Want to get mad? Read about Merrill Lynch's Bonuses

[shaqswede]

$10MM is also immaterial to the people barely getting by. Seriously screw the little people, I mean honestly who needs them to spend money and... oh wait

NO NO I KNOW, banks are the ones who really need money to loan out. So see, when those banks lose a ton of money, the only thing they can really do is give out huge bonuses to those who already have money... hmm that doesn't sound right for some reason. Odd.

Ok, so the huge bonuses are definitely a lot smaller than what they are normally. I'll try and make the point again that nobody was complaining (loudly anyways) about their bonuses when these companies were making money and the economy was much more sound. Proportionally, these bonuses are much smaller than what is typically given. Don't get me wrong, I'd love something in that wheelhouse. I just don't see my contributions to the company being as great as being responsible for the jobs of hundreds of thousands of workers.

When the overall confidence of the country is as low as it has been, people are going to focus on the "have's" much more than the "have-not's" and compare it to their own situation. I just think that the proportion of net income relative to the salaries is not that bad. Would you be screaming and yelling about a CEO who makes only $1.8MM a year when that company made $8.7MM in net income through the first 3 quarters of '08 (this is the old bank I used to work for)? Which looks worse, the 1.8 on the 8.7 or the 10mil on 1.2billion (which is what BofA made in the first 3 quarters of 08)? Bank of America still made profit in 2008. With the whole country crumbling, the company still made money.

I don't mind the large bonuses. It looks bad because it's a large number. But you gotta realize what kinds of crazy numbers these companies deal with on a daily basis.

[0ni0n]

Ok, so the huge bonuses are definitely a lot smaller than what they are normally. I'll try and make the point again that nobody was complaining (loudly anyways) about their bonuses when these companies were making money and the economy was much more sound. Proportionally, these bonuses are much smaller than what is typically given. Don't get me wrong, I'd love something in that wheelhouse. I just don't see my contributions to the company being as great as being responsible for the jobs of hundreds of thousands of workers.

When the overall confidence of the country is as low as it has been, people are going to focus on the "have's" much more than the "have-not's" and compare it to their own situation. I just think that the proportion of net income relative to the salaries is not that bad. Would you be screaming and yelling about a CEO who makes only $1.8MM a year when that company made $8.7MM in net income through the first 3 quarters of '08 (this is the old bank I used to work for)? Which looks worse, the 1.8 on the 8.7 or the 10mil on 1.2billion (which is what BofA made in the first 3 quarters of 08)? Bank of America still made profit in 2008. With the whole country crumbling, the company still made money.

I don't mind the large bonuses. It looks bad because it's a large number. But you gotta realize what kinds of crazy numbers these companies deal with on a daily basis.

I think a lot people are frustrated because bankers privatize the profits and socialize the losses. They will take a huge share of profit home when the business is profitable but they aren't penalized when there's a huge loss. Shareholders are the one that ultimately pay for the losses in the form of reduced share price. Some bankers make gargantuan bets with other people's money with impunity and enrich their own coffers, it's no wonder there's so much outrage in a time such as this.

It's also flawed logic to say the bonuses are ok because they are smaller than before. They are ridiculously high anyway to begin with compared to any other form of compensation, barring attorney comp. A friend of mine who started working on Wall Street 3 years ago at the age of 23 (after getting his BA in finance), his salary was $150,000 with a 50,000 signing bonus. And it would have only gone up if this financial debacle didn't take place.

[MrW]

We aren't talking about BoA. We're talking about Merrill Lynch. They had 27 BILLION in losses for 2008 but REWARDED top execs with almost 1 BILLION in bonuses. No excuse on the planet justifies these bonuses. Who cares that they're responsible for a ton of people. They DID NOT do their jobs and are getting rewarded.

Even that isn't why people are angry. People are angry at the fact that poorly run banks that made terrible decisions in years past are getting bailed out. Even THAT isn't the issue. Most people are upset at the fact that THE REST OF US are paying it back with BILLIONS of bailout money because a company/companies made terrible business decisions. If BoA made money in 2008 then why do they need, what was it, 45 BILLION in the bailout plan? Or maybe it's the fact that it's going to cost American tax payers somewhere around 2500 to 5000 in taxes. I think that is why most people are angry.

Edit: And what 0ni0n said.

[Blarg]

I found 2 bucks on the street yesterday so the trickle down has already reached us, it's all ok now.

[Dimmauk]

NY AG: Before Losing $15 Billion, Merrill Lynch Quietly Made 696 Employees Millionaires



All when they lose 15.31 Billion (recent Quarter), 27 Billion on the Year.

you can read the NY AG's PDF here http://www.oag.state.ny.us/media_cen...l%20letter.pdf

http://i39.tinypic.com/15ogtfs.jpg

[Muffins]

http://i39.tinypic.com/15ogtfs.jpg

FFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

[Neosutra]

Id be mad if I wouldnt do the same thing.

This is like getting mad at congress for voting for pay raises for themselves.

[Brill Weave]

OH MY GOD! You mean a business gave it's top level people bonuses while the company posted a huge loss?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?! SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING!

[MrW]

Nobody cares these people are making bonuses. People care when it's their money that's being fucked with. Lose all the money you want and give what you have to whoever you want. But don't take from me (me as in taxpayers).

[Mizango]

America! FUCK YEAH!

[Olo401]

Nobody cares these people are making bonuses. People care when it's their money that's being fucked with. Lose all the money you want and give what you have to whoever you want. But don't take from me (me as in taxpayers).

This is THE issue here, although the fact that executives who fail to perform receive bonuses is an issue as well. We'll all whine about these guys getting the big pay days all the time, but when those bonuses are being funded by $150-200 bucks taken out of our meager paychecks every week it's a HUGE fucking problem.

[0ni0n]

American capitalism strike again!

[eunhye]

time to play one of these things are not like the other:
http://images.eonline.com/eol_images...dya.021109.jpg
http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/G...97758_4672.jpg
http://thoughtmerchant.files.wordpre...ncy-pelosi.jpg
http://www.funny-potato.com/blog/wp-...rack-obama.jpg

[Maxxthepenguin]

Guys, without those bonuses those poor folks would only be making like 125k/yr.

Clearly they lowball salaries and add bonuses later.

[Tristam]

Pfft, this was all part of the plan, now these millionaires will have tons of money to spend on american made goods thus stimulating the economy. The job market will rebound any day now.....


Oh wait you mean they might not do that?

[shaqswede]

I'm just coming across as my point of view. I don't have the biggest issue with it. That's all I'm saying. Perfectly fine if everyone else does.

Also, if we're getting all these tax cuts are you really going to be seeing the hit on your paycheck?

One more thing. The government kind of pressed the issue with Bank of America's purchase of Merrill. In Merrill Deal, U.S. Played Hardball - WSJ.com

[Jaybar]

America's Yacht makers will see a boom this quarter.

[Dimmauk]

These were not Bonuses, they were "Awards"

[deivi]

whats with this cunt?

[zoobernut]

Increasing post count to post in advanced?