Posted on 10/21/2009 10:24:16 PM PDT by oioiman
The vice-chairman of Goldman Sachs has launched an astonishing defence of bumper bonuses just a year after bankers brought the world's economy to the brink of collapse.
In a speech likely to recall fictional banker Gordon Gekko in the film Wall Street - whose mantra 'greed is good' came to sum up the excesses of the 1980s - Lord Griffiths claimed taxpayers should 'tolerate the inequality'. And he insisted that banks should not be ashamed of rewarding staff.
Lord Griffiths (left) has echoed the 'Greed is good' maxim by Gordon Gekko, played by MIchael Douglas in the film Wall Street, by saying inequality is good
His comments came as it was revealed that President Barack Obama is set to slash bonus payouts by as much as 90 per cent to executives at Wall Street banks that received billions of dollars in taxpayers' cash. Last week, Goldman Sachs provoked anger after revealing that it planned to lavish a record £13.4billion in pay and bonuses on its staff.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1222099/Inequality-good-says-Goldman-chief-echoing-Gordon-Gecko-defends-huge-bank-bonuses.html#ixzz0UdhG5kT6
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Ping!
Someone is going to answer and someone is going to go to hell.
Much of Goldman’s money comes from AIG debt swaps which comes from the US taxpayers. The whole thing is a huge scam on the public.
Douchebag A-hole.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but this guy isn’t this guy a HARD CORE LEFTIST OBAMA SUPPORTER?
I guess that’s why he is publishing this - because he thinks he’s Teflon and he’s right. The government shouldn’t be in the business of telling companies how much employees are worth.
When you’re a member of the left, the rules don’t apply to you.
What is even scarier....is we got so called “conservatives” supporting the taxpayer-funded bonuses for Goldbrick-Suks and other TARP-baby welfare recipients.
These losers are giving themselves bonuses with taxpayer money for failure....we would be postal if some government employee did this.
It would have been better for America, long term, to let Goldbrick-Suks and the other Wall Street Socialists crash and burn. Americans should not be subsidizing their failure
wonder if he wears striped suspenders and slicks his hair back
The government shouldn’t be in the business of telling companies how much employees are worth.
The government should not be in the business of giving Welfare checks to executives of failed companies.
The real socialism here...is that we have people defending the welfare checks of failed executives. It is a good sign that liberals are joining real conservatives in the outrage of big bonuses for failed executives...paid for by the taxpayers
Amen! At least this “Lord” is European so I guess the game of aristocrats and peasants is nothing new to him. What irritates me is the Americans who buy into this foolishness. Mention taxing the rich and all of a sudden “rugged individualists” are wetting their britches and crying OMG, who’s going to give us jobs.
parsy, who finds that attitude disgusting in Americans
That was Goldbricking-Sucks.. and CARP
“Just another dog, with fleas”.
Q. What will the banker get for Christmas?
A. My savings.
It’s funny how these big time bankers can’t help but reinforce the stereotypes that make people despise them. It would be more courteous if they would keep quiet while they plunder the country.
I've heard so many attacks on Wall Street out of congress but hardly any mention of the thousands of middle class real estate speculators and home buyers who have irresponsibly defaulted on their mortgages.
I bought a house in the Spring of 2007 just after the market started falling and right now my house has probably lost 20% of its market value. But it's exactly what I want in a great location and I wouldn't even consider defaulting on the mortgage just because the house has lost value. Why do so many people think they can not live up to contracts the signed just because the deal isn't working out for them financially?
I do agree that many people on Wall Street are grossly overpaid for what they do, but government pay regulation isn't the answer. The underlying problem seems to be lack of competition and high barriers to entry for new firms on Wall Street. It's an old boys club that's closely connected to the federal government and it's tough to break into it. For example, I suspect Michael Milken was unjustly prosecuted for minor securities violations because he was from a small outsider firm in Philadelphia and he dared to challenge the big established firms in New York. Notice how its the same big firms that dominate Wall Street decade after decade (Goldman, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase, etc.), while in the technology industry there is constant upheaval and turnover among the top companies. Somehow the big firms on Wall Street are able to shut the boutique firms out of their markets and make excessive fees for most of their business, and that's the underlying cause of excessive compensation on The Street. What's really needed is a major anti-trust investigation and prosecution, but I doubt that will ever happen because of the revolving door of personnel moving from the federal government to Wall Street and back into the government. This is a protected industry that is protected by Washington, and it badly needs to be shaken up to promote more price competition.
Like a lot of people, you’re starting to generalize and assume that all high income people are overpaid the way Wall Street people are overpaid. They’re not all overpaid, and entrepreneurs work really hard and take a lot of financial risk to build new companies. When you tax the entrepreneur more you get less investment, fewer people willing to work that hard, and slower economic growth. The historical economic statistics prove this to be true. There are really very few people who make the kind of money made at Goldman Sachs...very few, just Wall Street people, entertainers, professional athletes, and some business owners. Most small business owners and entrepreneurs are way below GS executives in total income.
