TNR BLOGS

December 01, 2008 | 2:02 PM
December 01, 2008 | 1:00 PM
December 01, 2008 | 12:42 PM

December 01, 2008 | 11:22 AM
December 01, 2008 | 11:10 AM
December 01, 2008 | 9:57 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

December 01, 2008 | 4:08 PM
December 01, 2008 | 1:36 PM
December 01, 2008 | 12:00 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
13.10.2008
Belly-aching on the Bailout

Yes, I find the FT most informative and clarifying in these tempestuous times. Yes, tempestuous times even though the industrials index was up 936 points today. Not, by the way, on the basis of hard fact or new law. But on hope. Maybe the index will be up again tomorrow. Maybe not.

"Bail-out banks face tax burden," reads a dispatch in Monday's Financial Times. Apparently, the bill has provisions to dissuade banking houses from paying exorbitant salaries and bonuses. $500,000 seems to be the limit on which the Feds would allow tax deductions on companies that are beneficiaries of the bail-out. The limit used to be $1 million.

Half a million dollars. Horrors. How can a family live decently on that?

Now, of course, even with the previous $1 million constraint, many executives went home with $5 million and ten...or more. Their paymasters received no deductions from the excess. But, then, it came out of the profits that the banks were calculating. Today, there are no profits, and there won't be for a long time.

Half a million dollars seems a lot to me to earn from a counting house subsidized by the Feds. It isn't as if there will be a shortage of qualified staff to work at this lush sum. So what is the belly-aching about?

Middle class families will have to tighten their belts. The poor have already done that many times. The rich might have to dip into their savings--if they still have them.

Of course, there will be other consequences. Second houses (or third ones) might have to be sold, if they can be sold, and at much lower prices that for which they were insured. Those who skied in Telluride might have to ski in Sugarbush; those who went to Megeve might be forced to go to...well, you get the idea.

Posted: Monday, October 13, 2008 4:59 PM with 2 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

luispc said:

If those repulsive Persian-like practices of CEO's do not end (either spontaneously or not), something very bad will happen to the political aequilibrium of our world.

Anyway, this is all very morally uncomfortable from my point of view. But one thing is for sure: the Europeans who keep being accused of everything by everyone did not create the crisis but are paying for it. And it seems they have found the right solution for it.

Indeed, instead of Paulsons' morally repugnant and histerical idea of buying toxic assets with tax payers' money (something that did not fix the main problem which was credit freezing), they've created a solution that benefits the tax-payer and addresses the problem (securitizing interbank lending on comission + making sure the state gets equity if compromises undertaken by banks and securitized by the state are not met).

So this creates confidence on the markets, does not "rob" the tax-payer (who is very likely to make a profit by charging comissions on interbank lending securities) and eventually creates the conditions to keep everything and everyone afloat.

All those Representatives that were villified by everyone for not buying Paulson's plan (including those that explicitly said that this was a wrong medicine, from all points of view, being absolutely right) deserved an apologize and some recognition. On Obama and his team, they deserve shame for buying something so repugnant without daring to think of better alternatives.

And this should also be a motive for Americans to think about the health of their democracy. Once again the media covered for a "state of siege" and blackmailing of political institutions that led them to adopt the wrong plan without possibility of resistance...

October 14, 2008 3:05 AM

gennitydo said:

I think your numbers are off by an order of magnitude.

Llloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs received $53.97 million in compensation in 2007 plus an annual bonus of $67.9 million.  Total package = $121.87 million.

It will be a quite a pay cut down to $500,000.

October 14, 2008 5:35 AM

Double click this space to insert your ad.