$500K Salary Tough For Banking Execs

This is a discussion on $500K Salary Tough For Banking Execs within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; By LILY FU, MyFox National NEW YORK - Last week President Obama announced that those banking executives who were accepting bailout funds would have their ...

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 82

Thread: $500K Salary Tough For Banking Execs

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member Array Reborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Rowlett, Texas
    Posts
    1,739

    $500K Salary Tough For Banking Execs

    By LILY FU, MyFox National
    NEW YORK - Last week President Obama announced that those banking executives who were accepting bailout funds would have their salaries capped at $500,000.

    Seems like plenty of money. But for many Wall Street execs, it's a tough pill to swallow.

    The New York Times pounded out some numbers to show just how the city's elite live their lives. Here are some sample yearly living expenses:

    Mortgage: $96,000
    Co-op maintenance fee: $96,000
    Summer house in Southampton: $240,000
    Taxes: $293,000
    Nanny: $45,000
    Chauffeurs, bodyguards: $192,000
    Two children in private school: $64,000
    Two vacations: $16,000

    All that adds up to $749,000.

    Now most people would say, "Cut down on the luxurious expenses, live in a cheaper apartment and commute on the Metro." But as "Sex and the City" author Candace Bushnell explained to the New York Times, it's not that easy.

    "People inherently understand that if they are going to get ahead in whatever corporate culture they are involved in, they need to take on the appurtenances of what defines that culture," she said. "So if you are in a culture where spending a lot of money is a sign of success, it's like the same thing that goes back to high school peer pressure. It's about fitting in."
    Psalms 144:1
    Blessed be the Lord my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight.
    Senior Instructor for Tactical and Defensive of Texas
    http://www.tac-def-tx.com/
    CHL INSTRUCTOR
    Retired LEO
    NRA member
    TCHA member

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array Paco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    McKinney, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    I disagree with her assumptions, it really is that easy to do:

    Mortgage: $24,400
    Co-op maintenance fee: $350 (HOA)
    Holiday Inn from Expedia.com: $150 per night (4 kids so it costs me extra)
    Taxes: $13,000 (approx before deductions, etc.)
    Nanny: $0 (we take care of our own kids, not someone else's job)
    Chauffeurs: , I actually hate when other people drive.
    Bodyguards: $250 (with rebate gift card that is all my Sigma cost me, add $25 for a box o' hollow points)
    Two children in private school: $0 (We have 4 kids and we home school)
    Two vacations: Again, . The most fun I ever had on vacation was the Holiday Inn from above at the beach that we drove to in our own car driven by me with only myself, my Wife, and my 4 kids. No Nanny, no bodyguard, no chauffeur, no personal assistant, nada!

    I may not be a big wig Wall Street tycoon, but if I loose my job I cut off the cable and start eating beans and rice until I can get a new job.

    Dang it, I am sorry guys. I did it again...

    I am using COMMON SENSE in an emotional situation.
    "Don't hit a man if you can possibly avoid it; but if you do hit him, put him to sleep." - Theodore Roosevelt

    -Paco
    http://www.shieldsd.net

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array tinkerinWstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    1,263
    I don't agree when the government startes telling private companies what wages they should be paying. Not sure where I stand on it when it's tax payer money but I find it funny how the government was in such a rush to dole out money and then set up the rules later.

    As far as Candace Bushnel is concerned, she should read The Millionaire Next Door.
    "Run for your life from the man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper's bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another-their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun."

    Who is John Galt?

  5. #4
    Ex Member Array GreenHorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Leawood Ks
    Posts
    405
    I couldn't help but notice that more than half of the 500,000$ goes straight back to the feds in taxes.

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array Tubby45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Making ammo.
    Posts
    3,048
    The government shouldn't be telling private corporations how to pay their employees.
    07/02 FFL/SOT since 2006

  7. #6
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,724
    I agree that the gubment shouldnt be telling companies how much they can pay their help, but, the banks made a deal with the devil in this situation.

    I'm not one to get worked up over what somebody else makes. We all made our choices in life, and I'm old fashioned thinking that its none of my business what somebody else earns.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  8. #7
    VIP Member
    Array archer51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    21,337
    Quote Originally Posted by tinkerinWstuff View Post
    I don't agree when the government startes telling private companies what wages they should be paying. Not sure where I stand on it when it's tax payer money but I find it funny how the government was in such a rush to dole out money and then set up the rules later.

    As far as Candace Bushnel is concerned, she should read The Millionaire Next Door.
    Have to disagree with you. Since the government is using MY/OUR to bail them out, I think they should be able to control salaries, until the bail back is paid back. I don't remember which bank it was, but they tried to pay one of the top executives his bonus with the bail out money. Left unchecked the companies will blow through the money within a year and be back begging for more.

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array packinnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by SIXTO View Post
    I agree that the gubment shouldnt be telling companies how much they can pay their help, but, the banks made a deal with the devil in this situation.

    I'm not one to get worked up over what somebody else makes. We all made our choices in life, and I'm old fashioned thinking that its none of my business what somebody else earns.
    agreed to some extent, but they(wall street execs) didn't exactly make the choice for themselves. The choice was made for them. There were a series of meetings with the company heads and FED and it was basically to say that you WILL take this money or else(not including the auto industry bailouts).
    "My God David, We're a Civilized society."

