Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Fired Citigroup CEO Gets Millions as Bonus


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#16 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,737 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 13 November 2012 - 03:43 PM

Guys you're not getting his point. If you don't like what Citigroup's doing, don't go there. Meanwhile, government spends your money while there is NO way to remove a publicly elected official THAT'S THE INJUSTICE


I get his point.

Here is my point. If we were a free market economy Citigroup wouldn't even be around today along with GS and BA, to name a few.

These big banks get virtually free money from the Federal Reserve and loan it to the Federal Government at virtually no risk, picking the pockets of the US taxpayer in the process.

You would have to be a fool not to be able to make a killing with the billions loaned to the federal government on a deal like that! Not so fast, these idiots leveraged themselves so heavily in the name of unbridled greed, backed in part by the FDIC, that when the economy finally tanked, the big banks almost went under.

Good thing the American Taxpayer was there to make everything OK while they continued to pay out big executive bonuses despite their stupidity. Just a few years removed and they are giving away millions yet again by taking advantage of the US Taxpayer and their sweet hookup via the FR and FG.

We do not have a free market system.

Please stop defending a crony capitalistic system that is threatening the long term survival of the United States.

#17 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,737 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:16 PM

I will be glad when investment reparations happen. If those hedge funds have any connections to 401ks etc then those gains are to go to a settlement pool

Would love to see that happen, what are the chances? Heard anything?

Good thing Chris Dodd did the right thing with the Dodd/Frank act after he got special loans from Countrywide.


Dodd should have been in jail long ago, along with Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo. Of course, these men will never see the inside of a cell. Why? Crony Capitalism.

Meanwhile Adam Sandler makes 20 mil per film.


Somebody is apparently still watching his movies. Not sure why.

#18 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,970 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 07:07 PM

CEO's get paid well? Who would have thought that.

#19 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,970 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 07:13 PM

Would love to see that happen, what are the chances? Heard anything?



Dodd should have been in jail long ago, along with Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo. Of course, these men will never see the inside of a cell. Why? Crony Capitalism.



Somebody is apparently still watching his movies. Not sure why.


Or because it would have been incredibly difficult to prove any of the accusations beyond a reasonable doubt.

#20 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,737 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 13 November 2012 - 07:41 PM

Or because it would have been incredibly difficult to prove any of the accusations beyond a reasonable doubt.


Love it how these CEOs are the smartest guys in the room, worth millions of dollars for their rare talent and decision making abilities. That is, until disaster strikes and then somehow, they never saw it coming, never even thought it was possible, must have just been bad luck.

Of course, you are right, who would know how to navigate through all the loopholes in the law and create doubt better than the people that helped write them in the first place? Add to that, the Justice Department would have to deal with testimony dragging down some of the most powerful politicians on both sides of the aisle.

Better these criminals just give the government a fraction of their ill gotten gains and admit no wrong doing, than to run the risks of a real trial and things getting messy.

That is the beauty of crony capitalism, it is a symbiotic relationship in good times and bad alike.

#21 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,476 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 10:38 AM

Yeah, because that worked out so well in 1929. 25% unemployment would make what we have today look like an economic boom!


A short history of home loans prior to Freddie and Fannie:
http://www.c-spanvid...rg/clip/4159471


Agreed banks should not be able to sell their loans. Write a bad loan and you eat your own lunch.

Private sector home loans during the housing crisis
http://www.c-spanvid...rg/clip/4159469



People stopped buying GM and Chrysler cars several years ago and guess what? They are still around.

The big banks destroyed the world economy and themselves in the process and guess what? They are still around.

Why? Because we don't have a "free market" system.

The game is intentionally rigged by big business and our corrupt representatives to prevent a "free market" economy.

You must have been preoccupied the last several decades, otherwise you would already know that.



Strangely enough, this is something that I think that we are agreeing on.

I just think that we are seeing it differently. You are saying that we don't live in a "free market" anymore....and I am agreeing with you. We don't. The government has gotten it's hands into everything.

Get out of the banking industry, and they couldn't make those stupid loans, because they would own the paper.

Get out of the auto industry, and they could have declared bankruptcy and gotten out of truly awful legacy costs, and union contracts, and started over.

They need to get out of business.

#22 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,737 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:43 PM

Strangely enough, this is something that I think that we are agreeing on.

I just think that we are seeing it differently. You are saying that we don't live in a "free market" anymore....and I am agreeing with you. We don't. The government has gotten it's hands into everything.

