Talk about asense of entitlement–half a million dollars per year, PLUS stock, PLUS stock options, plus who knows what all that could be described as “creative finance.”
But it’s not enough for these creative geniuses who’ve managed to FUBAR the global financial system? They might take their “talent” elsewhere?
What astonishes me is that the journalists interviewing these apologists for the granddaddies of all fucktards didn’t react immediate with mocking scorn and derisive gut-laughing. The only “talent” these clowns have is an ability to make a working economy fall through the ceiling, if not disappear outright, which requires only greed on such an obscene level that it’s virtually unfathomable…and a political system where the major parties (both of them) can’t whore themselves out to the short term interests of big business fast enough…even if the policies themselves are a disaster over time.
$18 billion dollars in “bonuses.”
And people complain about working Americans wanting things like health insurance and funded pensions…or these days, paying jobs.
$18 billion dollars of taxpayer money for a performance that was absolutely in the crapper. Keep that number in mind the next time some wingnut whines about “entitlement programs.” And keep in mind that a half million dollars plus is “insufficient compensation” for these supposedly talented individuals.
Personally, I’d like to see these creators of wealth do something constructive for their taxpayer dollars…hmmm…offhand, I’ll bet there are mine fields in former war zones around the globe that could stand to be cleared. I’d offer executive compensation in exchange.
i blame oliver stone and trump.
this specious argument is a corollary of Rudy!s comment that taking away the bonuses of our Masters of the Universe would hurt the NY economy-by costing jobs in the fancy restaurants, nail salons, and trendy boutiques where said masters drop coin.
On MSNBC just now, they quoted a USA Today (maybe) editorial that such limits would cause a Wall Street “brain drain”, as execs who won’t settle for this leave.
After cleaning up the soda a spit up laughing, I told my TV that such a “brain drain” would be a side benefit.
Isn’t there an old saying about privatizing the profits while socializing the risks / loss?
…I am positively mystified by this whole “brain drain” line of reasoning that seems to be the root argument against compensation limits. Aside from the obvious question of why these executives should deserve massive salaries and bonuses given their track record, it seems like there is another fundamental question regarding threats that they would leave: so, like, where are they going to go?
I say let them freaking go! Brain drain my asp.
But nice graphic, who made that?
oh hi scout!
I understand there are comment boards out there lighting up with people who are comparing the salary and all the percs of the Presidency (he gets use of a mansion! And some planes! And a vacation home!) with execs who feel they are entitled to whatever they can get from taxpayers (http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=6806414). My head hurts…
The graphic is a mix of stuff I pulled from Google images, then photoshopped together.
This is akin to when athletes do the “my family can’t live on $11 million a year” thing and threaten to sit out. Where the hell are you going to get a job that pays that well, especially when your skills are limited to bats and balls and such?
Brain drain on Wall Street? If they had the brains, how did they get into this situation in the first place?
NY state taxes those bonuses too.
The right wing loves that “brain drain” argument; the Canadian right has been using it for 30 years to argue why Canada should be doing everything just the same way as the US.
I’ll pause here and let you catch your breath, because it gets funnier — they actually had to stop saying that when we started getting wave after wave of educated professional immigrants (many from the US) and people staying in Canada (as opposed to leaving to look for work Stateside) when Bush got in office and the US economy tanked. The contrast was particularly sharp when Canada’s economy was going like a house afire and the US’ was sliding into recession by millimetres.