Comments for http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html en-gb 30 Fri 31 Jul 2015 15:03:00 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html over100usa http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=98#comment50 Another group of people need to have their pays slashed. These are the senators and congressmen who vote to increase their pays annually. They are currently paid over $150K a year, plus lots of benefits that are not available to typical American! Wed 28 Oct 2009 03:57:04 GMT+1 David http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=96#comment49 Let's all wait and see if anything is really done to curb pay and bonuses.This is all 'media' hype and spin doctoring for the masses.The harsh reality is that it is business as usual in the financial and political world.HEY, guess what !!! the tax payer has inherited the bad debt through their elected officials and the bankers have got away scot free!!!I am of the opinion that the those directly and indirectly responsible for the financial crisis should face charges of economic sabotage which equates to TREASON and face the consequences!!! Tue 27 Oct 2009 06:51:54 GMT+1 alleman http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=94#comment48 Capitalism and Executive CompensationOn many of your recent programs you have had commentators who bemoan the fact that the government is attempting to set executive pay, albeit feebly. They go on to state that this government behavior is destroying capitalism. What these commentators and your interviewers fail to note is that in today’s large corporations, the owners i.e. stockholders, are not in control. They have not been for sometime. Management picks their boards which in turn set the executives’ compensation. Is it a surprise that it is excessive? Attempts to reestablish shareholders control or at least a say in compensation, have been rebuked by both the corporations and government. This is not the “capitalism” that Adam Smith discusses. Indeed, the separation of ownership from control does not deserve the name “capitalism.” James AllemanProfessor EmeritusUniversity of Colorado Tue 27 Oct 2009 04:46:55 GMT+1 RickMcDaniel http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=92#comment47 I'll wait for the proof that is has been done, and it is effective. In the meantime, that is just the tip of the iceberg, and I would strongly recommend to Congress, that such limits be placed on all of Corporate America's CEO's and top executives.There is no other way to return management's attention to managing a sound business, and providing jobs and well being for people, instead of manipulating stock values, for personal cashing in. Fri 23 Oct 2009 19:12:16 GMT+1 arclightt http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=90#comment46 @38 (StD) Again on track here. One of the largest contributors to this was the rise of the 401K pre-tax retirement plans, operated through mutual-fund managers. Why? Because we as retirees-in-waiting provided very, very simple direction to those fund managers: MAX MY PROFITS, OR ELSE. Nothing else. They did exactly what we asked them to: They went to corporate boards of directors and C-level seniors, bought large blocks of shares, and then said, "Maximize my profits, or else". What did the BoDs and C-level seniors do? Exactly what they were told. They maximized short-term profits, and came up with all kinds of screwy ways to keep the stock price going up up up. This usually meant shafting us workers in one way or another, or outsourcing, or whatever. We wonder why it all happened...while we are still shouting at the mutual-fund managers to MAXIMIZE MY PROFITS, OR ELSE.Methinks we need to come up with some different directions. Do you agree?Arclight Fri 23 Oct 2009 15:04:11 GMT+1 Al from BR http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=88#comment45 43:faeyth, no disrespect, but take a breath. I can feel the emotion pouring out of your words, but I can barely make it through your post with all the run-ons, squashed spacing, and bizarre punctuation. Fri 23 Oct 2009 04:38:32 GMT+1 KScurmudgeon http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=86#comment44 18. At 2:12pm on 22 Oct 2009, carolinalady wrote:#1 Gavrielle: Yes!! We do need some serious regulation for the financial and insurance industries and I'm surprised that it hasn't reached the floor of Congress yet. The media focuses upon the President and alternately criticizes him for having too much on his plate or junketing about, but I'm beginning to think that his agenda has pretty much overwhelmed Congress which grinds even slower under the recent regime of NO. Maybe that's the plan -- see below."Good perception. That's an obvious part of the plan - to keep everyone hopping busy, to dominate the conversation, to steamroller the press. They seem to be cutting their coverage, especially of his speeches, in response to the wilting criticism from the Repubs that the press coverage makes him too attractive.#6 KCcurmudgeon (are you sure you're not my dad?): And he must be a good man, to have such a daughter. (That would make me Irish.)I have kin in N. Carolina, but my only daughter, alas, lives in Texas. Now my granddaughter, she is a paragon ....KScurmudgeon Fri 23 Oct 2009 03:28:21 GMT+1 patrick http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=84#comment43 The only way restrictions on corporate bonuses can ever work, is if there is world-wide agreement to cap them in every country.The price of gold is so high because it is hard to come by, similiarly top bankers can demand top-dollar because there are very few of them who can do a competent job of turning around an ailing company.Cut their bonuses in one country and they will simply go somewhere else where they can earn more.That is why I believe corporate bonuses should be capped in every country on earth, if it is ever to work. Fri 23 Oct 2009 00:56:12 GMT+1 faeyth http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=82#comment42 I am sick of people saying we are Socialists,I