shape
carat
color
clarity

wall street bonuses to be paid out of bailout money

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

movie zombie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 20, 2005
Messages
11,879
and another angry soul:

A big reward for screwing up
November 18, 2008 - 6:18am.
By DAN K. THOMASSON

This could only happen in America.


The insurance giant AIG that is more than a little responsible for the current economic crisis reportedly has decided to lay out $503 million of early deferred compensation to top employees so they won''t abandon a ship that is being kept afloat only by billions upon billions of taxpayer dollars.


Think about that for a minute, folks. These are the same guys whose unfettered greed and arrogance helped destroy the housing market and bring about the worst economic downslide since the Great Depression. Why would anyone want to keep them? Is it so that they can continue to exert policies that have doubled the amount of government aid first estimated to be necessary to prevent the company from collapsing? That puts the new figures in the neighborhood of $150 billion. By the way, AIG''s losses amounted to $37.6 billion in the first nine months of 2008.


In case you don''t know what deferred compensation is, it is part of one''s salary placed in a fund to be paid to an executive at a later date, usually upon retirement. It lowers the employee''s immediate tax bill by deferring the tax on the amount set aside. For some time now it has been used to attract and keep top talent. At least that is the excuse for it most often cited by the AIGs of the world. It is, of course, just another example of bloated executive compensation that once again proves Will Rogers'' depression era assessment that this is the only country on the planet that will be driven to the poor house in a limousine.


One could argue correctly that after all the money in the deferred compensation fund held by the company belongs to its employees. But it is ludicrous to contend that unless it is paid out now in the midst of continued financial hemorrhaging these employees will go elsewhere. Where? To a tropical island where they can live in luxury? Please, let them go. Maybe jail would be a more appropriate place.


The government contends that it has put strict limits on AIG''s executive pay and benefits. Bully for it. Otherwise, it would be like paying Jesse James for robbing the bank. We all know that there has been far too much of that in recent years. Some $33 billion in executive bonuses was paid out last year at a time the financial industry was beginning its free fall and it was clear that the taxpayers were going to have to save the day somehow, if possible. Does anyone doubt for a moment that obscene executive pay has played a role in the current crisis by encouraging excessive risk taking?


Recent published newspaper reports show that Standard & Poor 500 Chief Executive Officers averaged $10.5 million in overall compensation last year -- 344 times the pay of the typical American worker. These same statistics show that from 1989 to 2007 compensation for the average CEO went up 167 percent as compared to about 10 percent for most workers. In addition, the comparison shows that U.S. chief corporate officers are the highest paid in the developed world.


It is everyone''s dream to make a lot of money -- to build the better mousetrap and realize the benefits from it. But that is not what has been happening. That dream has been turned into a nightmare by managers of financial institutions and hedge funds who merely move money about or manipulate stock with the blessing of friendly boards of directors while creating nothing but their own wealth. The government continued, meanwhile, to pledge fealty to a deregulated free market with little oversight. The red flags have been waving out there for some time. Now that they have been forcibly brought to our attention, we should hope it is not too late to avoid the kind of pain we endured from 1929 to 1939.


That may not be possible unless we bring down to earth the sky''s-the-limit policies of compensation committees and corporate boards that are tone deaf to public relations and replace them with those who understand it is one thing to be paid well but quite another to be rewarded well beyond one''s actual worth. (E-mail Dan K. Thomasson, former editor of the Scripps Howard News Service, at thomassondan(at)aol.com.)


 

movie zombie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 20, 2005
Messages
11,879
Date: 11/18/2008 11:44:27 AM
Author: AGBF






Date:
11/17/2008 2:05:24 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

then don''t buy a house. since when was it illegal to rent? why buy something that you can''t afford?

I don''t usually follow this thread, but I just saw this.


Homeowners are subsidized by the government which gives them tax deductions on mortgage interest. Renters aren''t.


In my opinion, that is unfair. It is welfare for the rich.


Deborah
34.gif
yes, it is.

movie zombie
 

NewEnglandLady

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
6,299
Date: 11/18/2008 11:44:27 AM
Author: AGBF






Date:
11/17/2008 2:05:24 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

then don''t buy a house. since when was it illegal to rent? why buy something that you can''t afford?

