CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6859
I was talking to someone last night who works for ISME - the Irish Small and Medium Enterprises association - and got to hear some anecdotes from the so called 'cold face' of the current banking crisis. One example was of an entrepreneur running a company that turned a month-on-month profit contacting the ISME for cash flow advice. He was running a large overdraft and needed an expansion of said facility. ISME told him instead to get a term loan, which he subsequently applied for. The bank told him that in addition to rejecting his loan application (the equity he had in his premises, equipment, etc. was apparently no good to them - he even offered his home as collateral) they would in fact also be halving his overdraft facility - thereby inevitably and unavoidably forcing him out of business and perhaps being left unable to pay back some/many of his business creditors.

Is this right? Is this 'the free market in operation'? Successful businesses being wound down because of irresponsibility and flawed risk assessment in the banking sector? There is something fundamentally wrong here, I just can't put my finger on it.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-12-22 05:43:22)

ATG
Banned
+5,233|6833|Global Command
The governments doing everything for the banks and nothing for the little guy will lead to eventual social unrest and breakdown.
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6852|San Diego, CA, USA
In the United States our government gave $25 billion to Bank of America (BofA), with basically no strings attached.  A few weeks later they laid of 35,000 workers.

The sooner we let the failed institutions fail or go into bankruptcy, the sooner we'll be out of this economic downturn.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6905|132 and Bush

ATG wrote:

The governments doing everything for the banks and nothing for the little guy will lead to eventual social unrest and breakdown.
Not true. They passed the debt forgiveness act and the Housing and Economic Recovery Act. There is more in the works. I feel like I'm getting jipped.. I need to stop paying my mortgage.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7011|67.222.138.85

CameronPoe wrote:

Successful businesses being wound down because of irresponsibility and flawed risk assessment in the banking sector?
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7040|Salt Lake City

The Salt Lake Tribune wrote:

Flying J. Inc., which operates 250 travel plazas and fuel stations across the country, on Monday filed for bankruptcy, citing a cash shortage brought on by plummeting oil prices and problems getting credit.
Wonder why they are having problems getting credit.  The banks have been lent billions and are still paying execs multi-million dollar salaries.

AP wrote:

AP study finds $1.6B went to bailed-out bank execs

By FRANK BASS and RITA BEAMISH
Associated Press Writers
AP Photo
AP Photo/David Karp
Advertisement
Buy AP Photo Reprints

Your Questions Answered
Ask AP: Rising oceans and volcanoes, trash at sea

Banks that have their hands out in Washington this year were handing out multimillion-dollar rewards to their executives last year.

The 116 banks that so far have received taxpayer dollars to boost them through the economic crisis gave their top tier of executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses and other benefits in 2007, an Associated Press analysis found.

That amount, spread among the 600 highest paid bank executives, would cover the bailout money given to 53 of the banks that have shared the $188 billion that Washington has doled out in rescue packages so far.

Some banks trimmed their executive compensation in the face of faltering performance that foreshadowed the current economic crisis, but they still granted multimillion-dollar packages. Benefits included cash bonuses, stock options, personal use of company jets and chauffeurs, home security, country club memberships and professional money management, the AP review of federal securities documents found.

Such bonuses amount to a bribe for executives "to get them to do the jobs for which they are well paid in the first place," said Rep. Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who chairs the House Financial Services committee.

"Most of us sign on to do jobs, and we do them best we can," said Frank. "We're told that some of the most highly paid people in executive positions are different. They need extra money to be motivated!"

The AP review of annual reports that the banks file with the Securities and Exchange Commission found that the average paid to each of the banks' top executives was $2.6 million in salary, bonuses and benefits.

Among other findings:

- Lloyd Blankfein, president and chief executive of Goldman Sachs, took home nearly $54 million in compensation last year. The company's top five executives received a total of $242 million.

This year, Goldman's seven top-paid executives will work for their base salaries of $600,000, with no stock or cash bonuses, the company said. Last spring, before Wall Street's staggering losses and layoffs mushroomed, Goldman described its pay plan as essential to retain and motivate executives "whose efforts and judgments are vital to our continued success, by setting their compensation at appropriate and competitive levels." Goldman spokesman Ed Canaday declined to comment beyond that written report.

The New York-based company, after gains last year, on Dec. 16 reported its first quarterly loss since it went public in 1999. It received $10 billion in taxpayer money on Oct. 28.

- Even where banks cut back on pay, some executives were left with seven- or eight-figure compensation that most people can only dream about. Richard D. Fairbank, the chairman of Capital One Financial Corp., took a $1 million hit in compensation after his company had a disappointing year, but still got $17 million in stock options. The McLean, Va.-based company received $3.56 billion in bailout money on Nov. 14.

- John A. Thain, chief executive of Merrill Lynch, topped all corporate bank bosses with $83 million in earnings last year. Thain, a former chief operating officer for Goldman Sachs, came to Merrill Lynch in December 2007, avoiding the blame for a year in which Merrill lost $7.8 billion. Since he began work late in the year, he earned $57,692 in salary, a $15 million signing bonus and an additional $68 million in stock options.

