I was right! HAHAHAHAHA!

I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

pahunkboy -> I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 8:48:20 AM)
A } $144 BILLION Wall Street is on track to pay its employees $144 billion this year, breaking a record for the second year in a row, the Wall Street Journal reports. Despite financial reform intended to curb compensation, and a steep decline in trading volume, pay in the financial services industry has shown few signs of fading. Pay is expected to rise at 26 out of the 35 firms according to the WSJ. According to it's analysis, the $144 billion overall figure is a 4 percent increase over last year's $139 billion. Revenue on Wall Street grew only 3 percent this year, the WSJ says, but, unlike at some businesses outside the financial sector, employee compensation remains a high priority.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 8:52:32 AM)
Right about what, and whats your point?

pahunkboy -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 8:53:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Right about what, and whats your point? Meet the owners of this country... and it is NOT you.

Lucylastic -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 8:54:22 AM)
a clock is right twice a day.. you got some catchin up to do.... and I dont see it happening again any time soon

pahunkboy -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 8:57:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic a clock is right twice a day.. you got some catchin up to do.... and I dont see it happening again any time soon LOL. yeah- I am sure it will blow over. ;-0~

EternalHoH -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 9:03:16 AM)
Compensation detached from reality. In our world, our compensation is based on productive work accomplished. In Wall Street's world, compensation is detached from productive work accomplished. Just like an ordinary welfare mom. Except this version of the welfare mom has incredible support from the right, too, not just the left. Today, Wall Street compensation is tied to proprietary trading - which is not working as an investment bank on behalf of your clients, but rather gambling for your own corporate benefit in financial casinos using borrowed money. The problem never gets solved because the voting minions are easily distracted into thinking a $20 trillion government deficit is a bigger problem than $700 trillion in gambling debt cultivated by the unregulated private sector.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 9:14:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH In Wall Street's world, compensation is detached from productive work accomplished. WS compensation is no more detatched from productive work than any other service job.

pahunkboy -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 9:45:00 AM)
Yeah- we dont need any more bean counters.

Fellow -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 9:51:21 AM)
quote: WS compensation is no more detatched from productive work than any other service job. This is true but, we need to consider, Wall Street belongs to a parallel universe and the proportions differ by several orders of magnitude.

stef -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 10:10:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy Yeah- we dont need any more bean counters. We need fewer unemployed insane people. ~stef

pahunkboy -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 10:19:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy Yeah- we dont need any more bean counters. We need fewer unemployed insane people. ~stef I cant come to the phone. I am counting beans.

popeye1250 -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 11:02:42 AM)
It's odd, people who are making $200,000-$400,000 in salary getting bonuses sometimes double or triple their salaries. But, people making $35k to $75k lucky if they get a Christmas turkey. So, the people who don't need "bonuses" get them but the people who do need "bonuses" don't get them,...right?

pahunkboy -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 11:05:14 AM)
Yeah, Popeye knows who owns the country. He was right too.

NewOCDaddy -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 11:20:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 It's odd, people who are making $200,000-$400,000 in salary getting bonuses sometimes double or triple their salaries. But, people making $35k to $75k lucky if they get a Christmas turkey. So, the people who don't need "bonuses" get them but the people who do need "bonuses" don't get them,...right? What you dont seem to understand is that the former group commands total compensation of double or triple their base salaries, but they but 1/2 to 2/3 of it at risk based on their performance. Their performance has direct impact on the bottom line of the company and are rewarded or punished commensurately. The people making $35-$75k put no compensation at risk as long as they put in their hours, because their performance has so little leverage in the outcome of the business.

LaTigresse -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 11:48:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 It's odd, people who are making $200,000-$400,000 in salary getting bonuses sometimes double or triple their salaries. But, people making $35k to $75k lucky if they get a Christmas turkey. So, the people who don't need "bonuses" get them but the people who do need "bonuses" don't get them,...right? I agree. Just as preposterous as people getting Social Security that don't need it!

BeingChewsie -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 11:53:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 It's odd, people who are making $200,000-$400,000 in salary getting bonuses sometimes double or triple their salaries. But, people making $35k to $75k lucky if they get a Christmas turkey. So, the people who don't need "bonuses" get them but the people who do need "bonuses" don't get them,...right? Right. People sell their labor or service for the going rate. For some people that going rate is much higher and includes a bonus. Same way a cardio-thoracic surgeon makes more than a counter person at Dunkin Donuts. The less people that can do your job, the higher the rate you can command.

EternalHoH -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 11:57:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NewOCDaddy What you dont seem to understand is that the former group commands total compensation of double or triple their base salaries, but they but 1/2 to 2/3 of it at risk based on their performance. Their performance has direct impact on the bottom line of the company and are rewarded or punished commensurately. Under typical circumstances, yes. Under present day Wall Street circumstances, no. You are attempting to associate pay with corporate performance. Corporate performance for an investment bank should be based on being an investment bank for their clients, and profiting from such activities. Today, its all about proprietary trading. Its all about borrowing money and using it to execute bets on your own corporate behalf, not on the behalf of your clients. Its the difference between making an honest wage, and winning at the track. When you win at the track, it has nothing to do with the business principles that drive compensation based on performance. The two are completely detached. These people are borrowing money to place bets at the casino. How they split their gambling winnings has nothing to do with an individual putting their compensation at risk as part of a compensation process that involves being judged on how well they perform on behalf of their clients. And when the bank operating as the bookie that took all those bets goes bust, and cannot pay up, don't worry, the taxpayer will come to the rescue. The bankers have their payday based on a good day at the casino, and the taxpayer holds the "too big to fail" bag.

popeye1250 -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 12:01:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NewOCDaddy quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 It's odd, people who are making $200,000-$400,000 in salary getting bonuses sometimes double or triple their salaries. But, people making $35k to $75k lucky if they get a Christmas turkey. So, the people who don't need "bonuses" get them but the people who do need "bonuses" don't get them,...right? What you dont seem to understand is that the former group commands total compensation of double or triple their base salaries, but they but 1/2 to 2/3 of it at risk based on their performance. Their performance has direct impact on the bottom line of the company and are rewarded or punished commensurately. The people making $35-$75k put no compensation at risk as long as they put in their hours, because their performance has so little leverage in the outcome of the business. Well what I do seem to understand is, "The Law of Supply and Demand." There is no "shortage" of people who would work at half those salaries and no bonuses. It's like lawyers, there are so many of them now that you can go "lawyer shopping" to get the best deal. And if an employee has "so little leverage" in a co. then maybe that position shouldn't be in existence. It's funny, many people don't think that the law of supply and demand applies to "them." These are just some of the things that they "don't teach you at Harvard Business School."

popeye1250 -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 12:06:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BeingChewsie quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 It's odd, people who are making $200,000-$400,000 in salary getting bonuses sometimes double or triple their salaries. But, people making $35k to $75k lucky if they get a Christmas turkey. So, the people who don't need "bonuses" get them but the people who do need "bonuses" don't get them,...right? Right. People sell their labor or service for the going rate. For some people that going rate is much higher and includes a bonus. Same way a cardio-thoracic surgeon makes more than a counter person at Dunkin Donuts. The less people that can do your job, the higher the rate you can command. Correct but we're not talking thoracic surgeons here, we're talking about positions that you can learn in 3-6 months of OJT, less if you're bright.

LaTigresse -> RE: I was right! HAHAHAHAHA! (10/12/2010 1:26:32 PM)
Good luck getting a securities license in 3-6 months.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.100586E-02