Didn’t Goldman have a stake in the run up of oil in 08?
Then, the Federal regulators were sicked on banks to assure that they did not use decent credit standards on any favored political victim class. The focus on much of the financial crisis should include government as much as the private sector.
I have no sympathy for Goldman people..
If they had pulled themselves out of the ditch without TARP money that would be different.
Very good points. Dodd and Frank helped create a disaster in the financial system.
I can hear Madame Defarge’s knitting needles.
Check out Frontline’s special on the de-regulation binge of the 90’s. And yes, Congress is complicit with the sub-primes, complicit with the Banks who sucked them up and sold them off once they were done with people who could afford mortgages. You can’t pin this on one party without the other.
Much of Goldman’s money comes from AIG debt swaps which comes from the US taxpayers. The whole thing is a huge scam on the public.
**************
Bingo!
Yet, obozo’s fascist mandate to cut salaries doesnt apply to Goldman?
Horrible, just horrible hypocrisy from the Usurper.
I save my outrage and scorn for the government who bailed them out in the first place. It was completely antithetical to free-market capitalism, which requires that there be a DOWNSIDE to the risk-reward curve.
Much more dangerous is the precedent set by government controlling wages - this dangerous, slippery slope ends in the destruction of the American dream.
Yes, there are horrible abuses on Wall Street that go on to this day - but change the federal enablers, not the capitalist system. And remember, nobody put a gun to anybody’s head when it comes to investing. If you think the market’s manipulated (and I do) stay out of it or go along for the ride - it’s your CHOICE.
It's part of the plan. Rev up the class envy.
Exactly what do we, the market, pay these CEOs the big bucks for? The successful way they influence our economy?
It seems like their chief goal was, of course, to make profits - and most of them couldn’t even do that.
The one thing that they ALL were miraculously successful at was obtaining compensation that equaled the annual GDP of some small nations.
I’m not envious of their class - I have no desire to be a con man. But I am fed up with their arrogant theft from the American Treasury, as well as their apologists.
Watch the other hand.
This guy isn’t just talking to the press this way to defend high bonuses. They need a bogey-man in order for the Federal Government to be justified in getting involved in salary actions. So you have to ask yourself, do I let a certain amount of arrogance and injustice to survive so that the Republic can survive or do I go after the abusers and end up losing more freedom?
Yes, of course, their goal was to make money. That’s the goal of corporations.
You say you are fed up with “their arrogant theft from the American Treasury.” You should be angry at the government, not the bank executives.
How would you like the government to come in and tell *you* that you must return all but 10% of the money you made last year? How would you like it if your buddy who does the same job at the place across the street gets to keep his salary?
You may hate the bank executives and think they are thieves but it will be a different story when they come after your paycheck.
The government should stay out of private enterprise. No bailouts, no salary caps. Any ‘conservative’ who applauds the government actions re salaries is no conservative.
Companies negotiate givebacks with their employees all the time. And I suppose that if the government “came in” and told me that I, as the President of a company that they’d given billions to, was told that I had to take 25 million instead of 250 million, I would quite and go to a company that would pay me the 250.
Maybe that’s what these guys will do.
My problem isn’t with them making money for the corporations. It’s that they didn’t - only Goldman did. But they all took the money anyway - which leads me to believe that it was their personal profitability and not company profitability that was their chief concern.
Of course, if the government comes after everyone’s paycheck, it won’t matter - the deflation will equalize all incomes.
These guys knew that this giveback was part of the deal when they took the bailout. This should come as no big surprise to them. I feel no sympathy for them and believe that they deserve what they are getting, because they are greedy fools. They could have taken less this year, returned the bailout, and then gorged themselves for the foreseeable future. But, no, they have to grab as much as they can immediately. They are fools with no forethought. They’re not worth the ginormous salaries they backslapped for themselves.
And who appointed you the Conservative Purity Police?
“Didn’t Goldman have a stake in the run up of oil in 08?”
Yes.
Exactly right! The "greed is good" statement applies to a genuine capitalist entity, one willing to earn its profits and accept its losses in the free market. That isn't Goldman Sachs, a quasi-governmental entity that expects to be indemnified by the government against any possible negative outcome...just like every other welfare recipient in the country.
Class envy? I don't begrudge someone who makes a lot of money honestly. But these guys threw caution to the wind, took in huge paychecks, and left the taxpayer saddled with the downside. The risks they took were massive and systemic, but they pretended across the board that those risks did not exist - even lying about the risks, in the form of bogus ratings on securities. Futhermore, they have been playing commodities markets as neither producer nor consumer, which has cost American consumers billions.
It's easy to talk about not bailing them out. But they basically took on so much risk that they could have utterly destroyed our modern economy, leaving no good choices. And they appear to have learned absolutely nothing, they are just going about re-inflating the bubble once again. I'm not sure what good actions can be taken against them. But until they learn to act in a responsible manner, I have no sympathy for them.