wish.Middle class has a easier time in Social Economies.They are no less poorer than we are,and Social economies and policies,won't change the way we vote for multiple parties,have a President,Congress,and Supreme Court.I wish more Americans understood that Socialism isn't Communism.And you can have a Social Economy and programs and it won't change they way our government is run or individual freedoms. Social Programs have and do work in this country and many others.And socialism isn't against White collar workers and aren't going to take their pay way but make sure everyone is paid fairly for their labor Blue and White Collar by Stockholders and Corporations.And that people deserve to end Corporate monopolies,and Stop being over charged for Resources that belong to us all that are owned by our State and Federal Governments.I am talking about Government land not individual private land their is a difference. Thu 22 Oct 2009 21:29:47 GMT+1 faeyth http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=80#comment41 I don't believe you should get into Government for money and have a competing salary with private business.Stop making excuses for unethical behavior.Most people don't get into religious jobs for money.Some things are what they are and should be held up to a higher level.Scientists,Religious Leaders,and etc..don't make great salaries.You should be a government leader because of the reasons behind the job.Want money go into a different line of business. Thu 22 Oct 2009 21:17:17 GMT+1 faeyth http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=78#comment40 And yes Dems voted for Bank Bailout they controlled Congress when it was passed.No Obama didn't sign it,Bush did.Anything Bush wanted to sign should have been a warning it was bad.Dems and GOP are playing the same game.Only the GOP give handouts to Rich,Dems the poor,and Middle Class pays the bill for both. Thu 22 Oct 2009 21:12:45 GMT+1 faeyth http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=76#comment39 7 companies BIG DEAL.How about changing regulations for the other hundreds that are going to steal our money with loans from Federal Government they have virtually no interest to pay back the American Tax Money we lend them the ones the Gov. doesn't have stock in,they loan them our tax money to do business.Or stock regulations,credit cards,bankruptcy laws,Corporate welfare,Mortgage and loans fees,Corporate taxes and loopholes,etc...They are trying to appease the ignorant voter.With a marginal reaction for Banks and Corporations.Dems are stupid,It too little,too late.Unemployment,Foreclosures,homelessness,reduced wages,etc...They messed up with Bail Outs, and just don't want People to see they are as ineffective as GOP.I am tired of their politics as usual and the 2 main parties.I am done wasting my vote on them,I am voting 3rd party from now on,might as well give them a chance.By the way people can boycott Banks,pull their money and put it in Credit Unions who don't and can't get away with the same greedy schemes.Yes you don't have to pay bankers their bonuses if you don't want to,Bet you haven't heard that on the News. Thu 22 Oct 2009 21:10:02 GMT+1 LucyJ http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=74#comment38 As an average Main Streeter, I think that this is a great idea from President Obama. When the corporate banks pay us back all our taxpayer dollars, then they can spend whatever they want on their employees. In the meantime, they have to suffer like us. Misery loves company, and all that jazz. But it makes Main Streeters feel like they aren't getting gypped, as none of us have been bailed out and although many, including myself, have finally found jobs, there are still too many who need jobs and are struggling to get by. Why should the Wall Streeters be the only ones bailed out? At least, this gives Main Streeters satisfaction! This is a good move by President Obama. There is nothing wrong with Wall Streeters making money, but it can't be off of the taxpayers. Pay us back and then you can do what you want! Thu 22 Oct 2009 20:28:16 GMT+1 saintDominick http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=72#comment37 Ref 35, Steveinthestates"...after having the public bail them out for failure to reward themselves for the failure is criminal.they should have all their asstes seized by the the governments.and People like Geithner and Larry Summers should be put out to pasture.they have caused enough damage"The TARP, commonly referred to as the bank bailout, was proposed by Mr. Paulsson and signed by President Bush in 2008. Messrs Geithner and Summers had nothing to do with it. What President Obama proposed and signed was a package to help stimulate the economy by providing funds for infrastructure improvements and various projects designed to mitigate the effects of the recession and create jobs, plus a $200B tax reduction.The damage done to our economy was caused by corporate greed, deregulation, repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999, unsustainable debt at all levels, the collapse of the real estate market, the decision to move jobs overseas to increase profits, an ineffective education system that puts us at a disadvantage when we try to compete with other industrialized nations, and insufficient investment in R&D and what could be a lucrative business and a source of jobs - alternative energy sources. The factors that contributed to the current economic and fiscal crises did not start or materialize during the past 9 months, they began decades ago and we - the American people - bear much of the responsibility for what has happened. Thu 22 Oct 2009 20:15:43 GMT+1 DigitalJanitor http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=70#comment36 Dear Wall Street: Good grief. This has NOTHING to do with 'socialism' or 'capitalism'. Please stop playing the victim, we're not buying it and your tantrum just makes you look like stupid whiny brats. Everyone in The Real World knows, say, WIC vouchers only work with certain foods- you can't just buy whatever you want. Proof is as close as the cheese and cereal isles in your local grocery store.ASSISTANCE USUALLY COMES WITH STIPULATIONS. If you don't want to abide by those rules, THEN DON'T TAKE THE ASSISTANCE. If the rules get changed mid-stream and you don't like them*, JUST PAY THE MONEY BACK AND GO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT. *And stop whining about that too. Heaven knows we consumers have been forced to put up with whatever game changes you can get away with whenever you geniuses bake them up and mash them through political channels. Welcome to the jungle. Pay up, or hunker down and learn live with it. Thu 22 Oct 2009 19:24:10 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=68#comment35 ref #33With the exception of millionaires like the Bushes, Kennedys, Rockefellers and others, most members of Congress are lawyers with limited financial resources. Some even spend the nigh sleeping on a cot in their office because they can not afford to pay the exhorbitant rents charged in the DC area. Cutting their salaries in half would mean the end of the Federal Government, unless of course we replace the existing members with janitors. _____________________________________________-I think the average janitor is more proficent than legislators like Frank and Dodd. And where are they going to go? most including Obama could not make it in the private sector. Thu 22 Oct 2009 18:40:23 GMT+1 Steve Neubeck http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=66#comment34 These people are the same ones who under the "free"marketi.e .dont regulate us but while we build a paper economy best described by the late engineer and economist Seymour Melman is profits without production.that type of economy is bound to fail.So the executives in the banks took the rest of the world for a ride and now after having the public bail them out for failure to reward themselves for the failure is criminal.they should have all their asstes seized by the the governments.and People like Geithner and Larry Summers should be put out to pasture.they have caused enough damage Thu 22 Oct 2009 18:34:03 GMT+1 saintDominick http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=64#comment33 The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1932 enabled commercial lenders to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and establish Structured Investment Vehicles. The flexibility afforded by the repeal may have helped some U.S. banks, but it was a major factor in the global financial crisis of 2008-09. I think it is worth remembering that in 1998, the year before the repeal, sub-prime loans were about 5 percent of all mortgage lending, by 2008 they were almost 30 percent.IMO, the repeal of Glass-Steagall, deregulation, and the accumulation of debt are the main reasons for the mess we are in. Thu 22 Oct 2009 17:33:04 GMT+1 saintDominick http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=62#comment32 Ref 10, Magic"I'd like to see all congressional members take a 50% paycut for the lousy job they have done. And all all non military, medical or other crucil staffers make no more than 75K..."$75K would put many civil servants at par with trash collectors in some parts of our country. With the exception of millionaires like the Bushes, Kennedys, Rockefellers and others, most members of Congress are lawyers with limited financial resources. Some even spend the nigh sleeping on a cot in their office because they can not afford to pay the exhorbitant rents charged in the DC area. Cutting their salaries in half would mean the end of the Federal Government, unless of course we replace the existing members with janitors. Contrary to what some people believe, the federal government has a very competent workforce. The only way they can compete with private industry is by offering competitive salaries and a good benefit package. Since government salaries and upward mobility opportunities are well below those offered in private industry, the only enticements are job security and a fairly good benefit package. It is bad enough to be the target of constant criticism and contempt, the last thing our civil servants need are limits that ignore individual contributions. What we should do is the opposite, we should pay competitive salaries to entice qualified personnel to fill government positions. Government is not the problem; in a society such as ours we are the government, which means it must be part of the solution. Thu 22 Oct 2009 17:13:26 GMT+1 U13817236 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=60#comment31 "With a growing sense of anger at the distance between Wall Street and Main Street, and a sense of unfairness that the bosses who'd helped fuel the crisis were getting rewarded for it, the administration obviously felt it had to act"...so naturally, it did the bare minimum in action with the intention of getting the full maximum in publicity. The majority of the seven few companies that are covered are auto firms, only three are financial corp's. As noted, most can still receive stock options. The rest of the "kings of the hill" can go right on doing whatever they please. Goldman Sachs - which paid back its TARP welfare in order to escape compensation regulation - and was central to the murky financial legerdemain that brought on the crisis, will pay out over $16 billion in bonus bucks to its kings this year. Wall St. kings will go right on slashing Main St. paupers with the enthusiastic connivance of the artful administration and the courtiers of capitol hill. Thu 22 Oct 2009 16:57:48 GMT+1 ghostofsichuan http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=58#comment30 Now that Reaganomics has run its course we should realize that unregulated markets place everyone at risk. All this nonsense about complex computer models and brain-powered investment strategies is not much different than the snake oil salesmen of the past. The issues are about ethical behaviors and honesty...both severely lacking on Wall Street. Wall Street deserves severe punishment..some