Get out of the banking industry, and they couldn't make those stupid loans, because they would own the paper.

Get out of the auto industry, and they could have declared bankruptcy and gotten out of truly awful legacy costs, and union contracts, and started over.

They need to get out of business.


I am with you when it comes to trying to minimize and simplify the burdens of regulation. But it is unrealistic to think we can do without it entirely.

I'm not crazy about having to follow a lot of government regulations but as a history buff it is not hard to find countless examples of death and destruction due to the private sector ignoring the safety of their employees or ripping off the consumer with false or misleading claims. Wall Street just did that by intentionally packaging high risk home loans and selling them as AAA financial products, there were no regulations requiring them to do it, it was just greed. It is precisely that type of BS that ends up forcing all Americans to endure yet more regulations.

I can remember as a kid seeing industrial waste being dumped directly from a factory just outside Charlotte into a stream. The manager of the plant was telling my dad and I how the regulations would soon change and he would no longer be able to do that, resulting in added production costs. That was decades ago, I don't doubt that textile business and it's jobs are in Mexico by now polluting their streams instead. So there are definitely economic trade offs to regulations.

However, government regulation is in large part a victim of its own success. Cars are safer in accidents than ever before, people dying of spoiled food or bad liquor is almost unheard of, when was the last time there was a major plane accident? Our air and water are safer, kids are not breathing in lead particles from auto fumes or eating poisonous lead paint chips, just to name a few. People often go through their daily lives never giving it a thought, but life is much better due to regulations.

When is comes to determining the appropriate amount of regulation, the devil is in the details.

#23 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,476 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:50 PM

Agree with those thing. 1 thing that stands out though is the fact that had the government not been in bed with the banks on the mortgage stuff, they would have never made those loans.

They couldn't have afforded to do so.

If a bank "in housed" loans like they should, we would never have this problem. However we would not have made banks and politicians billions.

#24 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,324 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:55 PM

And again. The regulators the left adores were the ones tellin congress in 01 and 03 freddie and fannie needed to be fixed. But barney frank said they we're sound. He played partisan and burned millions of people because of his ego.

And to this day f and f have YET to pay back tarp but for some odd reason the media or occupy people don't focus on that. To my knowledge.

#25 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,737 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 14 November 2012 - 01:41 PM

Agree with those thing. 1 thing that stands out though is the fact that had the government not been in bed with the banks on the mortgage stuff, they would have never made those loans.

They couldn't have afforded to do so.

If a bank "in housed" loans like they should, we would never have this problem. However we would not have made banks and politicians billions.


There are many people that think this recent recession was caused by loans to poor people that other wise wouldn't have qualified without government policies interfering with the natural order of things. Traditional poor people were not the problem.

The big problem last decade was actually with middle income families and speculators buying more than they could afford while anticipating their properties would continue to increase in value. Mortgage lenders were often making no effort to verify credit worthiness. That was not the government's doing, that was corrupt lending practices. Still the problem wouldn't have been so bad if it ended there, but those bad loans were resold often several times and ultimately incorporated into financial products that played an even bigger roll in the downfall of the world economy.

Credit being harder to get would not bother me. I don't think it is inhumane to have to rent till you have enough for a 20% down payment for a home loan. That would have gone a long way to preventing 2008, since the housing market would have never gotten overheated to begin with. I can tell you right now the big banks and the government would never go for such a sound conservative approach to home loans. Why not? Because that kind of policy would not stimulate an economy. The government, Fed and Wall St policies intentionally drove the housing boom and for a few years it made our economy look strong. Unfortunately, we were living on borrowed time, artificially stoking the economic flames with cheap money and flimsy credit standards, it was ultimately doomed to fail. Both government and big business had key roles to play in our economic melt down and they were in bed with each other from the word go.

#26 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,476 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 01:45 PM

No doubt about it.

Wasn't the poor, wasn't the middle, or the rich, but a combo of all.

Anytime you can buy a home on stated income, with 0$ down....we are going to have major issues.

Banks shout hold the paper. It's that simple.

#27 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,737 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 14 November 2012 - 01:57 PM

And again. The regulators the left adores were the ones tellin congress in 01 and 03 freddie and fannie needed to be fixed. But barney frank said they we're sound. He played partisan and burned millions of people because of his ego.

And to this day f and f have YET to pay back tarp but for some odd reason the media or occupy people don't focus on that. To my knowledge.


Lack of criminal accountability in both the political and business communities only ensures more of the same greedy immoral behavior in the future.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.