Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 168 posts

Re: Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

#11

Post by quonn »

tormeh wrote: post #4

>“When the banks did well, their employees were paid well. When the banks did poorly, their employees were paid well,” Cuomo’s office said in the 22-page report. “When the banks did very poorly, they were bailed out by taxpayers and their employees were still paid well. Bonuses and overall compensation did not vary significantly as profits diminished.” Waaat. I think the government should stop bailing out businesses.…

This is an excellent point. I would put a system in place that makes it clear that banks have a choice of a) Splitting before they get to big to fail or b) Accepting that if they grow larger, they can always be nationalized if they make a mistake that would cause them to go bankrupt.

The problem is, that currently nationalization is only possible in most countries, if you fully pay the owner. Changing this would in some countries require constitutional changes. I think having a special rule for banks and the option to split would be a feasible change.

Re: Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

#12

Post by davidw »

cowsandmilk wrote: post #8
jheriko wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Either you let the company go bankrupt or you nationalize. I vaguely agree with that sentiment, but the problem in practice is that government sucks at running things. They introduce layers of infrastructure that business doesn't and turn things into political footballs. Although thinking about that for a moment, its a big problem on its own...

> government sucks at running things Because a company that needs to be bailed out was doing a great job...

You should have seen how banks were run in Italy when they were essentially the financial wings of various political parties.

Anyway, this is pretty clearly about politics, so... article flagged.

Re: Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

#13

Post by josteink »

quonn wrote: post #11
tormeh wrote: post #4

>“When the banks did well, their employees were paid well. When the banks did poorly, their employees were paid well,” Cuomo’s office said in the 22-page report. “When the banks did very poorly, they were bailed out by taxpayers and their employees were still paid well. Bonuses and overall compensation did not vary significantly as profits diminished.” Waaat. I think the government should stop bailing out businesses.…

This is an excellent point. I would put a system in place that makes it clear that banks have a choice of a) Splitting before they get to big to fail or b) Accepting that if they grow larger, they can always be nationalized if they make a mistake that would cause them to go bankrupt. The problem is, that currently nationalization is only possible in most countries, if you fully pay the owner. Changing this would in s…

If the company/bank goes bankrupt, the value of the company is by definition zero. What is there to pay the owners?

Re: Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

#14

Post by JetSetWilly »

jheriko wrote: post #6
tormeh wrote: post #4

>“When the banks did well, their employees were paid well. When the banks did poorly, their employees were paid well,” Cuomo’s office said in the 22-page report. “When the banks did very poorly, they were bailed out by taxpayers and their employees were still paid well. Bonuses and overall compensation did not vary significantly as profits diminished.” Waaat. I think the government should stop bailing out businesses.…

> Either you let the company go bankrupt or you nationalize. I vaguely agree with that sentiment, but the problem in practice is that government sucks at running things. They introduce layers of infrastructure that business doesn't and turn things into political footballs. Although thinking about that for a moment, its a big problem on its own...

The UK government nationalised RBS and thus far RBS does not seem to be particularly badly run or more bureaucratic when compared to other banks, so I'm not sure there's any real evidence for this statement.

In fact the UK government is expected to make a tidy profit when it privatises RBS again.

Re: Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

#15

Post by matthewmacleod »

jheriko wrote: post #6
tormeh wrote: post #4

>“When the banks did well, their employees were paid well. When the banks did poorly, their employees were paid well,” Cuomo’s office said in the 22-page report. “When the banks did very poorly, they were bailed out by taxpayers and their employees were still paid well. Bonuses and overall compensation did not vary significantly as profits diminished.” Waaat. I think the government should stop bailing out businesses.…

> Either you let the company go bankrupt or you nationalize. I vaguely agree with that sentiment, but the problem in practice is that government sucks at running things. They introduce layers of infrastructure that business doesn't and turn things into political footballs. Although thinking about that for a moment, its a big problem on its own...