might say that what they have done in the US and bankers in other countries too, are acts of treason...placing nations at great risks for purely selfish reasons assoicated only with the accumulation of wealth. I am not against the accumulation of wealth but am opposed to financial institutions placing entire economies and individual investment accounts at risk based on projections that are contrived to mislead investors. Why most bank presidents and board chairs are not in jail is beyond me. The SEC did not do it's job and the idea of self-regulation has proven to be a big mistake. How anyone can defend the system that is this corrupt is beyond comprehension. We all understand that the elected bodies were the handmaidens to all of this and the calls for control were dismissed, yet those who dismissed these warnings apparently feel no guilt or regret. The Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac government run system was just as corrupt and the legislative committee providing oversight owns must responsbilities for those failures. If you operate banks and financial services based on bonuses and high services fees, this is the outcome. That is not difficult to understand, the incentives in the system encouraged the problems, not forgetting that loans were unsecured, that in the past would never have been originated. We have corrupt people at the highest levels of financial enterprises with a self-serving political system responsible for oversight. Things may have turned out better if we had let them all fail and started all over for currently we are simply replicating the conditions that created the problem. The banks with their "Let them eat cake" attitudes beg for the guillotine. Thu 22 Oct 2009 15:54:07 GMT+1 GH1618 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=56#comment29 It's a good step, but what is really needed is regulation of all aspects of the financial industry. Deregulation of the industry, beginning with privatization of FNMA in the 1960s and revision of New Deal legislation such as Glass-Steagall in the 1980s and 1990s is what got us into this mess. Bankers need to be kept on a short leash. Thu 22 Oct 2009 15:07:22 GMT+1 corestore_org http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=54#comment28 It's not happening folks. Empty gestures. Political grandstanding. Move along, nothing to see here. If the government find a way to cut pay, the bankers will find - at minimum - 28 ways to quietly restore the cuts, before breakfast time. Governments simply can't dictate pay and conditions like that, and they look foolish if they try. It's not a fox guarding a henhouse, it's a sheep guarding a henhouse from a pack of wolves! Thu 22 Oct 2009 14:42:39 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=52#comment27 11 david. to be fair to all involved(I admit right away most spent way more than they could afford etc and no I have an old second hand banger and no debt but no possessions;)But people took on loans in a different time from when things went belly up for them. They may have had a job had things quite good, then in about 2000 the medical premiums went up. and up and up.(funny how the health insurers today claim that regulation will put prices up, how the hell can that be?) Then the Credit card rates started going up and up and up.The returns to investors went UP and UP and UP, until it all came tumbling down.The investors were the ones that wanted More return. Not happy with 3-5 % they wanted 15-20%. so those that took on debt in good faith , having sorted out their finances got screwed. People were evicted and suddenly Cheap homes were available for those blood suckers that wanted to take advantage or the over charging medical industry. as jobs were lost because healthcare costs were too high in the USA so they moved away.The greed of all was involved but I suggest the loan shark behaviour of the credit card industry and the house bubble pushing LIERS that kept telling people "you WILL make on this"(Experts pah.)The medical industries that today announce great profits. But no one here wants to discuss any of that. too bust blaming the poor.That medical industry that produces great profits THEY started this mess. and they continue this mess. But then they are financed by----Bankers.But again america will not hold them responsible because they don't really seem to think too hard about much other than war. Thu 22 Oct 2009 14:35:41 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=50#comment26 ref #23, saintDominick wrote:Ref 20, Magic"Since the UAW and SEIU are benefiting from the bailout how about cutting those esec pay by the same percentage."You could take it a bit further and instead of just punishing corporate and Labor Union executives we could impose pay restrictions on everyone. I believe the name of that economic model is socialism and if I am not mistaken it didn't work very well in Eastern Europe. _______________________________I am a bit concerned about the selective restictions. Since I was against the bailouts, I really have no objection to restrictions where they apply. But I do think union heads should have to pay as well and as I stated earlier so should the goverment. What do you thik of my suggestion post #10? Thu 22 Oct 2009 14:34:58 GMT+1 saintDominick http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=49#comment25 Ref 18, Carolinalady"I'm beginning to think that his agenda has pretty much overwhelmed Congress which grinds even slower under the recent regime of NO."President Obama's ambitious agenda is almost unprecedented, but I actually think this Congress has passed more legislation in one year than the preceding ones did in 8, except for the fact that these guys have not authorized any crusades or eavesdropping on American citizens.Unfortunately, many Democrats in the House and Senate are so scared of losing their jobs next year that they are joining the party of NO and erecting one barrier after another on issues such as healthcare and energy independence. I guess it is not a good idea to antagonize