I don''t usually follow this thread, but I just saw this.


Homeowners are subsidized by the government which gives them tax deductions on mortgage interest. Renters aren''t.


In my opinion, that is unfair. It is welfare for the rich.


Deborah
34.gif

I''m not a homeowner so I am not clued into the tax breaks, but are the tax breaks larger than the annual personal property taxes the homeowner must pay?
 

Irishgrrrl

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
4,684
Date: 11/18/2008 12:41:51 PM
Author: movie zombie

Date: 11/18/2008 11:44:27 AM
Author: AGBF







Date:
11/17/2008 2:05:24 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

then don''t buy a house. since when was it illegal to rent? why buy something that you can''t afford?

I don''t usually follow this thread, but I just saw this.


Homeowners are subsidized by the government which gives them tax deductions on mortgage interest. Renters aren''t.


In my opinion, that is unfair. It is welfare for the rich.


Deborah
34.gif
yes, it is.

movie zombie
Well, I don''t know if I''d call it "welfare for the rich" . . . more like "welfare for the rich and middle-class," since the majority of homeowners are far from rich. And it works about as well as the welfare system for the poor, in my experience.

DH and I own a modest two-story, three-bedroom house which we bought in April, 2004 (before the real estate boom). Every year at tax time, we carefully itemize our deductions, including our mortgage interest. Those itemized deductions have NEVER been more than our standard deduction, so we receive no tax benefit whatsoever from owning our home.
 

Dancing Fire

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
33,852
Date: 11/18/2008 11:44:27 AM
Author: AGBF






Date:
11/17/2008 2:05:24 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

then don''t buy a house. since when was it illegal to rent? why buy something that you can''t afford?

I don''t usually follow this thread, but I just saw this.


Homeowners are subsidized by the government which gives them tax deductions on mortgage interest. Renters aren''t.


In my opinion, that is unfair. It is welfare for the rich.


Deborah
34.gif
i don''t understand why people still get fool by these tax deductable B.S.,you will never come out ahead b/c on the avg you would only get back 30 cents for evey dollar you paid on interest. that just don''t add up in my book.
14.gif
 

Dancing Fire

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
33,852
Date: 11/18/2008 1:21:07 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl

Date: 11/18/2008 12:41:51 PM
Author: movie zombie


Date: 11/18/2008 11:44:27 AM
Author: AGBF








Date:
11/17/2008 2:05:24 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

then don''t buy a house. since when was it illegal to rent? why buy something that you can''t afford?

I don''t usually follow this thread, but I just saw this.


Homeowners are subsidized by the government which gives them tax deductions on mortgage interest. Renters aren''t.


In my opinion, that is unfair. It is welfare for the rich.


Deborah
34.gif
yes, it is.

movie zombie
Well, I don''t know if I''d call it ''welfare for the rich'' . . . more like ''welfare for the rich and middle-class,'' since the majority of homeowners are far from rich. And it works about as well as the welfare system for the poor, in my experience.

DH and I own a modest two-story, three-bedroom house which we bought in April, 2004 (before the real estate boom). Every year at tax time, we carefully itemize our deductions, including our mortgage interest. Those itemized deductions have NEVER been more than our standard deduction, so we receive no tax benefit whatsoever from owning our home.
yup, you tell them Irish
36.gif
it doesn''t take a mathematical genius to figure it out.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
Date: 11/18/2008 6:33:22 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

Date: 11/18/2008 1:21:07 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl


Date: 11/18/2008 12:41:51 PM
Author: movie zombie



Date: 11/18/2008 11:44:27 AM
Author: AGBF









Date:
11/17/2008 2:05:24 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

then don''t buy a house. since when was it illegal to rent? why buy something that you can''t afford?

I don''t usually follow this thread, but I just saw this.


Homeowners are subsidized by the government which gives them tax deductions on mortgage interest. Renters aren''t.


In my opinion, that is unfair. It is welfare for the rich.


Deborah
34.gif
yes, it is.

movie zombie
Well, I don''t know if I''d call it ''welfare for the rich'' . . . more like ''welfare for the rich and middle-class,'' since the majority of homeowners are far from rich. And it works about as well as the welfare system for the poor, in my experience.

DH and I own a modest two-story, three-bedroom house which we bought in April, 2004 (before the real estate boom). Every year at tax time, we carefully itemize our deductions, including our mortgage interest. Those itemized deductions have NEVER been more than our standard deduction, so we receive no tax benefit whatsoever from owning our home.
yup, you tell them Irish
36.gif
it doesn''t take a mathematical genius to figure it out.
You''d get to deduct if you were single...

And no I''m not advocating divorce.
2.gif
 

Skippy123

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Messages
24,300
Date: 11/18/2008 6:33:22 PM
Author: Dancing Fire




Date: 11/18/2008 1:21:07 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl





Date: 11/18/2008 12:41:51 PM
Author: movie zombie






Date: 11/18/2008 11:44:27 AM
Author: AGBF

I don't usually follow this thread, but I just saw this.


Homeowners are subsidized by the government which gives them tax deductions on mortgage interest. Renters aren't.


In my opinion, that is unfair. It is welfare for the rich.


Deborah
34.gif
yes, it is.

movie zombie
Well, I don't know if I'd call it 'welfare for the rich' . . . more like 'welfare for the rich and middle-class,' since the majority of homeowners are far from rich. And it works about as well as the welfare system for the poor, in my experience.

DH and I own a modest two-story, three-bedroom house which we bought in April, 2004 (before the real estate boom). Every year at tax time, we carefully itemize our deductions, including our mortgage interest. Those itemized deductions have NEVER been more than our standard deduction, so we receive no tax benefit whatsoever from owning our home.
yup, you tell them Irish
36.gif
it doesn't take a mathematical genius to figure it out.
Hmmm, if you lived somewhere where houses are expensive, then I am sure the amt in interest is pretty high and property taxes are high and you can deduct those and probably exceed the std deduction (what Deb is talking about).
34.gif
eta: I just noticed, this isn't about the bailout anymore.
 

Irishgrrrl

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
4,684
Date: 11/18/2008 8:46:49 PM
Author: ksinger
You''d get to deduct if you were single...

And no I''m not advocating divorce.
2.gif
LOL! Karen, you''re very right . . . my standard deduction would be smaller if I were single. But, I think having DH around is probably worth the tax disadvantages . . . probably!
2.gif
9.gif
11.gif
 

Irishgrrrl

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
4,684
Date: 11/18/2008 10:00:09 PM
Author: Skippy123
Hmmm, if you lived somewhere where houses are expensive, then I am sure the amt in interest is pretty high and property taxes are high and you can deduct those and probably exceed the std deduction (what Deb is talking about).
34.gif
eta: I just noticed, this isn''t about the bailout anymore.
Skip, that''s very true. Fortunately, the cost of living is pretty reasonable in our area. There are parts of the country where houses are much cheaper, and there are parts of the country where houses are much more expensive. I''m sure there are plenty of couples living in pricier areas who DO get tax advantages by deducting their mortgage interest, just due to the fact that their loans are so much bigger than ours. I guess we should have bought a more expensive house if we wanted to be able to deduct our mortgage interest . . . I wonder if there''s a mortgage lender somewhere who is still willing to lend DH and I way too much money for a new house! LOL!
9.gif


And you''re absolutely right about this thread being off topic . . . sorry! Threadjack ended!
12.gif
 

Skippy123

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Messages
24,300
Date: 11/19/2008 8:38:15 AM
Author: Irishgrrrl
Skip, that's very true. Fortunately, the cost of living is pretty reasonable in our area. There are parts of the country where houses are much cheaper, and there are parts of the country where houses are much more expensive. I'm sure there are plenty of couples living in pricier areas who DO get tax advantages by deducting their mortgage interest, just due to the fact that their loans are so much bigger than ours. I guess we should have bought a more expensive house if we wanted to be able to deduct our mortgage interest . . . I wonder if there's a mortgage lender somewhere who is still willing to lend DH and I way too much money for a new house! LOL!
9.gif


And you're absolutely right about this thread being off topic . . . sorry! Threadjack ended!
12.gif
I was just teasing on the last part; I didn't even realize we were off topic until after I posted. hehe
3.gif
I wonder what is going to happen to the US auto industry?
34.gif
 

Irishgrrrl

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
4,684
Date: 11/19/2008 10:33:07 AM
Author: Skippy123
I was just teasing on the last part; I didn''t even realize we were off topic until after I posted. hehe
3.gif
I wonder what is going to happen to the US auto industry?
34.gif
Very good question! I''d like to know that too. I have an uncle who works for Ford, and I think he''s been a little nervous lately!
40.gif
 

meresal

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
5,720
I haven't kept up with this thread, so if this has been said, just ignore.

I work for a bank that was one of the 9 banks "chosen by the gov" to take money and deal with their accounting regarding the funds. Found out today, that "IF" we receive bonuses, it won't be until at least mid next year. All financial instutions involved are being required to submit prior years salary and bonus records to be compared with the current year and any funds received from tax payers money.

Thank you AIG... My 12 hours days should payoff, sometime, maybe.
 

fleur-de-lis

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
1,343
Date: 11/18/2008 6:33:22 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
Date: 11/18/2008 1:21:07 PM

Author: Irishgrrrl


Date: 11/18/2008 12:41:51 PM

Author: movie zombie



Date: 11/18/2008 11:44:27 AM

Author: AGBF










Date:
11/17/2008 2:05:24 PM

Author: Dancing Fire


then don''t buy a house. since when was it illegal to rent? why buy something that you can''t afford?


I don''t usually follow this thread, but I just saw this.



Homeowners are subsidized by the government which gives them tax deductions on mortgage interest. Renters aren''t.



In my opinion, that is unfair. It is welfare for the rich.



Deborah

34.gif

yes, it is.


movie zombie
Well, I don''t know if I''d call it ''welfare for the rich'' . . . more like ''welfare for the rich and middle-class,'' since the majority of homeowners are far from rich. And it works about as well as the welfare system for the poor, in my experience.


DH and I own a modest two-story, three-bedroom house which we bought in April, 2004 (before the real estate boom). Every year at tax time, we carefully itemize our deductions, including our mortgage interest. Those itemized deductions have NEVER been more than our standard deduction, so we receive no tax benefit whatsoever from owning our home.
yup, you tell them Irish
36.gif
it doesn''t take a mathematical genius to figure it out.

Geez, how low are your state taxes where you live?

Here in CA, the 9.5% state tax alone brings most skilled workers WAY over the standard deduction on their federal taxes. All mortgage interest, etc. is gravy.

f-d-l

P.S. Hey there, fellow SupaGrannies!!!
35.gif
 

Dancing Fire

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
33,852
Date: 11/15/2008 8:10:12 PM
Author: tradergirl
I had a hell of a year because I''m a short seller. Last year was good too. In 2003, I barely kept the lights on and didn''t pay myself anything.
must be a happy day for TG....the rich get richer !!
 

tradergirl

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
865
DF: this is the nastiest market action I can remember in over 20 years in the market. S&P is under 800 right now on Globex.

Thinking about buying DIG though, what do you think?
 

Dancing Fire

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
33,852
Date: 11/20/2008 2:54:29 AM
Author: tradergirl
DF: this is the nastiest market action I can remember in over 20 years in the market. S&P is under 800 right now on Globex.

Thinking about buying DIG though, what do you think?
you''re asking the wrong person.i have no luck lately but i''d think oil is near a short term bottom. i bought VLO @ $32.50
39.gif
 

Irishgrrrl

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
4,684
Date: 11/19/2008 11:19:44 PM
Author: fleur-de-lis

Geez, how low are your state taxes where you live?

Here in CA, the 9.5% state tax alone brings most skilled workers WAY over the standard deduction on their federal taxes. All mortgage interest, etc. is gravy.

f-d-l

P.S. Hey there, fellow SupaGrannies!!!
35.gif
Hey there, Supa Granny!
9.gif


I live in PA and our state taxes are pretty low. It''s actually very frustrating when I do our taxes every year, because our itemized deductions always come in just a hair under the standard deduction. That''s why I keep itemizing every year . . . in the vain hope that, someday, we''ll get to deduct more than the standard deduction! LOL!
22.gif
 

purrfectpear

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
4,079
I pay $29,000 a year in mortgage interest alone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top