I guess they should have thought of that before they sold their soul to the Devil (for taxpayer funds, no less).
An all around moral disaster. Insane risks were accepted because of implicit government backing, failure was subsequently rewarded as anticipated, with people who took no part in said insane risks being those who involuntarily pay the reward for failure. The whole affair is sold as being necessary for the common good, with the group determining what constitutes common good being composed of a revolving-door coterie of alumni from the initiating plague bearers. The whole ensemble of players not only insist upon the necessity of the bailout, but also act as if entitled to it.
The responsible parties continue on with irresponsible behaviors, while touting anew the principles they earlier demanded that they, the government, and the taxpayers must abandon, finding it again to be of convenience to pretend that their fortunes are the result of merely their own meritorious conduct.
The crony capitalists are like spoiled children - extolling the virtue of freedom for themselves while they are successful, while demanding (and receiving, for having nurtured institutional privileges via government infiltration) paternalistic protectionist measures when the fruit of their irresponsible conduct is ripe. They thus parry the selective market forces that would normally bury them with the remains of other failed enterprises, their behaviors persisting because of the collection of perverse incentives they themselves engineered to be part of the government repertoire used to “correct for market failures”. America has suffered few deceits as vile.
Those bailouts were forced on many banks. Don’t let the government get away with tricking you into believing their populist crap. This was the govt plan all along. Cause financial institutions to fail so they could take them over. The salary caps will help speed the process.
You support even higher taxes on the rich than we already have? Do you even pretend to be a conservative?
“I suspect Michael Milken was unjustly prosecuted for minor securities violations because he was from a small outsider firm in Philadelphia and he dared to challenge the big established firms in New York. “
I agree with your post about government staying out of private salary/bonus decisions. I agree with your comment about people not living with the consequences of their decisions.
But you are wrong about Milken. Drexel Burnham was huge in M&A. Milken was dirty as hell and committed the epitome of insider trading unlike what passes today for insider trading — not insiders. Also you are forgetting that Boesky led to Drexel which gave the government a cooperating witness.
Goldman, Morgan had their share of SEC troubles but they settled early and at least made moves to fix the problems.
Another small example of daily mail non-conservativeness.
“mantra ‘greed is good’ came to sum up the excesses of the 1980s”
It’s faux-con.
No pretense. I ain’t a durn libertarian and I don’t worship the wealthy. I have been thru my Ayn Rand phase and have come out the other side. Now I guess you could try to tax people who don’t have enough money to barely eke by. Or you tax the ones who have piled up a doo-doo pile of wealth. Or you could do neither cause it don’t really matter in the long run. The deficit is going to have to be monetized. There is no good, workable alternative so get used to deficits.
parsy, who don’t like it but is prepared for it
I agree with what you say. I am using Wall Street and the wealthy in a very collective sense. No way around it or every reply would be ten pages long.
Problem is with Wall Street, so much of what they do has less to do with entrepreneurs or even big companies. It is a paper money shuffle with a lot of gambling thrown in.
FWIW, this is not a “commie” opinion. Try naked capitalism.co and read some of their archives. These people are knowlegdable and you get the real skinny on what is going on and how it hurts our economy.
Paradoxically, if you raise tax rates on the wealthy, I think you will move more money into entreprenuership and investment instead of this wasteful paper shuffling crap.
Think about like this. Assume a 70% marginal tax rate. Rich dude makes a million at this level. He can invest $300,000 into stock market, or he can find a business to invest in where a good part of his expenditure is deductible. The go’vt is in effect subsidizing 70 cents on the dollar for him.
The money moves to lower income people with higher MPC and demand comes from wages instead of usurious credit cards and debt. Everybody profits and it is bottom up not trickle down. (Trickle down is BS)
parsy, who says it is counter-intuitive sometimes
US President Barack Obama (L) shakes hands with the crowd after delivering a major speech on the finacial crisis at Federal Hall in New York, NY, in September 2009. A majority of financial executives in the United States say they are reducing bonuses, which have become a hot-button issue amid the economic crisis, according to a poll published Monday. (AFP/File/Jim Watson)
I have no sympathy for the Wall Street executives. My position has nothing to do with sympathy.
You just can’t be a conservative and think it’s okay for the goverment to control salaries this way.
Did you here Rush today? His head was about to explode over this issue.
There a lot wrong nowadays. But a lot of these bonuses were made possible only with governmental bailouts. In other words, these guys are going to take home millions because they stuck the working stiffs like me with the tax bill. If they had any sense of sanity, they would have lain low for a couple of years on this matter until their revenues picked back up on its their accord. But the same short-term thinking that led to the grossly excessive risk-taking in the first place is also setting themselves up as easy targets for this kind of governmental action. And that is the real problem here - they apparently have learned nothing.
Im laughing so hard at you and your commie nonsense it hurts! Let me repeat, laughing AT you, not with you. Go away, “farcey”.
You take the handout, they get to call the shots.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.