Did Wall Street bonuses bone us?

for what it's worth, Ice, I do think woe to the person expecting a bonus who may not receive it. Absolutely sucks. Especially if their performance was good.

We just disagree on the level of risk someone takes with the compensation arrangements many of the IB employees had, and whether a company having gone through what these ones have, should be paying bonuses that are not linked to a commitment to continue with the firm.

Thanks for the discussion -- hope it all works out well for you.

 

Antiquated philosophy? What would you know of antiquated philosophy. You view it as antiquated Social Darwinism because you were never in a position to do otherwise.

An alternate name would be fairness. Somebody who endeavoured more should reap the benefits he sowed. But no, despite the top 5% pay over 80% of the taxes while reaping far far fewer of the benefits, it isn't enough for you.

If somebody in a better situation wants to help the poor, great, more power to him. But if and when I help somebody, that is out of my own kindness/charity, not some idiotic "obligation" to some whiny little c*nt who thinks I somehow owes him something.

 

A little bit of a personal pet peeve, but traders, not investment bankers are more to blame for this current mess.

 

If I'm not a greedy, angry and narcissist like you it must be because I'm poor and jealous of your lofty greatness? Whatever helps you sleep at night, Smeagol.

Aren't investment bankers responsible for putting together the credit default swaps behind the whole risk shell game that went on?

 

So in other words, you are in the shoes of a trader? Funny, I would never have guessed.

Hence, the next time you pay your mortgage, remember some financial institution/"big wig" took the risk to put your ass in a house in the first place.

 

And speaking of greed:

 

I don't have a morgage. I paid cash for my house.

The fact that you are still trying to defend the CDS's shows how you still don't get it, which is fine, because the rest of us are going to regulate the crap out of you for the rest of your life.

 

See here is the thing, I frequently found it funny that people like you (and the media too of course) talk about instruments such as CDS. They throw those buzz words like "toxic," while never addressing why it is so. The reason is quite simple. They don't understand it; and that they would lose the argument if the details are brought forth.

I also find it funny at how easily the importance of securitization to not only the housing market, but the whole the US economy, especially over the past 25 years, is written off just like that. Nobody ever credits the banks for enabling them to buy a house when they otherwise wouldn't be able to, at a cost they can afford. Because apparently only MBS/CDS/CDO/CMO/etc are risky, not their own sh1tty creditworthiness.

Don't you worry about me. Regulation or not, I'll be just fine. Your poor buddies now defaulting on their mortgages, that's another story. I have a feeling the banks would be long fine before your buddies get any relief if they ever hope to buy another house again.

 

If you want to have that argument I am perfectly able.

Your persistent and desperate need to feel better about yourself by alternately sneering at “the little people” as poorer, stupider, or less well educated only speaks to a gaping void in your own sense of a metric of self-worth not bound in external trappings.

 

Now see here that is a combination of nonsense and strawman. But that just highlights the tactics you have to go through to create an artificial point.

The desperate need to feel better about myself? I hardly feel the need. As a matter of fact, throughout this entire post you could not find a single post in which I divulged my income, profession, smarts, penis size or what have you except when I said I will be fine when you made a snide remark. You took a swing in the dark and missed by a mile.

I suspect that what you intended to do was compare the shall we say less fortunate to the Wall Street "fat cats." Shall I do that for you?

The "little people " are poorer, yes that is by definition why they are "little people." Because they are poorer. If they aren't they wouldn't be "little people" now would they?

Stupider? Funny how I don't recall saying that. What I did say is that he/she/they "worked hard. He went through a good college. Made the right choices in life (had a bit of luck as well)"

Better educated. I can't believe you are actually trying to argue that point. Though not 100%, traders for the most part are Ivy League grads. If you aren't one they won't even look at you. I haven't bothered to look at the stats so I can't be sure, but somehow I get the odd feeling that the average American isn't an Ivy League grad.

And I don't know about self-worth, but at least in terms of personal worth, those guys normally do quite well for themselves.

But enough wasting time. I think the line "If you want to have that argument I am perfectly able" juxtaposed next to your disappearing arguments is highly comical. Shall I narrow the topic of discussion to one or two at a time so we keep focus?

1. Securitization is bad because...
2. Are discussing the fairness of the wealth transfer through the tax code and the legal system or not...

In regards to point two, I got a novel idea for ya. Let's charge a true flat tax of say $150K per person, indexed for inflation. How's that? Simplifies the IRC, no need to worry about AMT, perfectly fair. Everybody pays their fair share and successful ones aren't punished for being so.

No? Then perhaps appreciate how good the less fortunate have it already.

 

Dude, CDS's of the world are not inherently good or evil, they serve a purpose when used correctly. They help bring liquidity to the market which enables millions of people to buy their own house. Just like any other instrument, it can cause problems when used recklessly. For all the talk about CDS blowing up, there really hasn't been any major problems with them.

So congrats on you not having a mortgage, a lot more people still need those financial products to buy their house.

 

Point taken. I should have said CDS's as they have been used in the real world since they were invented.

Better?

 

LMFAO - right, only the world's largest insurance company collapsing due to a portfolio of super senior secured CDS and requiring 100 billion + in taxpayer funds to bail them out to keep the world economy from collapsing....among other things. But really there haven't been too many problems with credit default swaps.

 

It's pure crap that some of these guys got bonuses by selling investment grade securities backed by junk mortgages with borrowers that are unlikely to pay back. That's pure greed. They knew it was a house cards and somebody would be left holding the bag. Unfortunately, it was the tax payer while they made off with the millions in commission bonuses and get retention bonuses too. It was a big scam on the taxpayer.

 

For all the talk about Lehman failing and their CDS blowing up everyone else, there really hasn't been too much damage. Believe me, I was in the camp of CDS will cause the whole world come down, but so far they have been unwound in a pretty orderly fashion.

 

have the issuers of these swaps had to payout yet? how are cds accounted for on their balance sheets.

 

LOL ... would you still be for regulation if the regulatees were firearms and their distributors?

 

I am entirely in favor of parity of regulation.

And if firearms distributors were holding the US Economy hostage for $700 Billion I would expect a lot more regulation, and probably some jail time.

 

MFW, I think your wholesale characterization of working class folks who lost their jobs as the ones who screwed up is over the top.

Think about the analogy of Yao Ming the working class vs Lebron James the Wall Street fat cat.

Both work hard. No doubt about that. But would you say Yao himself screwed up when his production dropped because biased NBA refs took him out of the game while LBJ got all kinds of preferential treatment from the same refs despite committing fouls at will and flopping like Fish?

You can argue that in the end both Yao and LBJ got "free handouts" from the refs, but the timing of these handouts couldn't be more impactful as far as the outcome of the game is concerned. As always, LBJ's entitlement is a given. For Yao, it is merely an afterthought.