the big boys that pull the strings behind the scenes. Thu 22 Oct 2009 14:20:33 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=47#comment24 18 well said. Thu 22 Oct 2009 14:20:28 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=45#comment23 Decieler. "free market"that is the slave term of the 21 centuary. free to abuse the workers. free to ignore the lawsfree to ignore taxes to help the nation and the good of all;)free to extort money out of people by getting tax laws fixed so people have little choice but to gamble their pensions(Thank god GW pension plan was shelved), I refer to the tax incentives to a 401K etc. Free to make obscene amounts of money while claiming to be human while they watch their fellow country people die.Free to oppress the poor with lots of free market goods. like riot batons , stun shields, protective vests, armoured personal carriers with water cannons.Free to market what we think acceptable. Our drugs and booze. our tobacco but not theirs.Not their coca leaf tea. not their opium not their hashish;) there's a few un free trades but the guns and the bombs and the tanks. They are OK to trade.Free trade.Forked tongue .FT Thu 22 Oct 2009 14:19:28 GMT+1 saintDominick http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=43#comment22 Ref 20, Magic"Since the UAW and SEIU are benefiting from the bailout how about cutting those esec pay by the same percentage."You could take it a bit further and instead of just punishing corporate and Labor Union executives we could impose pay restrictions on everyone. I believe the name of that economic model is socialism and if I am not mistaken it didn't work very well in Eastern Europe. Thu 22 Oct 2009 14:13:49 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=41#comment21 I'm very strangely with St dom on this as well.They will need to compete in the market for employees, (unless some real decent people apply who have the skills but not the greed. But pay has for a long time been set to high in the first place.so there is a middle ground. But why punish those that seek to fix the system while letting those that broke it to get off scot free. IF they had all been paying a decent rate of tax in the first place a lot could be being done now to help( well OK it was spent on tarp) (I've bought several tarps they never last very long Truckers tarps their not bad) Where are the prosecution for embezzlement. that was the pay rises of the last couple of decades. Insider trading is small spuds compared to the massive amounts of Incompetence seen in the better paid circles of america. Do not allow them back on the Job and remove their wealth gained at the promise of making the investors money.Surely some can be tried. Who was it that came here and said america has advertising standards laws.If you say to a client "this is what we will give you, and you don't you are committing the typical american fraud. the fraud of words.Fake promises.Why can americans not be more professional about things. are they amateurs?American promises and oaths are not worth the words spoken. That Justice of the peace took an oath to uphold the laws. When he doesn't . america doesn't sack him or put him in jail for breaking his oath of office as a justice. America doesn't like holding people accountable for what they did. Obama is getting flack because of Bush's actions. But the right insist that Bush is old news and nothing should be done about him or dick.The managers that screwed the worlds economies. They got nothing. but all the time there are jail beds for pot heads .A nation that panders to deceit. Thu 22 Oct 2009 14:11:32 GMT+1 washuotaku http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=39#comment20 This is very bad news Mark; I work for one of those companies the Government wants to slash the Executive paychecks by 90% and nobody is taking it as good news. Several of senior members of management are retiring and/or leaving to competators, this new plan is just going to make things worse. The best solution is for the Government to not impliment these communist methology onto the companies they are supporting, but to help regulate what they can or cannot do... pay is mearly a compisation of how much one makes in order to do the job; nobody will want to do that job if the pay doesn't match. I certainly wouldn't want to be the CEO right now with a pay of close to zero with all the risk involved. Thu 22 Oct 2009 14:10:18 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=37#comment19 ref #16Our business philosophy is based on profits and rewarding performance, I believe that with the exception of those working for companies receiving public funds to stay afloat, the government should not impose arbitrary limits on executive compensation.On the issue of underperforming executives, compensation and retention ought to remain within the purview of the board of directors and stockholders, not the government.___________________________________________If the PayCzar gets involved in companies not taking a bailout than we are in a different situation.Since the UAW and SEIU are benefiting from the bailout how about cutting those esec pay by the same percentage. Thu 22 Oct 2009 13:33:02 GMT+1 dceilar http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=35#comment18 I agree with St Dom on this. These firms are still privately run companies and need to play the game of getting the best talent and getting the best out of what they have. I can imagine these companies failing because no-one will want to work for them and it'll be the tax-payer picking up the tab.You either support Capitalism or you don't. If you want these firms to remain privately run institutions then let them run as privately run institutions. If not, then you should've nationalised them without compensation when you had the chance. You could've still nationalised them and still support capitalism - you make these failing firms profitable again and then sell them to the highest bidder.Braun - there never has been or ever will be a capitalist 'free market'. It's a meaningless slogan the rich brag on about to please the punters. When did anyone in the history of the world have a 'free market'? Thu 22 Oct 2009 13:31:53 GMT+1 carolinalady http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=33#comment17 #1 Gavrielle: Yes!! We do need some serious regulation for the financial and insurance industries and I'm surprised that it hasn't reached the floor of Congress yet. The media focuses upon the President and alternately criticizes him for having too much on his plate or junketing about, but I'm beginning to think that his agenda has pretty much overwhelmed Congress which grinds even slower under the recent regime of NO. Maybe that's the plan -- see below.#6 KCcurmudgeon (are you sure you're not my dad?): I have remarked before in this forum that the President is a master strategist and plays all the media and congressional strings like a master. He has the big picture and the long view firmly in mind and doggedly works toward his goals although he isn't above taking tactical advantage of the opportunities presented by the stupidities of the opposition. Thu 22 Oct 2009 13:12:49 GMT+1 ikamaskeip http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=31#comment16 Meanwhile in the UK and the EU Member States the disgraceful rush to announce bigger bonus payouts for the year ahead amongst similarly 'Tax-funded' private institutions gathers pace!I wrote elsewhere about seeing the Formula 1 'corporate hospitality areas' in Rio last weekend being jammed with Executives and their 'ladies/hangers-on' from 2 UK Banks that received significant bail-out from the Exchequer. Looking at photos I now see several other World renowned Businesses also had some of their 'elite' suffling at the trough in Rio.How do these People and their Companies get away with it?How can a Bank (in hock by millions to the tax-payer) from beyond the UK's northern border be sending Executives by Jet in top-rated Business-class seats/service to Rio to eat pate de foie gras, swill champagne etc.? This is the sort of 'regulation' that gives the 'royal mail' strikers in G.B. and elsewhere a very good reason to tell the powers that be to stuff it! Thu 22 Oct 2009 12:44:24 GMT+1 saintDominick http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=29#comment15 I am a registered Democrat, liberal on foreign policy and conservative on domestic policies, albeit for the fact that I believe the government has a role in providing certain services, but I have a serious problem with this decision.Our business philosophy is based on profits and rewarding performance, I believe that with the exception of those working for companies receiving public funds to stay afloat, the government should not impose arbitrary limits on executive compensation.On the issue of underperforming executives, compensation and retention ought to remain within the purview of the board of directors and stockholders, not the government. Thu 22 Oct 2009 12:18:32 GMT+1 MattofNJ http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=27#comment14 Though I am conservative on most things, I am quite happy to have our "socialist" Presidential administration cut the pay of some of these fools. Maybe some of these high-priced execs will have to look for a new job. If a lower-paid employee failed as miserably as these execs, everyone would expect them to be fired--why not these execs? Thu 22 Oct 2009 11:28:17 GMT+1 Justin150 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=25#comment13 Lets assume all the executives have contracts of employment. Some are US citizens, based in the US and employed by a US company. Some will be based outside of US (probably in London) and employed by a UK subsidiary of the US bank.Maybe in the US, they can pass a law that abrogates the employment contract and allows for a change of terms without compensation. That will not work where the employee is employed in London and by a UK subsidiary of the US bank. All that will happen is the employee will sue on his employment contract against his UK employer and we will win.Simple reason, although one that US politicians are incapable of understanding, US law does not apply outside of UK.This is relevant. At AIG one of the biggest earners is based in London in their financial products division and earned c$100m last year (according to press reports so whether that is right who knows). If his bonus is based on a percentage of turnover then US govt has no right to change his employment terms.As #13 said it is a PR stunt and probably a bad thing for US. Easiest way for people to get round the problem is for the key executives to move to London. Obviously they will not do so immediately but we look forward to seeing them - we could do with the extra tax revenue Thu 22 Oct 2009 10:45:05 GMT+1 coreypaul http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=23#comment12 I'll believe it when I see it. There are sooooo many loop holes for corporations and politicians, they can move money around as easily as the "common folk" blinks. This is just a PR move to make it look like the US Gov. gives a poop about the American people. All the American people are good for is to use for money, and to keep the two-party system running its theatrics and illusion. Thu 22 Oct 2009 10:06:33 GMT+1 Via-Media http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=21#comment11 Limiting these executive's bonuses- while the right thing to do- isn't going to solve the problems besetting the international financial industry, or even big business in general. Short-term profit-taking has become so entrenched that few firms have long range plans or goals, and end up making short-sighted decisions that come back later to haunt everyone. Providing executives with short-term incentives in the form of annual bonuses is a symptom, not the problem, of what ails much corporate culture; unless the culture changes, and the regulatory system changes to stop the flagrant abuses and work-arounds, then we can be right back in this situation in 10 years.2 BraunSA Please don't kid