be where men were men and women were slightly less mannish men?

When did it become the society of lace wearing pansies?
Author:  darksiege [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Elmarnieh wrote:
Dude, Lame.

I thought Australia was supposed to be where men were men and women were slightly less mannish men?

When did it become the society of lace wearing pansies?


Hell no dude, Australia is the place where a large portion of the ladies are ultra hot due to the accent and their looks combined.
Author:  Lydiaa [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:24 pm ]
Post subject: 
Let me put it this way Elmo. There is a reason why violent breaking and entering is like 500 billion times lower than theft when the owner is not home (statistics made up).
Author:  Elmarnieh [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
I'm glad I can shoot people breaking into my house waiving toaster mitts.

Anyways Lydiaa do you know why I can't get accurate crime rates for Australia after 2001?
Author:  Lydiaa [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:54 pm ]
Post subject: 
Because of the different state laws, most statistics are done per state rather than country. Is there anything you had in mind? http://www.abs.gov.au is the government site which includes censes every year.

You're probably looking for this http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf ... endocument It's a statistic on the type of weapons used in crimes where there is a victim.
Author:  Elmarnieh [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
Thanks thats closer but I can't believe its so hard to get a general crime rate report.
Author:  Lydiaa [ Thu Oct 22, 2009 10:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
Oh the data's there by state, we just make you work for it hehe.

Here's a brief one of Aust for 2008, http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf ... enDocument

As I said we do it more by state, so here's one for NSW (which contains sydney)
http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/b ... /CCS08.pdf
Author:  Rafael [ Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:34 am ]
Post subject: 
I have mixed feelings about this. The clear cut solution was to never bail out failing entities in the first place. That is how you encourage people not to fail and structure their company to incentivze failure (i.e. the way CEO's tend to get paid).
Author:  Diamondeye [ Fri Oct 23, 2009 8:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Fed to review pay caps and compensation on lots of banks
To be perfectly fair, the banks structured their pay plans long before they knew there would be a bailout in the event of crisis. At least one large bank (Bear Stearns) was allowed to fail, too. That sort of indicates that these buisnesses will do this sort of thing regardless of what it creates an incentive for.
Author:  Rafael [ Fri Oct 23, 2009 8:36 am ]
Post subject: 
Then they get to continuosly suffer under incompetent stewardship as a consequence. Eventually, the market eliminates them.
Author:  Diamondeye [ Fri Oct 23, 2009 8:38 am ]
Post subject: 
One hopes. It seems, however, that such practices are so widespread that the market cannot eliminate them without eliminating itself in the process.
Author:  Rafael [ Fri Oct 23, 2009 8:43 am ]
Post subject: 
Hopefully, that means competing markets with superior financial organizations will destroy our domestic market. Of course, we've seen what the government's action is on those cases: protectionism, just like in the auto industry.

I love it when people buy domestic products (this can be applicable to the resident of any country, not just ours) claiming they do it to save American jobs. What they don't realize is they are destroying American jobs (or conversely, preventing other jobs from coming into existence) in other sectors of economy by doing so.
Author:  Kaffis Mark V [ Fri Oct 23, 2009 11:20 am ]
Post subject: 
It infuriates me to see people who should know better defending this move, saying "we the public own large chunks of these companies because of the bailouts, so it's perfectly legit."

No, it's not. If we own large chunks, and exercise it in, say, shareholder votes or board votes, like any other investor, THEN it would be legit. This isn't voting on the board as a stakeholder. This is legislation. Completely different.
Author:  Jeryn [ Fri Oct 23, 2009 12:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Micheal wrote:
Quite well some of my old Aussie friends told me. They're usually in the hunt for the top ranks in the game.
Completely random aside: Douglas Adams' Life, the Universe and Everything (Krikkit, the Wikkit Gate, etc) was an even funnier read once I learned about "The Ashes".
Page 1 of 4 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/