PastaJoe Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 "If you somehow take that bonus out of the economy, it really will create unemployment," he said on CNN's "American Morning." "It means less spending in restaurants, less spending in department stores, so everything has an impact." "Those bonuses, if they are reversed, are going to cause unemployment in New York," the self-described fiscal conservative said. "I remember when I was mayor, one of the ways in which you determine New York City's budget, tax revenue is Wall Street bonuses. "Wall Street has $1 billion, $2 billion in bonuses, the city had a deficit. Wall Street has $15 billion to $20 billion, New York City had a $2 billion, $3 billion surplus, and it's because that money gets spent. That money goes directly into the economy. First of all, it gets taxed as income. Secondly, it gets taxes again when somebody buys something with it." http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/30/giu...uses/index.html You freaking moron, these financial institutions want to be bailed out by our tax dollars, and then still want to give executive bonuses while laying off workers. And you think that bonuses result in the city's fiscal strength. You're telling me that if they don't get their bonuses, the executives are going to start brown bagging it for lunch? How about using that bonus money to avoid laying off workers or paying off the bad debt accumulated by the executive's decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Bonuses= about 75% of a Wall Street workers pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 There are bonuses and then there are BONUSES. I got a hefty bonus this past Christmas (in lieu of a raise)...but it definitely wouldn't float NYC. It wouldn't even float dogpatch. The obscene multi-million dollar C-level bonuses are what's drawing the most ire. Those go to a few individuals at a company. Handing out millions of dollars across 5,000 managers is not the same thing. Cutting the former would be justice to some; cutting the latter would definitely impact a city's economy. Assuming they didn't spend it all in New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Connecticut, where many of them probably live.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 There are bonuses and then there are BONUSES. I got a hefty bonus this past Christmas (in lieu of a raise)...but it definitely wouldn't float NYC. It wouldn't even float dogpatch. The obscene multi-million dollar C-level bonuses are what's drawing the most ire. Those go to a few individuals at a company. Handing out millions of dollars across 5,000 managers is not the same thing. Cutting the former would be justice to some; cutting the latter would definitely impact a city's economy. Assuming they didn't spend it all in New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Connecticut, where many of them probably live.... Is something preventing you from starting a company? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Is something preventing you from starting a company? Why would I want to do that? I have no desire to run a company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Why would I want to do that? I have no desire to run a company. Well, moving up the ladder to stratospheric compensation usually entails a career of risks, gambles, compulsive work, and luck. For every guy who is getting a million, there are a thousand that gambled on the wrong field at the wrong time, or made the wrong move, or just couldn't cut it. Starting a company is one path, but it sounds like you prefer a safer more conservative career. That's fine, and probably smart. But begrudging the ambitious their rewards is the quickest way to throw a wrench into an innovative economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 There are bonuses and then there are BONUSES. I got a hefty bonus this past Christmas (in lieu of a raise)...but it definitely wouldn't float NYC. It wouldn't even float dogpatch. The obscene multi-million dollar C-level bonuses are what's drawing the most ire. Those go to a few individuals at a company. Handing out millions of dollars across 5,000 managers is not the same thing. Cutting the former would be justice to some; cutting the latter would definitely impact a city's economy. Assuming they didn't spend it all in New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Connecticut, where many of them probably live.... Remember a lot of bonuses are in the form of out of the money stock options. Worthless if the company doesn't improve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Well, moving up the ladder to stratospheric compensation usually entails a career of risks, gambles, compulsive work, and luck. For every guy who is getting a million, there are a thousand that gambled on the wrong field at the wrong time, or made the wrong move, or just couldn't cut it. Starting a company is one path, but it sounds like you prefer a safer more conservative career. That's fine, and probably smart. But begrudging the ambitious their rewards is the quickest way to throw a wrench into an innovative economy. How many of these CEOs who've run the company into the ground are the same people that actually started them? I don't have a problem with risk and reward. I am typically willing to take a risk and it's always paid off. I hit the executive level ten years ago, worked really hard and got rewarded very well. When my son died I found I really didn't care that much and so I opted to let someone who did take over. I don't begrudge anyone the fruits of their labors, but I'm saying that a CEO who !@#$ed up so badly that his company needed a billion-dollar bailout from the government does NOT deserve a bonus. Pay for performance. They gambled, they lost. If the problem wasn't so deep and if the implication for our economy wasn't so dire - I'd say flush them all right down the proverbial toilet. They're lucky they have jobs with income and benefits. Plenty of innocent people who were not greedy and fiscally irresponsible are now wondering how they'll pay their bills due to these scumbags and they do not deserve one dime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts