Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Wall Street, Bonuses

1.  $170 million / $170 billion = very tiny.  But that doesn't matter, because that $170 million was my money and, well, fuck 'em. 
2.  As Mr. Taplin puts it, they managed to lose $65 billion in just 3 months.  On that note... why the f do they deserve a bonus, why are they getting it?
3.  Because it's contractually obligated.  WTF, mate?  That's not a bonus, that's pay.  Or, pay by another name... I wonder what incentive they would have to disguise regular pay as a bonus?  (public relations, tax reasons, who knows...)
4.  Relatedly, (see last sentence of previous linked article), how the FUCK is the government surprised by this??  It was contractual.  It was planned in advance.  Why the shitstorm right before ...the shitstorm?
5.  Finally, who says the government can't just take those bonuses away?  Although taxing them at 100% sounds clever, I don't know if that's going to stand up constitutionally. Kind of a specific law, no?  And may not make it through congress.  On the other hand, why not just take them away?  "We won't be able to retain good people," snivels Wall Street.  EXPLAIN THAT ONE - because it seems to me that taking these away would punish incompetence (ahem - incompetence at best; _____ at worst) while incenting good performance ..... hell, forget the "good" and let's be happy with NOT FUCKING UP.   So, you know, we'd be encouraging the departure of ye who fucked up.  Anyhow, Monsieur is right - this would be analogous to bankruptcy.  Yes?
I hope that whoever wrote those shitty contracts gets a papercut on their asshole.

No comments: