PDA

View Full Version : Wall Street bonuses up 17 percent



RandomGuy
02-23-2010, 08:16 AM
By MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press Writer Michael Gormley, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 19 mins ago
ALBANY, N.Y. – Wall Street bonuses were up 17 percent to over $20 billion in 2009, the year taxpayers bailed out the financial sector after its meltdown, New York state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli said Tuesday.

Total compensation at the largest securities firms grew beyond that figure and profits could surpass what he calls an unprecedented $55 billion last year, DiNapoli said. That's nearly three times Wall Street's record increase, a rate of growth that is boosted in part by the record losses in 2008 of nearly $43 billion, the Democrat said.

"Wall Street is vital to New York's economy, and the dollars generated by the industry help the state's bottom line," said DiNapoli. "But for most Americans, these huge bonuses are a bitter pill and hard to comprehend. ... Taxpayers bailed them out, and now they're back making money while many New York families are still struggling to make ends meet."

DiNapoli supports reforms that require Wall Street bonuses to be tied to long-term profitability, to force more stability in the volatile markets and "make sure the securities industry thrives without driving the rest of us out on a fragile economic limb."

DiNapoli reviews tax collections each year and bases his annual projection of Wall Street bonuses on income and other taxes paid in New York City.

DiNapoli notes the bonuses help state revenues tremendously as it faces an $8.2 billion deficit, but they are a "bitter pill" to most taxpayers nationwide.

The bonus estimate doesn't include compensation that Wall Streeters chose to take in stock options and other kinds of deferred payment.

He said the bonus pool is a third less than the amount paid out two years ago when Wall Street had its previously most profitable year.

The estimate does not include stock options that have not yet been realized or other forms of deferred compensation. This year's estimated bonus pool is third less than the amount paid two years ago, the previous most profitable year.

For example, Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman could receive a stock bonus currently valued at $8.1 million for 2009 if he meets certain performance targets, the bank said in January. Gorman is getting deferred stock worth $5.4 million but no cash bonus for 2009, Morgan Stanley said in a filing. Gorman can't cash in the stock for three years.

Banks had been expected to hand out near-record compensation for last year's performance. Several banks earned huge profits in 2009, aided by billions in government bailout funds and a rebounding stock market.

State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo has pressed the nation's eight biggest banks to reveal how much they plan to pay out in employee bonuses for 2009. The Democrat also sought the size of the banks' bonus pool would have been affected if the banks hadn't received a taxpayer rescue at the height of the financial crisis in late 2008.

coyotes_geek
02-23-2010, 08:26 AM
Break. Up. The. Banks.

RandomGuy
02-23-2010, 08:30 AM
Break. Up. The. Banks.

That would require resolve from Congress. :bang

EVAY
02-23-2010, 12:13 PM
break. Up. The. Banks.

+1

EVAY
02-23-2010, 12:13 PM
that would require resolve from congress. :bang

+100

angrydude
02-23-2010, 12:16 PM
the bonuses don't bother me half as much as the ongoing transfer of wealth to the banks in the form of borrowing from the govt. at 0 percent interest and loaning it back to them a 3.

SnakeBoy
02-23-2010, 02:59 PM
That would require resolve from Congress. :bang

As I recall, the banks were doing a good job of breaking themselves up and you were cheerleading the effort to have the government jump in and keep things the same with taxpayer money.

boutons_deux
02-23-2010, 03:29 PM
You fuckers haven't been listening to me.

There is NO COUNTERVAILING power to the powers of the corps and capitalists.

Govt and the regulatory apparatus has been totally captured.

Ain't conservative "philosophy" in practice a beauty to behold?

SouthernFried
02-23-2010, 03:35 PM
First of all...the government should not have given banks ANY money.

Second, third and fourth...the government should not have given the banks ANY money.

Obama doesn't know how to run banks, and neither do any of you. If they wan't to pay bonus money...none of your damn business, and none of mine. Unless you want to control the banks to make it your business.

And THAT is why Obama and govt gave them the money...for control. Now it IS your business...cuz you MADE it your business.

This is how it works, and how it always works.

"But..but...the world and our economy woulda collapsed without govt money."

Really?...I mean, really?

Can people who don't understand free markets, really claim to know what's going to happen in those free markets...let alone try to control them?

Bailouts were more about control, than about saving anything. But, even worse than that...the people who wanted control, have no fucking clue what they're doing. They just wanted control. As ALWAYS is the case.

...and so it goes.

JudynTX
02-23-2010, 03:37 PM
End the fed!

Wild Cobra
02-23-2010, 06:02 PM
That would require resolve from Congress. :bang
I find this topic so funny. People complain about these huge bonuses, but congress was either too stupid, or in collusion to make their friends rich. You see, all that infusion of money, was seen as a positive on the balance sheets. Because of the way bonus contracts are paid out, this was an obligation.

People...

Please stop whining about the bonuses, and fire the congressional members that voted for it instead.

RandomGuy
02-24-2010, 11:20 PM
I find this topic so funny. People complain about these huge bonuses, but congress was either too stupid, or in collusion to make their friends rich. You see, all that infusion of money, was seen as a positive on the balance sheets. Because of the way bonus contracts are paid out, this was an obligation.

People...

Please stop whining about the bonuses, and fire the congressional members that voted for it instead.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=57&pictureid=323

Sir, please step away from the accounting references and put your hands behind your head.

Really, it hurt my brain to try and sort through that.

Assets = Liability + Equity

ChumpDumper
02-25-2010, 04:09 AM
First of all...the government should not have given banks ANY money.

Second, third and fourth...the government should not have given the banks ANY money.

Obama doesn't know how to run banks, and neither do any of you. If they wan't to pay bonus money...none of your damn business, and none of mine. Unless you want to control the banks to make it your business.

And THAT is why Obama and govt gave them the money...for control. Now it IS your business...cuz you MADE it your business.

This is how it works, and how it always works.

"But..but...the world and our economy woulda collapsed without govt money."

Really?...I mean, really?

Can people who don't understand free markets, really claim to know what's going to happen in those free markets...let alone try to control them?

Bailouts were more about control, than about saving anything. But, even worse than that...the people who wanted control, have no fucking clue what they're doing. They just wanted control. As ALWAYS is the case.

...and so it goes.Which banks are being run by Obama?

Be specific.

Marcus Bryant
02-26-2010, 07:45 AM
That's a bit of revionist history to pin that decision solely on Obama. After all, whose Treasury Secretary came up with the brilliant plan to provide socialism to Wall Street in the first place?