Like Goldman, Merrill tapped taxpayers for $10 billion on Oct. 28.
Yeah, so much for the bailout.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6859

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Successful businesses being wound down because of irresponsibility and flawed risk assessment in the banking sector?
in the banking sector
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6905|132 and Bush

@ Agent_Dung_Bomb
Barney Frank. Would expect anything less from him?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7040|Salt Lake City

Kmarion wrote:

@ Agent_Dung_Bomb
Barney Frank. Would expect anything less from him?
Not quite sure what you mean.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6905|132 and Bush

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

@ Agent_Dung_Bomb
Barney Frank. Would expect anything less from him?
Not quite sure what you mean.
He has a history of letting things go to hell and then pointing the finger while acting like he's outraged. I mean c'mon, he's been on the House Financial Services Committee since 2003. He's been the chairmen for the last two.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7040|Salt Lake City

Kmarion wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

@ Agent_Dung_Bomb
Barney Frank. Would expect anything less from him?
Not quite sure what you mean.
He has a history of letting things go to hell and then pointing the finger while acting like he's outraged. I mean c'mon, he's been on the House Financial Services Committee since 2003. He's been the chairmen for the last two.
I don't really care about his comments.  My point is posting the article is what these banks have done with millions of dollars supplied by the feds to keep them afloat.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7011|67.222.138.85

CameronPoe wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Successful businesses being wound down because of irresponsibility and flawed risk assessment in the banking sector?
in the banking sector
This made it sound like to me the business wasn't so sound.

CameronPoe wrote:

(the equity he had in his premises, equipment, etc. was apparently no good to them - he even offered his home as collateral)
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6709|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

ATG wrote:

The governments doing everything for the banks and nothing for the little guy will lead to eventual social unrest and breakdown.
Not true. They passed the debt forgiveness act and the Housing and Economic Recovery Act. There is more in the works. I feel like I'm getting jipped.. I need to stop paying my mortgage.
The problems all started with the Fed Reserve.  Once that institution was put into place, we sealed our fate as "fucked."

Even before the Fed Reserve, the main issue was just pure, unadulterated greed.  When people bought stocks on margin in the lead up to the stock market crash in '29, that should've been a sign that some regulation was needed.

Then again, we had antitrust laws before that -- which were born out of the greed of monopolies.

So ultimately, the lesson learned would seem to be that a certain amount of regulation is necessary to keep the elite rich from fucking things up with their irresponsible greed.  Instead, what we've done is encouraged even individuals to be irresponsible with these bailout plans for everyone from banks, to GM, to homeowners that never should've gotten a loan in the first place.

We're so fucked....
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6905|132 and Bush

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Not quite sure what you mean.
He has a history of letting things go to hell and then pointing the finger while acting like he's outraged. I mean c'mon, he's been on the House Financial Services Committee since 2003. He's been the chairmen for the last two.
I don't really care about his comments.  My point is posting the article is what these banks have done with millions of dollars supplied by the feds to keep them afloat.
I find this to be even more troubling.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6905|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

So ultimately, the lesson learned would seem to be that a certain amount of regulation is necessary to keep the elite rich from fucking things up with their irresponsible greed.  Instead, what we've done is encouraged even individuals to be irresponsible with these bailout plans for everyone from banks, to GM, to homeowners that never should've gotten a loan in the first place.

We're so fucked....
Yes, the problem is everyone is irresponsible. But when the government mandated certain loan practices they forced lending to people who never had a chance to make their loan payments. That rippled through the entire lending market and set the bar so low that even other non GSE organizations had to follow. Otherwise they would have lost a their chunk of the market share, including non sub prime loans (Government loans had doubled). Also consider when buying those government backed loans (Fannie/Freddie) on secondary market ability to pay isn't a factor. Why would a bank care if the government says they will guarantee that the lender will not lose their ass? But what happens when that guarantee flops? Part of this problem was the government action.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7040|Salt Lake City

Kmarion wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


He has a history of letting things go to hell and then pointing the finger while acting like he's outraged. I mean c'mon, he's been on the House Financial Services Committee since 2003. He's been the chairmen for the last two.
I don't really care about his comments.  My point is posting the article is what these banks have done with millions of dollars supplied by the feds to keep them afloat.
I find this to be even more troubling.
I absolutely agree.  There was much talk about regulation on how the money would be spent before they started giving it out, but things still got rushed through with little to no oversight.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6709|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

So ultimately, the lesson learned would seem to be that a certain amount of regulation is necessary to keep the elite rich from fucking things up with their irresponsible greed.  Instead, what we've done is encouraged even individuals to be irresponsible with these bailout plans for everyone from banks, to GM, to homeowners that never should've gotten a loan in the first place.

We're so fucked....
Yes, the problem is everyone is irresponsible. But when the government mandated certain loan practices they forced lending to people who never had a chance to make their loan payments. That rippled through the entire lending market and set the bar so low that even other non GSE organizations had to follow. Otherwise they would have lost a their chunk of the market share, including non sub prime loans (Government loans had doubled). Also consider when buying those government backed loans (Fannie/Freddie) on secondary market ability to pay isn't a factor. Why would a bank care if the government says they will guarantee that the lender will not lose their ass? But what happens when that guarantee flops? Part of this problem was the government action.
Absolutely, but this is why I support regulations on speculation and irresponsible greed, not on how banks lend to people.