yourself- the U.S. and other major industrialized countries do not have free markets- regulation and government service is a necessary part of our lives. "Socialism" is a bogeyman brought out any time corporate interests are threatened, but it is a not an "either-or" choice: there are varying degrees to the extent a society chooses to self-impose programs for the benefit of all. It's a range, not a black-and-white choice.Left to itself, pure market capitalism has proven again and again that corporate interests are not always in the best interests of the nation as a whole; corporations decide purely on what is best for their bottom line, and concentrate wealth into the hands of a few. Do we really want to suggest that corporations know what is best for our society? And the U.S. has always had elements of "socialism" where the people as a whole decide that they want to combine resources for the common good. Or would you suggest that we do away with, or better yet, simply contract out to corporations for our police and fire protection? Do away with the volunteer fire depts. and hire private companies? Do away with Public Schools! The Coast Guard and military and Border Patrol? All of these functions could be hired out. Look how well that worked for Italy in the Middle Ages... Thu 22 Oct 2009 09:31:16 GMT+1 D R Murrell http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=19#comment10 I have no real issue with limits on bailed out companies pay and bonuses, whether they are in the US or UK, that’s the price of going cap in hand to the government. It’s nice to see the banker bashing still going on, though I think some of that is spiteful ostrich syndrome. Yeah we should have let the greedy banks crash and burn, that would have been lots of fun, for about the hour it took for the conflagration to destroy the rest of the economy. We could have all stood around as the gloating ostriches watched their jobs and savings going up in smoke, while they smugly denied any responsibility.Obviously no one who thought the bankers should have been left to rot in their own mess actually contributed to the situation. Its shocking how few people seemed to have loans, mortgages or credit cards, I am not sure how the car or luxury goods industries ever existed since no one ever seemed to have bought brand new car, a big plasma screen TV, an iphone or any other must have gadget!I personally earn a decent wage, about the equivalent to $90,000 per anum (though I gather that figure means less in the US than the equivalent does in the UK), while I enjoy myself I haven’t bought a new car in 6 years and don’t buy every new gadget that comes along, because I actually don’t do credit. I did and got into trouble, so I bailed myself out, but people who earn much less than me seem to be able to afford these things, because of loans and credit cards.Yes the financial industry was made up of a house of cards and most people supplied them with their building material. Personal debt fuelled the bubble, sub-prime mortgages being the worse. Were the banks stupid in giving loans to people who really couldn’t afford them? Yep, just as stupid and greedy as the people, from main street, who borrowed more than they could afford.Everyone has suffered directly or indirectly from the crash, but then again the vast majority of people directly or indirectly helped cause it. The bankers who have been bailed out should not profit from being saved, then again I am not convinced that majority of people should get to play the wounded martyr role as much as they do. Thu 22 Oct 2009 09:31:05 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=17#comment9 No objection to anyone who got bailout having pay packages being regulated.now lets see the goverment clean up it own house, I'd like to see all congressional members take a 50% paycut for the lousy job they have done. And all all non military, medical or other crucil staffers make no more than 75K Thu 22 Oct 2009 08:59:35 GMT+1 mrjjjohnson http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=15#comment8 Vast amounts of taxpayers' money have been used worldwide to stop the financial industry's house of cards from collapsing. If this money had not been spent to stop the row of dominoes from falling there would have been total meltdown, i.e. the employees in the financial industry wouldn't have jobs, let alone bonuses, irrespective of how they performed. Those employees should now go down on their bended knees and thank the taxpayers for their jobs. It's time for them to come down to this planet and realise that they have a massive debt to the taxpayers which they should now repay over the coming years.This has nothing to do with Socialism or Capitalism or any other -isms. The plunderers must simply return their spoils and begin to grasp that the vast majority of the taxpaying population has had enough of their behaviour. Those banks that feel they have to pay big bonuses to retain "their brightest people" should be told to let those "brightest people" go. It's the "brightest people" who got us into this mess in the first place. Thu 22 Oct 2009 08:24:45 GMT+1 Gowers great Tiger Moth incident http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=13#comment7 This is a fantastic move, only it doesn't go far enough as top executives should be axed, rather than suffering pay cuts. The US Administration must also ensure the companies in question do not find ways to pay salaries and bonuses 'through the back door' - some companies in the UK are doing this by way of loan notes, where they promise to pay bonuses at a later date, probably when they are not under scrutiny. Let's hope Brown can implement such measures in the UK. Thu 22 Oct 2009 07:58:57 GMT+1 sizzlestick http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=11#comment6 The USA financial crisis is most illuminating. The smart ones aka smart money, Wall Street, Masters of the Universe etc are the cleverest people in the USA. During the go-go days, fat bonuses is the grand prize of capitalism. Even the 2007-2008 market