They introduce layers of infrastructure that business doesn't and turn things into political footballs.

Have you ever had any interaction with any large business? They are bureaucratically indistinguishable from governments.

Re: Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

#16

Post by themartorana »

davidw wrote: post #12
cowsandmilk wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> government sucks at running things Because a company that needs to be bailed out was doing a great job...

You should have seen how banks were run in Italy when they were essentially the financial wings of various political parties. Anyway, this is pretty clearly about politics, so... article flagged.

You should either participate in a discussion OR flag it as inappropriate, because the second you agree to engage, you believe the conversation has some merit on this forum.

Edit: I can't reply to you for some reason, but I didn't downvote you. However, saying "downvote" instead of just doing it, and then flaunting your karma score and elevating yourself to the position of de-facto moderator seems much like saying "here is MY political opinion, and now I will work to shut down any further discussion on the subject."

Re: Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

#17

Post by mattgibson »

jheriko wrote: post #6
tormeh wrote: post #4

>“When the banks did well, their employees were paid well. When the banks did poorly, their employees were paid well,” Cuomo’s office said in the 22-page report. “When the banks did very poorly, they were bailed out by taxpayers and their employees were still paid well. Bonuses and overall compensation did not vary significantly as profits diminished.” Waaat. I think the government should stop bailing out businesses.…

> Either you let the company go bankrupt or you nationalize. I vaguely agree with that sentiment, but the problem in practice is that government sucks at running things. They introduce layers of infrastructure that business doesn't and turn things into political footballs. Although thinking about that for a moment, its a big problem on its own...

> the problem in practice is that government sucks at running things. They introduce layers of infrastructure that business doesn't

Actually, there is no evidence of this. See this report that compares the Govt run industries before and after privatisation: http://www.psiru.org/reports/public-and-private-sector-effic...

"The results are remarkably consistent across all sectors and all forms of privatisation and outsourcing: there is no empirical evidence that the private sector is intrinsically more efficient"

Even if it was more efficient, $31 billion of corrupt bonuses on top = no different from an inefficient government.

Re: Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

#18

Post by antocv »

josteink wrote: post #13
quonn wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an excellent point. I would put a system in place that makes it clear that banks have a choice of a) Splitting before they get to big to fail or b) Accepting that if they grow larger, they can always be nationalized if they make a mistake that would cause them to go bankrupt. The problem is, that currently nationalization is only possible in most countries, if you fully pay the owner. Changing this would in s…

If the company/bank goes bankrupt, the value of the company is by definition zero. What is there to pay the owners?

What the taxpayers have payed to keep the bank profitable.

Just, you know, the taxpayers are not the owners, because .

Hm, maybe it doesnt really matter if taxpayers would have become the owners, because in any case they would have payed for their losses but the profits would not magically find their way into taxpayers pockets, instead it would be some new term instead of owners like "facilitators" "workers".

In the end, money doesnt really matter, what matters is which people take decisions concerning all other people, power.

Re: Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

#19

Post by tomp »

jheriko wrote: post #5

an industry driven by greed is greedy... why am i not surprised. that stuff needs some regulating. its all well and good making everyone richer and deregulating to encourage it, but if the gap widens, because of how the economy works, the poor get poorer in real terms :( also we have big explosive crashes...

I think a better analogy would be, an industry that makes money has money. Just like a baker wouldn't go hungry and a shoemaker will have shoes.

Re: Banks Paid $32.6B in Bonuses Amid U.S. Bailout (2009)

#20

Post by CmonDev »

tormeh wrote: post #4

>“When the banks did well, their employees were paid well. When the banks did poorly, their employees were paid well,” Cuomo’s office said in the 22-page report. “When the banks did very poorly, they were bailed out by taxpayers and their employees were still paid well. Bonuses and overall compensation did not vary significantly as profits diminished.” Waaat. I think the government should stop bailing out businesses.…

"Also I clearly need a job in banking..."

What you need is to be a partner.

Post reply on HN