I think we can agree that the Community Reinvestment Act was full of shit.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6905|132 and Bush

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

I don't really care about his comments.  My point is posting the article is what these banks have done with millions of dollars supplied by the feds to keep them afloat.
I find this to be even more troubling.
I absolutely agree.  There was much talk about regulation on how the money would be spent before they started giving it out, but things still got rushed through with little to no oversight.
There was actually a thought process behind it, not that I necessarily agree. If you presented full disclosure and listed what banks got what (and for what), it would send further panic through the market and in turn people would "make a run" on the banks. That lack of confidence would make any bailout useless and would help to expedite the total collapse. That is why only a select few have been privy to the entire situation.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6905|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

I think we can agree that the Community Reinvestment Act was full of shit.
Part of it yes. The biggest impact was the fact that Fannie and Freddie were essentially cooking the books. They needed designated oversight from a neutral source. Did you know that over 85% of all mortgages in the US have at some point been "touched" by the government on the secondary market? But 88% of all mortgages originate privately. Fannie and Freddie have been extremely busy. Japan recognizes crap when it see's it. Why can't we? Could it have anything to do with the $175 million in lobby money Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac spent over the last 10 years?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6709|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I think we can agree that the Community Reinvestment Act was full of shit.
Part of it yes. The biggest impact was the fact that Fannie and Freddie were essentially cooking the books. They needed designated oversight from a neutral source. Did you know that over 85% of all mortgages in the US have at some point been "touched" by the government on the secondary market? But 88% of all mortgages originate privately. Fannie and Freddie have been extremely busy. Japan recognizes crap when it see's it. Why can't we? Could it have anything to do with the $175 million in lobby money Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac spent over the last 10 years?
I suppose it's time to put a bullet through Barney Frank's skull.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6905|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I think we can agree that the Community Reinvestment Act was full of shit.
Part of it yes. The biggest impact was the fact that Fannie and Freddie were essentially cooking the books. They needed designated oversight from a neutral source. Did you know that over 85% of all mortgages in the US have at some point been "touched" by the government on the secondary market? But 88% of all mortgages originate privately. Fannie and Freddie have been extremely busy. Japan recognizes crap when it see's it. Why can't we? Could it have anything to do with the $175 million in lobby money Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac spent over the last 10 years?
I suppose it's time to put a bullet through Barney Frank's skull.
Yes it angers me too. But at some point we have to realize that it is we, the poor oppressed and ill served constituents, that continue to enable these people. I just wished people looked deeper and really explored the issue. If there is a silver lining it's in the fact that pain and suffering is a great motivator. People are once again educating themselves. An informed voter is the only way to get a democracy in line. It's a long road back but I still prefer it over anarchy.

So much blame and criticism is dealt to the executive branch. Yet the people who are most responsible for crafting this debacle are rarely singled out. I believe this is because it takes a consorted effort to sift through the lies. It's easier for us to accept the simple answers.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7065

Cam, nice sig.  May I see the story where you found that? 



p.s.  and you call me distasteful
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6709|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


Part of it yes. The biggest impact was the fact that Fannie and Freddie were essentially cooking the books. They needed designated oversight from a neutral source. Did you know that over 85% of all mortgages in the US have at some point been "touched" by the government on the secondary market? But 88% of all mortgages originate privately. Fannie and Freddie have been extremely busy. Japan recognizes crap when it see's it. Why can't we? Could it have anything to do with the $175 million in lobby money Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac spent over the last 10 years?
I suppose it's time to put a bullet through Barney Frank's skull.
Yes it angers me too. But at some point we have to realize that it is we, the poor oppressed and ill served constituents, that continue to enable these people. I just wished people looked deeper and really explored the issue. If there is a silver lining it's in the fact that pain and suffering is a great motivator. People are once again educating themselves. An informed voter is the only way to get a democracy in line. It's a long road back but I still prefer it over anarchy.

So much blame and criticism is dealt to the executive branch. Yet the people who are most responsible for crafting this debacle are rarely singled out. I believe this is because it takes a consorted effort to sift through the lies. It's easier for us to accept the simple answers.
Absolutely, but Democrats winning House Seats in Massachusetts is about as certain as Republicans winning House Seats in Utah.

Frank's constituents obviously aren't thinking when they go to the voting booth.
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|7020

Kmarion wrote:

@ Agent_Dung_Bomb
Barney Frank. Would expect anything less from him?
Barney Frank is a stain... He is a lot of the reason things are messed right now... then to listen to that asshole grill AIG and others on Capitol Hill... he has balls that clank... Massachusetts needs to send this dirtbag packing... they won't, but they should...
Love is the answer
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6457|what

usmarine wrote:

Cam, nice sig.  May I see the story where you found that? 



p.s.  and you call me distasteful
Search

http://www.theonion.com/content/infogra … _victories
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard