These companies were not “bought”….they are NOT “investments”….they were, in fact, STOLEN from their stockholders!!!!

The White House is running a Chicago-style PROTECTION RACKET!!!

ramrants on October 24, 2009 at 1:08 AM

You made the point I was trying to make a few comments below, but you did it much better than I.

Conservatives have been pushing the line that money buys “talent” for decades. It doesn’t. They were at the forefront of increasing government workers wages to attract better “talent”. Well, here in CA some elementary school teachers can make 6 figures. I can’t even begin to imagine what kind of talent that will produce in the next generation of school kids. (Yeah, right.)

Ed Morrissey, once again, this time on executive pay cuts: And who leaves first? The people who can most easily find better-paying jobs elsewhere. Anyone who has worked at a company that attempts to downsize through attrition (or through across-the-boa…

The other silly argument is that this perspective is tantamount to “worship” of these individuals. I hate Alex Rodriguez and think he’s overpaid. But if he were batting for my team — even if he were in a terrible slump — at no point would I think that I would get better performance from him if I took away 90% of his pay and set that as a future limit on anyone else who might replace him. This doesn’t mean I worship the guy. It doesn’t mean I even like him. It doesn’t mean I think he “deserves” it at some irrelevant metaphysical level. It just means I am dealing with reality and might win some ballgames this way, but I am guaranteed not to if I try things the other way.

This government mandated pay cut — only at firms stuck in the TARP — aligns perfectly with these firms’ ambitions to best their remaining competitors, poach top talent, and increase their top and bottom lines.

Corporatism lives. Freedom dies.

I don’t know where you, Ed, got the idea that the “best and the brightest” always end up at the “top”. I generally meet the “best and the brightest” around the middle of a company.

If the question is, “Should government control exec’s wages?” then fine. Let’s discuss. But you are specifically saying that the really smart people will leave and I see it as the rats abandoning ship.

Update: Good line from Glenn Reynolds: Mr. Galt’s corner office is now available.

Close to what I thought when I heard the pay cut news. You have to wonder if all the “I Hate Fox News” distraction is because the Obambi Inept-istration is building a giant sound-disruptor machine in the middle of the Midwest.

But at lease envious Americans feel better

/

Right Fins?

CWforFreedom on October 23, 2009 at 6:09 PM

Envious-American, the ultimate hyphenated-American.

The Democrat Party seems to be full of them.

These companies have failed. And these executives have failed. “Oh, they wanted to give back some money!” But they want to keep the government guarantees and the free money from the Fed

Actually no they didn’t fail. They weren’t allowed to fail. The gubmint made sure of that. Which was the stupidest thing Bush, Barry, and Congress ould have done and what has kept the economy from not turning around faster than it should have. They actually should have been allowed to fail. You don’t clear debt out by replacing it with more debt. You clear out debt by allowing companies to declare bankruptcy. I don’t disagree these companies screwed up and got greedy. But, the solution of bailing them out only made things worse.

Economics 101. I guess they didn’t offer that class at Harvard or Columbia. If they did they must be awfully embarrassed by Odumbo.

rjoco1 on October 23, 2009 at 6:37 PM

I am thoroughly convinced Barry did not take one Econ, Accounting, or remotely related business class during his education

John9400 on October 23, 2009 at 11:02 PM

From the link -

Bloomberg reports that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s closest aides earned millions of dollars a year working for Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and other Wall Street firms. Bloomberg adds that none of these aides faced Senate confirmation. Yet, they are overseeing the handout of hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer funds to their former employers.

The gifts of billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money provided the banks with an abundance of low cost capital that has boosted the banks’ profits, while the taxpayers who provided the capital are increasingly unemployed and homeless.

The political system is unresponsive to the American people. It is monopolized by a few powerful interest groups that control campaign contributions. Interest groups have exercised their power to monopolize the economy for the benefit of themselves, the American people be damned.
- Paul Craig Roberts (Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration)

Get the talent out of there and the system fails. . . yeah communism!

- The Cat

You think that’s bad? Wait till Obamacare gets passed. Bye-bye, doctors and specialists.

John the Libertarian

Yeah, but on the bright side, the nations of the world who only have America’s best interests at heart will emit a mighty sigh of relief that finally…FINNALY…America has decided to screw its citizens too.

Thursday, he ruled only on slightly more than three quarters of the pay packages that were to be under his purview. The balance reflected executives who have left since he began his work in June or will be gone by the end of the year.

Since the pay czar’s workload has been cut by almost 25% it’s only reasonable that his paycheck will be cut by the same 25%.

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/10/where-hell-is-outrage.html

Mish is one of the most politically conservative economic bloggers out there. You don’t have to be a populist lefty class warrior is be angry as hell about what Wall Street is doing to our economy as we speak.

Doesn’t matter if they were “good at it” or not. The shareholders of these companies will determine who they want running the company. The fed govt has no authority to determine what a company should pay it’s employees. I understand that the convoluted logic of Barry says that because they unwillingly received tax payer money (and some wanted to pay it back and Barry would have nothing of that) that that means the Fed Gubmint can regulate their pay and that Barry thinks their salaries are “obscene”. Again, that’s not for him to decide, it’s the shareholders that need to “worry” about finding someone willing to work for $200K.

And to extend your Post Office example, frankly, given Barry’s performance thus far I think his taxpayer funded salary is “obscene”.

Fed45 on October 23, 2009 at 9:10 PM

Not sure if you noticed, but the US government is the largest shareholder in some of these companies. The US government also provides TRILLIONS of dollars worth of debt guarantees that keep these companies alive.

These companies have failed. And these executives have failed. “Oh, they wanted to give back some money!” But they want to keep the government guarantees and the free money from the Fed.

Do you realize how BoA and C are making their money right now? Why is it that the Fed has pumped so much money into the economy and yet we’re seeing deflation instead of inflation? Because instead of lending that money out, all the banks are using it to roll the dice in the stock market. And THIS is what you want to reward with free market multi-million dollar salaries?

People on HotAir need to wake up and realize that the Stock Market is and has been a ponzi scam. It’s not just about Obama and what he’s doing now. The big banks were screwing our economy over before Obama ever got there.

It’s funny that some people think the financial companies are the victims in all this. How good can Wall Street PR be that they wreck the world’s economy through wild gambling, get the taxpayers to bail them out, and then get “fiscal conservatives” on blogs everywhere to defend their huge bonuses?

Once you have their money, never give it back