    "Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the crap out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
    -The Mist (2007)

  10. #9
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,632

    Stockholders should be setting exec compensation

    Quote Originally Posted by Tubby45 View Post
    The government shouldn't be telling private corporations how to pay their employees.
    Stockholder, through the BOD, should be setting executive compensation. When a bank accepts billions of dollars from Uncle in exchange for stock Uncle gets to say something about the way the bank is run, same as if any billionaire bought a controlling interest in any company.

    Besides, these multi-billion dollar salaries and perks which have become common recently throughout the corporate world are nothing but the stealing of stockholder equity. It is past time some regulation was in place to protect the investor---you know, you guys who have 401 Ks and state pension plans.

    If the collective stock investment of your large cap pension fund went to XXXCORP, but they had not control over how much the execs got in salary, and XXX execs took 2/3 of the invested money in salary, what would that do to the pension plan?

    Executive salary caps are badly overdue and definitely needed.

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array Tubby45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Making ammo.
    Posts
    3,048
    I strongly disagree. The government does not have the power to set wages for common workers or executives of private companies.

    What if the government cut your pay down to $6/hr?
    07/02 FFL/SOT since 2006

  12. #11
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,724
    Quote Originally Posted by Tubby45 View Post
    I strongly disagree. The government does not have the power to set wages for common workers or executives of private companies.

    What if the government cut your pay down to $6/hr?
    If the government is who I'm working for, I guess they could do that. Because the gubment pretty much bought these banks, they can dictate these things, just like it was explained in others posts.

    Now I agree the gubment shouldnt be messing with private business, but thats a whole new topic.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  13. #12
    Member Array fatcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by archer51 View Post
    Have to disagree with you. Since the government is using MY/OUR to bail them out, I think they should be able to control salaries, until the bail back is paid back. I don't remember which bank it was, but they tried to pay one of the top executives his bonus with the bail out money. Left unchecked the companies will blow through the money within a year and be back begging for more.
    That is a fair point. If they are using government money to stay afloat, the government should have some say.

    If you take out a business loan from a bank, that bank often has a lot of say in how you spend your money. They can tell you who to hire and how much to pay your management team. They can tell you where you need to direct the flow of your money. They can even restrict your funds.

    So if the banks have been putting stipulations on money they lend, a serious argument can be made that the government (the lender) should have some input as to how their money is spent.

    I agree with those that say the government should not have any say on salaries of private companies. But in a sense, these institutions are no longer private. They are owned by the tax payers in a sense, and until they are able to pay that money back their lender (the government) should be able to have oversight of their finances.

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array Tubby45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Making ammo.
    Posts
    3,048
    The government did not have the power to lend money in the first place.
    07/02 FFL/SOT since 2006

  15. #14
    Ex Member Array JOHNSMITH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    somewhere
    Posts
    1,726
    Well, its just the lifestyle that comes with that much regular income. We can't seriously expect them to live in a small 3 bedroom home in a quiet, regular suburb and drive a Kia to work. They're going to live a bit better than us and have more expenses as a result.

    I'm sure some homeless man would think we're stupid for spending money on fast food, TVs, cars (isn't a motorcycle "enough"?), nice shoes, nice clothes, homes with yards, etc. It's acceptable to us because msot of us have income levels that allow this. The same goes with executives, except they have a higher income level.

    Honestly, I just see this running away any executives with a shred of talent and bringing in crappy CEOs who are actually willing to run such a big company with such terrible problems while getting paid only $500k.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tubby45 View Post
    The government shouldn't be telling private corporations how to pay their employees.
    True, but in this case, they basically *are* government companies, so there's technically nothing wrong it. It does miss the point, though, and is just intended to make the sheeple feel like the government is doing something to the "big bad executive."

  16. #15
    Distinguished Member Array tinkerinWstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    1,263
    Quote Originally Posted by archer51 View Post
    Have to disagree with you. Since the government is using MY/OUR to bail them out, I think they should be able to control salaries, until the bail back is paid back. I don't remember which bank it was, but they tried to pay one of the top executives his bonus with the bail out money. Left unchecked the companies will blow through the money within a year and be back begging for more.
    Maybe you should have read my very next sentence.

    And I'll reiterate the second half of that next sentance that said the difference here is when the "guberment" (as Sixto says) decided to make up the rules AFTER doling out our tax money instead of before.

    There were banks who didn't WANT the bailout money but were all called in and told they NEEDED to take the money otherwise it would show that some banks were weaker than others and could have caused a run on the banks. Anyone see the full page ad in the Wall Street Journal that basically told off the media and government to go pound sand?
    "Run for your life from the man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper's bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another-their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun."

    Who is John Galt?

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. RANT: Why is our banking system so out of date?!
    By JOHNSMITH in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: February 20th, 2011, 08:36 PM
  2. APNewsBreak: $500K donated to Ariz. to defend law
    By ErnieNWillis in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 8th, 2010, 05:22 PM
  3. OnLine Banking?
    By ArmyCop in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2009, 10:57 AM
  4. $1 million in salary being paid to officers restricted in their jobs.
    By DaveH in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: May 4th, 2009, 10:30 AM