User 187593

Bank Stress Tests: Tangible Common Equity a Critical Metric

MSRs should not be backed out of TCE because they are earning assets, generally with a 9% or 10% yield. While classified as intangible by FASB, MSRs are fundamentally different than non-earning intangibles like goodwill.

Wells Fargo Earnings: What's Real, What's Not?

The author is confusing default rate with loss rate. Wells Fargo did not project a 29% default rate. The projection was a 29% loss rate. I'm tired of bloggers who do not know what they are talking about.

The Bonus Tax: The Redistribution of Both Wealth And Talent

This situation is not humurous--it is facisist. Congress is doing nothing less than targeting a specific group group for persecution (banking employees) just as the Nazis targeted jews. The reason I say employees is that the test is household income, not individual. Imagine a $40,000 secretary who received a $1,000 bonus, who is married to a $210,000 non-TARP company executive. That secretary willed be taxed at 90%. IT'S NOT JUST THE FAT CATS!!!


On Mar 22 07:35 PM mediapro wrote:

> The article is almost as humorous as most of the comments.
>
> The one who wrote the violin music about the porr financial guy who
> has a bunch of unredeemable stock options, a taxed salary (OMG!)
> and a bleeding Grandmother lost in Europe was better than the afternoon
> soaps.
>
> Let's get real folks. What these guys do, in the list of TARP companies
> provided in this article, is literally move money around for their
> living. Where's the equal outrage and concern for the working stiff
> who is now supposed to renegotiate his union contract to spare the
> poor Detroit idiots?
>
> I for one am sick and tired of hearing the outrage over confiscation
> of ill-gotten gains while the smart people who populate this site
> can't seem to realize that the role of the financial sector is to
> provide capital for people who actually produce things.
>
> The problem with our economic contstruct is that we are not doing
> enough to right the wrongs of a failed, simplistic, silly policy
> direction that we have suffered through for at least the past thirty
> years.
>
> The introduction, ascendency and idolatry of Milton Friedman's brand
> of shock economics has done more to destroy the world's economy than
> any economic hypothesis in our lifetime. This is not just Reaganomics
> /Bushanomics, but the pitting of haves/have nots in a global play
> orchestrated through Milton's disciples within the IMF, World Bank,
> and governing neo-conservative world view since at least 1975.<br/>
>
> Cutting taxes on the wealthy and re-distributing middle class income
> up to those captains of industry combined with wholesale deregulation
> and record deficits under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II, and conveniently
> leaving the $1 Trillion dollars of Iraq war spending off the books
> while the national debt ballooned from around $5 Trillion to $10.6
> Trillion at last peek is an ingenious spin on what constitutes supply
> side stimulus, if not outright delusion.
>
> Count the change left in your pockets, unless of course you are one
> of the few who benefitted from this latest episode of Shock Economics
> so popular with necons. I'll just ask you the same question Reagan
> used to ask: "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?"
>
>
> If you're in the same boat as the rest of us, our "staying the course"
> has undeniably run the lot of us aground. If you have benefitted,
> then you're one of the lucky 2% that control 80% of America's wealth,
> completely comfortable that you'll ride out the storm until the next
> lunatic can covince most of the people all of the time into something
> completely counter to their own self interest.

The Bonus Tax: The Redistribution of Both Wealth And Talent

AIG bonuses were not based on performance. They were retention bonuses, paid solely on obligation to stay on the job and perform during 2008. Since the affected employees stayed throughout 2008 they deserve the benefits of their contractual commitments, which they fulfilled.


On Mar 22 04:05 PM henarl wrote:

> First: If these AIG bonuses are "based on performance" Then how is
> losing a world record 60 plus billion in one quarter considered positive
> performance?
> Second: If these AIG employees are the irreplaceable "brains" of
> the whole financial ststem, we're in real trouble.
> Third: Congress should be damned thankful that none of their compensation
> is based on "performance".!
> Finally: These AIG bonuses, while troubling, are inconsequential
> compared to the huge amounts passed thru to Goldman, et al that seemed
> to be perfectly okay with Congress because the public was kept in
> the dark about that at the time. Now Barney Frank &amp; Company are
> reacting to populist outrage only for political reasons.

The Bonus Tax: The Redistribution of Both Wealth And Talent

What makes you think Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, and Souter won't vote to sustain? Kennedy is the wild card here.


On Mar 22 10:07 AM Paul Killinger wrote:

> Hopefully, should any of this reactionary legislation actually become
> law, the Supremes will nip this nonsense in the bud. If not, it will
> enable the Obamanistas to begin their pursuit of the rest of us.
> Anyway, we can always hope we're pretty far down on their lists.
>

The Bonus Tax: The Redistribution of Both Wealth And Talent

No they were not the epicenter of the meltdown. Those in place today are the survivors. The ones responsible have already been fired. JPM Chase, Wells Fargo, Northern Trust and the like are unintended victims in this witch hunt.


On Mar 22 08:44 AM Jim Bond wrote:

> "Their competitors, on the other hand, are going to have a field
> day snatching up talent that is trying to escape lower paying government
> wages, along with the restrictions placed on such businesses".<br/>
>
> What is wrong with that? Seems resonable to me. However, we are talking
> about thousands of high paid people out looking for jobs THAT ARE
> NOT THERE, certainly not at their pay scale. Even so, the ones that
> do trade places will presumable help those companies that did not
> self destruct. I am all for it, even if they are foreign companies.
> Welcome to the global economy.
>
> But wait, aren't these the same people that were are the epicenter
> of the global economic meltdown? That doen't look so good on the
> resume.

Fast and Easy Fannie

And to think that Congress wants to bail out the consumers who lied with our tax dollars. Maybe those of us who suffered losses in the tech stock meltdown should petition Congress for reimbursement because we lied about our ability to purchase the stocks and suffer the losses. I really couldn't afford it.
Honest.