rockawayboy

Scrooge, aka Taxpayer, Heads for Wall Street

Sorry.......but if a firm received government (taxpayer, that's you and me) bailout funds, then it would be logical and morally correct for said firms to freeze bonuses until this crisis is over.


On Nov 11 05:49 PM K9s-4-k8 wrote:

> The payroll system on Wall Street can sometimes be quite troubling.
> They don't earn their income like the average Joe. They get a salary
> but it isn't what attracted them to the industry. Its the year-end
> bonus that provides them with the necessary incentive to produce.
> If they eliminate the year-end bonus, Wall Street firms would be
> less productive. Now some would reason that would have been good
> considering what kind of production they have been doing the last
> few years, and I'll give you that. But if they were operating under
> a union contract much as the UAW has its union members, we would
> be in the same place but for different reasons. Productive vs. nonproductive.
>
> Yet still, a case must be made for those that weren't at all involved
> in credit default swaps or the packaging of mortgage backed securities.
> Anyone involved in these divisions of production deserve no bonus,
> but for those involved in divisions that were profitable, should
> they not be rewarded accordingly? And what do we say about the firms
> that were forced to accept government investment. They weren't all
> willing participants. Should they be treated in the same way?