meltdown is no detriment, they can always depend on socialism to take care of the financial institutions' losses. They are very good at taking care of their own ilk with pay bonuses and benefits.These stand-out smarties are so conspicuous, I wonder who are the dumbest USA citizens? It got to be their warriors in the battlefields of Iraq and Afgahistan. During the same period, Wall Street prospered till The DJ index peaked in early 2207. And Wall Street prevailed during the DJ's bottoming in late 2008 and early 2009. The non-achievement of the warrior class is too glaring to succor them from being called the dumbest. Two of their non-achievements : civil wars in the occupied territories and the re-instatement of opium cultivation after Taliban wiped it out. The most gruesome weapons they face are home-made bombs and their most uesful weapon are the airplane drones flown by pilots sitting in air-conditioned rooms. While they sweat it out among the dirt and the hostiles.Maybe its time for some career switch, Wall Street go to Afghanistan to sort it out. Whilst the current warrior class are retrenched like some of their fellow USA civillians. Let's put the smarties to work for a change. Thu 22 Oct 2009 07:30:29 GMT+1 KScurmudgeon http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=9#comment5 Perhaps this is the next phase in the Obama strategy. He waits like a cat, tail swishing ominously, until the prey accumulates enough public outrage, then he moves. So for the sector of the health care industry that has failed to cooperate with reform (Insurance), and for financial giants who feel they have no interest in caring for the public interest.Look out, Ms Pelosi - do well, or be exposed for what you are.Is it opportunism? Is it politics? Is it truth to power at last?KScurmudgeonI must be dreaming...... Thu 22 Oct 2009 07:20:26 GMT+1 Al from BR http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=7#comment4 I second that, BraunSA. The funny thing about that semi-socialist or Progressive era style bailout of Wall street last Spring is that for the time being the government, and by extension the American people, now own significant shares of these now semi-private companies. It's only logical then to conclude that those Execs now work for all of us, meaning we get to help decide the amount of their bonuses through our representatives in the government until the bailed out companies pay off their state loans and buy back the majority of the shares in their companies. Who knows how long this process will take to end, but that's how Progressivism works; it lingers. Mr. Mardell, don't get flustered by all the talk of you staying to long in D.C. Many of us here are American, and we often like to bicker about such things not because we are angry at you, but because many of us want to share with you our own special piece of America. I know that you don't want to miss out on huge national stories, so I won't pester you about it beyond this posting, but I encourage you to continue to brave this vast country of mine.I know it's not my place to tell you how to do your own job, so I won't. However, I am suggesting that it is possible to write a post on national stories from a hotel or cafe in Las Angeles, New Orleans, Seattle, Chicago, St. Louis, or Boston. And one final thought before I log off for the night, keep up the good work. Thu 22 Oct 2009 06:40:37 GMT+1 rodidog http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=5#comment3 This is what happens when you become a dependant, you lose any say in the matter. Turning a company into a ghost town is not a smart way to get a return on your investment. Could be bad for the union pension plans at GM and Chrysler. Thu 22 Oct 2009 05:58:51 GMT+1 David Cunard http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=3#comment2 #2. ct 2009, BraunSA: "And to remind you of the definition of Socialism, The best of the worst, and the worst of the best"Never having heard or read that definition, I Googled it, only to find "about 504,000" references to it, none on the first page having any connection with socialism. It seems to me that true Socialism has in fact fostered the very best brains and experience, otherwise how does one explain the USSR's achievement in space or the welfare state of the United Kingdom? At a stretch, Nazi Germany might be included, a nation which excelled in rocketry, so much so that her scientists were absorbed by the USA and without whom the race for the first man on the moon would likely have fallen to another country. "Socialism" isn't a problem in America - greed is. Thu 22 Oct 2009 05:39:04 GMT+1 BraunSA http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=1#comment1 Since the Gov't bailed them out, they (We the people), have every right to tell the bosses how much they should make. We should have never bailed them out in the first place, they should be out of a job like alot of people! But here we are, and now you see why Ford Motors said "No Thanks!" to Obama's cash in hand. What does this mean for the working man? That your children really are in danger of living under a theocracy, the religion of environmentalism and social justice. And removing risk, creating socialism, by uber-regulating, the free market. There is no in between, either we have a free market economy, or we don't, just alot of sentimental tears as it fades away... And to remind you of the definition of Socialism, The best of the worst, and the worst of the best... Thu 22 Oct 2009 03:52:41 GMT+1 Gavrielle_LaPoste http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/10/will_wall_street_slashers_impr.html?page=0#comment0 It is good news, though it would be even better if Congress put some serious regulatory legislation into place. Still, the ship of state moves slowly, but it does apparently move.And here's some very nice news out of Iraq which made my day even better. Things are so quiet that General Odierno is now saying we can accelerate the drawn down of US troops and by 2011 leave Iraq to the Iraqis! Thu 22 Oct 2009 02:41:38 GMT+1