# Interchangeable carbon blobs. Only 1% generate any wealth. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 15, 2011, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976 "2011-05-15T11:53:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/81 "2011-05-17T17:53:03Z")
> [@Le\_Jacquelope](#): > > For those who believe that workers are by and large expendable and that only 1 out of 100 people ever generate wealth, there seems to be no answer to some basic questions about this: > > 1. How can you manufacture much of anything without workers to help you? Namely, any operating system, cars or iPods? > 2. Get rid of all the interchangeable carbon blobs - namely, that other 99% - and who will buy your stuff? > 3. How can you generate any wealth without anyone to buy your stuff? > > Basically: what wealth can you generate if you provide all the supply and there’s no demand? You seem to be confusing the words “interchangeable” with “expendable” They’re not the same. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/82 "2011-05-17T18:16:52Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > \ I see you accusing me of a rant yet you are the one with zero citations to backup any of your assertions choosing to nitpick to make your point. The overall wealth disparity of the US is not in question. The financial collapse is not in question. Unemployment is not in question. Flat wages in the past decade in the country are not in question. The rich getting richer while everyone else goes the other way is not in question. Corporate treatment of workers when the corporation has nothing restraining them is not in question. Cites for them have been provided, plenty more where they came from. These are nationwide issues. These are historical issues. You have supplied no answer for why people at the top, who make substantial amounts of money, are not accountable when it all goes south but continue to make that money. You have not answered why MY tax money should save them. Why MY tax money should pay their bonuses. Why I get taxed at a higher rate than they do. Why the people who actually generate that wealth for the company (i.e. the workers) should not share in the company’s prosperity (certainly they are the ones who take it in the ass when things go bad…bye bye job, be bye 401k, bye bye pension…guys at the top get a bonus though). ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/83 "2011-05-17T18:16:52Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Nobody is denying that some people generate more wealth than others. What you said in your first post was that just 1 out of 100 people generate wealth. That is, quite plainly, wrong. But I’m not saying everyone generates the same amount. And unfortunately I was a little too loose with my verbiage. Everyone working generates _some_ wealth. But consider that we have a lot of people making $30k a year, and a few people making $30million per year. When the numbers orders of magnitude different, I have a tendency to drop off the smaller portion. If you make $50k a year and your kid makes $10 a week with his paper route, which of you is the wage earner in the family? Do you list that $10 on your taxes? What’s even more significant about the 1 in 100 is that generally speaking the other 99 fail. 100 people submit a story to be published, only 1 is selected meaning only 1 generates wealth. Like I said with Walmart, there have been hundreds of failed discount department stores. Walmart wasn’t the only one at the time in that location, but how many are still in existence? > [@RickJay](#): > > And even the NBA comparison demonstrates the completely arbitrary nature of deciding who creates wealth. Rose is merely an employee; he’s not the guy who runs the Chicago Bulls or the NBA. Only if you get confused with what we’re talking about. Of NBA players only a handful get paid the big bucks. Teams compete to get those players. Next you’ll notice there are a lot of NBA teams, only a few of which are any good in any given year. How many fail? Then, consider basketball leagues. Why do people watch the NBA and not the WNBA? Or any other league? The NBA is just 1 of hundreds of leagues that people could watch. And basketball is just one of many sports. Why aren’t people watching professional waterpolo? Of all the sports invented, why is basketball so popular? The NBA provides a service people will pay a lot of money for, how much are tickets to a local high school game? Lots of leagues tried and most failed. The Bulls put together a team people will pay to watch. Lots of team owners fail to do that and go bankrupt. And again, we look at the makeup of the Bulls and ask who is generating wins, Rose or the guy that washes the jerseys? Both are important, one is more interchangeable than the other. > [@RickJay](#): > > The NBA, as a business enterprise, would likely not be affected at all if Derrick Rose walked off the edge of the earth, and even the effect on the Bulls would be miniscule. So although Rose is highly paid, and rightly so, the truth is that if he wasn’t around someone else would get the money and the overall impact on the NBA’s product quality and resulting revenue would be barely noticeable. Rose is not an easily replaced talent for the Bulls in terms of their team, but in terms of pro basketball he is quite interchangeable. Rose specifically may not be the best example, but look at all the basketball leagues without Rose and tell me which is doing better. How many other leagues can you name? Like removing Stephen King, when you start taking away the top talent the fans stop showing up for games (or buying books), more importantly ad revenue falls. I’ve lived in cities where the top talent leaves and the team falters. A few years of that and ticket sales slump, then the team moves to Memphis. > [@RickJay](#): > > By your logic, I could quite easily argue that the real wealth generator there is the owner of the Bulls. That is true, like I said back in the beginning we have a situation where multiple people come together with their specialties. The owner of the Bulls can’t do what Rose does, Rose can’t do what the owner does. Rose will be a great basketball player even if he goes to Europe for a year. And that team will very likely do better as a result. The owner of the Bulls could start a hockey team and probably do very well. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/84 "2011-05-17T18:23:31Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > You have not answered why MY tax money should save them. Why MY tax money should pay their bonuses. Why I get taxed at a higher rate than they do. Wait, what the fuck? When did that become a relevant question? I noticed you chose to ignore my questions. But here’s the answer to yours: America voted for the wrong politicians, do you need a cite for that? Would you like me to link to the election results of the past 30 years? Reagan, Clinton, and Bush were all two term presidents, voters were happy to re-elect them. They are the ones that taxed you and gave your money away. If you have a beef take it up with them, most are still in office. Your question has NOTHING to do with capitalism or the OP, but failed political policy. Face it, you get the politicians you deserve. They were the ones that removed regulation, failed to put in useful regulation, and failed to enforce the regulations on the books. 2008 happened because of that, not because of Dick Fuld. Now tell me, with a cite, why does Derrick Rose get paid more than the concession stand, and why is that okay with you? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/85 "2011-05-17T18:26:02Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Wait, what the fuck? When did that become a relevant question? I noticed you chose to ignore my questions. > > But here’s the answer to yours: America voted for the wrong politicians, do you need a cite for that? Would you like me to link to the election results of the past 30 years? Reagan, Clinton, and Bush were all two term presidents, voters were happy to re-elect them. They are the ones that taxed you and gave your money away. If you have a beef take it up with them, most are still in office. Your question has NOTHING to do with capitalism or the OP, but failed political policy. Face it, you get the politicians you deserve. They were the ones that removed regulation, failed to put in useful regulation, and failed to enforce the regulations on the books. 2008 happened because of that, not because of Dick Fuld. > > Now tell me, with a cite, why does Derrick Rose get paid more than the concession stand, and why is that okay with you? Corporations have overwhelming control of politicians and the political process. Should not be news to you. Derrick Rose does not hire the concession stand employee nor does Derrick Rose pay him. Derrick Rose has zero to do with the concession guy. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/86 "2011-05-17T18:30:56Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Corporations have overwhelming control of politicians and the political process. Should not be news to you. It is news! I had no idea they got to vote, here I thought it was only citizens that got to vote. > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Derrick Rose does not hire the concession stand employee nor does Derrick Rose pay him. Derrick Rose has zero to do with the concession guy. Again, you’ve avoided the question: Why is Rose paid $5million per year when the concession guy makes minimum wage? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/87 "2011-05-17T18:31:38Z")
Because no one is arguing for absolute income equality, you are arguing against it, and are gleefully pointing out the absurdity of a position not offered. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/88 "2011-05-17T18:33:35Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > If nothing else it is bad for the economy. Concentrating wealth in a few hands comes nowhere near providing the economic stimulus that spreading the money around lots of less wealthy people would. You still need to prove this statement or admit it’s bullshit. I’ll wait. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/89 "2011-05-17T18:39:07Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Because no one is arguing for absolute income equality, you are arguing against it, and are gleefully pointing out the absurdity of a position not offered. Wrong. I am arguing that people should get paid for what they provide. Others are suggesting the opposite. **Whack-a-Mole** continues to bitch that CEO’s make 550x what the other employees make. So what’s the alternative? Step in and take a bunch of the CEOs money and give it to the employees? We’ve now had the Gini coefficient dragged out (and claimed it was a cite), are you prepared to tell us what the goal should be? I think we should aim to be more like Ethiopia, there’s is nice and low. Wouldn’t we all be better off living in Ethiopia? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/90 "2011-05-17T18:40:28Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > You still need to prove this statement or admit it’s bullshit. I’ll wait. You’re kidding, right? We need to prove to you that in a consumer-driven economy, it is important that the consumers have enough money to buy the products? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/91 "2011-05-17T18:48:03Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > It is news! I had no idea they got to vote, here I thought it was only citizens that got to vote. What planet are you living on? You really think corporations and the wealthy have no more control over what happens in Congress than Joe the Plumber? > [@](#): > > Again, you’ve avoided the question: Why is Rose paid $5million per year when the concession guy makes minimum wage? Derrick Rose has an agent and is in a union. Besides which no one, including me, is suggesting the concession guy get paid the same as Derrick Rose. There is a distinct difference in their contribution to the profitability of the organization and that greater contribution should be reflected in their compensation. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/92 "2011-05-17T18:52:04Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Wrong. I am arguing that people should get paid for what they provide. Others are suggesting the opposite. **Whack-a-Mole** continues to bitch that CEO’s make 550x what the other employees make. So what’s the alternative? Step in and take a bunch of the CEOs money and give it to the employees? Yes. When the CEOs take that money they are taking it from shareholders and/or employees. No one is saying they should earn minimum wage but why is 50x average compensation not enough? Works fine for people elsewhere in the world. > [@](#): > > European CEOs make half the pay > > Regardless of their performance or the size of company, American bosses rake in far bigger rewards, beneficiaries of a superstar culture and more passive shareholders. > > Forgive European CEOs if they suffer from a bit of paycheck envy. > > They’re not doing bad, mind you. Many still get to use the word “million” when tallying up their compensation. But compared to their American counterparts, whose total pay increased an average 27% last year, they’re practically destitute. > > \ > > Deutsche Telekom (DT, news, msgs) Chairman and Chief Executive Kai-Uwe Ricke got $3.3 million in salary and bonus last year, and he accrued $400,000 in incentive pay. His counterpart at AT&T (T, news, msgs), Edward Whitacre, had a pay package worth more than $38 million. That included $9.2 million in salary and bonus, $4.7 million in long-term incentive payouts and $24.8 million worth of long-term incentive grants. > > Ricke got paid one-tenth as much as Whitacre even though Ricke manages a bigger company; Deutsche Telekom has annual revenue of around $75 billion, while AT&T’s is $50 billion. > > SOURCE: [http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/CompanyFocus/EuropeanCEOsMakeHalfThePay.aspx](http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/CompanyFocus/EuropeanCEOsMakeHalfThePay.aspx) ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/93 "2011-05-17T18:56:35Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > You still need to prove this statement or admit it’s bullshit. I’ll wait. Good grief… Warren Buffet may be a billionaire but he is still likely to buy only one iPod. Apple makes money by selling millions of them. If people do not have money to buy millions of them then Apple has no market to speak of. > [@](#): > > **Rich Americans Save Tax Cuts Instead of Spending, Moody’s Says** > > Give the wealthiest Americans a tax cut and history suggests they will save the money rather than spend it. > > Tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 under President George W. Bush were followed by increases in the saving rate among the rich, according to data from Moody’s Analytics Inc. When taxes were raised under Bill Clinton, the saving rate fell. > > The findings may weaken arguments by Republicans and some Democrats in Congress who say allowing the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to lapse will prompt them to reduce their spending, harming the economy. > > SOURCE: [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-13/rich-americans-save-money-from-tax-cuts-instead-of-spending-moody-s-says.html](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-13/rich-americans-save-money-from-tax-cuts-instead-of-spending-moody-s-says.html) ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/94 "2011-05-17T20:00:36Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > You’re kidding, right? We need to prove to you that in a consumer-driven economy, it is important that the consumers have enough money to buy the products? No, you need to prove that wealth transfer is the way to achieve that. That goes for **Whack-a-Mole** too. Taking money from Steve Jobs, giving it to poor people, so that they can buy iPods from Steve Jobs. It’s obvious trickle down doesn’t work, so either prove that trickle up does work, or accept that government involvement doesn’t always help. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/95 "2011-05-17T20:08:19Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Besides which no one, including me, is suggesting the concession guy get paid the same as Derrick Rose. There is a distinct difference in their contribution to the profitability of the organization and that greater contribution should be reflected in their compensation. Progress. That’s what we’ve been trying to tell you about CEO’s. They get paid more because of their contribution to the profitability of the organization. Tell me, how much is Dick Fuld getting paid now? More or less than $350million? You’ll notice he’s not a CEO any more. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/96 "2011-05-17T20:47:04Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Yes. > > When the CEOs take that money they are taking it from shareholders and/or employees. > > No one is saying they should earn minimum wage but why is 50x average compensation not enough? Works fine for people elsewhere in the world. First of all, the CEO is not stealing that money from anyone, you do realize that right? And the company that pays them isn’t stealing the money either. They provide a product/service people want, which is better than the competitor. Who are you to tell them what level of compensation is appropriate? And I see you’ve once again posted that bullshit comparing US CEOs to Europeans. You know what, American basketball players get paid more too, are you ready to go after their salaries as well? How about instead of posting the same bullshit rhetoric over and over you have the balls to tell us what you think should happen. Do you want a government panel to approve executive compensation? Do you want to mandate that it be a fixed ratio related to the average/median/lowest employee? What are you actually trying to say when you post that stupid statistic? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/97 "2011-05-17T21:23:53Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > No, you need to prove that wealth transfer is the way to achieve that. > > That goes for **Whack-a-Mole** too. > > Taking money from Steve Jobs, giving it to poor people, so that they can buy iPods from Steve Jobs. > > It’s obvious trickle down doesn’t work, so either prove that trickle up does work, or accept that government involvement doesn’t always help. This tells some of that story: > [@](#): > > The accompanying table, which is adapted from the book, tells a remarkably consistent story. It shows that when Democrats were in the White House, lower-income families experienced slightly faster income growth than higher-income families — which means that incomes were equalizing. In stark contrast, it also shows much faster income growth for the better-off when Republicans were in the White House — thus widening the gap in income. > > The table also shows that families at the 95th percentile fared almost as well under Republican presidents as under Democrats (1.90 percent growth per year, versus 2.12 percent), giving them little stake, economically, in election outcomes. > > SOURCE: [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/business/31view.html?\_r=1](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/business/31view.html?_r=1) While it is not talking about a direct wealth transfer (e.g. take money from the rich and give to the poor) it does show that when income inequality shrunk the wealthy actually did a tad _better_ than they do when income inequality grows. More: > [@](#): > > When tax legislation was signed by Clinton in 1993 – raising the top tax rate to 39.6 percent from 31 percent – the saving rate fell from 12.1 percent in the second quarter to 9.5 percent in the first quarter of 1994. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index rose 1.9 percent from July through September, after little change the previous three months. > > When the first Bush tax cuts were signed into law in June 2001, pushing the top rate down to 35 percent, the wealthy boosted savings. The saving rate climbed to 2.8 percent in the first quarter of 2002 from minus 2 percent in the second quarter of 2001. The increased savings coincided with a 1.1 percent decline in the S&P 500 index. > > SOURCE: [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-13/rich-americans-save-money-from-tax-cuts-instead-of-spending-moody-s-says.html](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-13/rich-americans-save-money-from-tax-cuts-instead-of-spending-moody-s-says.html) The issue is not so much having Steve Jobs write me a check. It is about evening the playing field. How about Dick Fuld and Jobs and Buffet pay the same tax rate I do (never mind the higher marginal rate they theoretically would pay but don’t). Most of Fuld’s income was in stock and that stock is taxed at the Capital Gains rate which is lower than I pay and probably lower than you pay on our salary. You are also financing Wall Street profits right now. Essentially the [banks are borrowing from the US government](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/26/fed-lending-helped-wall-street_n_853884.html) at shockingly low rates (0.5% or lower). They are then turning around and buying government debt and getting 2-3.5% on that money. The loans they took were backed by junk-rated bonds. The government loans were meant to stimulate credit to the public. Banks have slashed that lending though tightening credit lines. Why bother lending to business when the government will essentially hand you free money with no risk? Make no mistake, as a tax payer YOU are paying the banks. It’d be little different than if you just wrote a check to BofA every week. Smart of the banks I suppose. Why not? Good for you or me or the economy? Nope. Good for bank CEOs? Yep. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/98 "2011-05-17T21:28:46Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Progress. That’s what we’ve been trying to tell you about CEO’s. They get paid more because of their contribution to the profitability of the organization. > > Tell me, how much is Dick Fuld getting paid now? More or less than $350million? You’ll notice he’s not a CEO any more. Fuld works for a hedge fund now (Matrix Advisors). No details on how much he is making but I bet it’s not a $50,000/year desk job. Why would Fuld care if he had no job now anyway? Living on $350 million a problem? What Fuld did was make risky, short term bets that were terrible for long-term stability and growth. He was incented to make short term profits. His compensation did not align him with the best interests of his company or stock holders. He pilfered the system and walked away a rich man. I’m sure he’s all broken up about losing his job. :rolleyes: Not to mention instead of allowing other Wall Street firms to fail (as they would have) taxpayers (you and me) bailed them out. Did they suffer consequences? None I see. > [@](#): > > The Merrill bonuses were 22 times larger than those paid by AIG ($3,620 million versus $165 million). They were also very large relative to the TARP monies allocated to Merrill. The Merrill bonuses were the equivalent of 36.2% of TARP monies Treasury allocated to Merrill and awarded to BOA after their merger. The bonuses, awarded mostly as cash, were made only to top management at Merrill. To be eligible for the bonuses, Merrill employees had to have a salary of at least $300,000 and attained the title of Vice President or higher. > > The Merrill bonuses were determined by Merrill’s Compensation Committee at its meeting of December 8, 2008, shortly after BOA shareholders approved the merger but before financial results for the Fourth Quarter had been determined. This appears to be a departure from normal company practice, since the type of bonus Merrill awarded was a performance bonus that, according to company policy, was supposed to reflect all four quarters of performance and was paid in January or later. In this case, however, the bonuses were awarded in December before Fourth Quarter performance had been determined. > > SOURCE: [http://www.alternet.org/economy/134235/merrill\_lynch\_bonuses\_were\_22\_times\_the\_size\_of\_aig's/](http://www.alternet.org/economy/134235/merrill_lynch_bonuses_were_22_times_the_size_of_aig%27s/) Poor guys…really suffered the downside of their actions (their investors did though). ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/99 "2011-05-17T21:31:53Z")
Tax payer paying the banks? Worse, the sweetheart free money deal they got made it so tax payers are paying back the money we gave the banks. The banks tell Americans how great it was for them to pay back the loans. Hell .they did it with our tax money. The banks have done nothing to fix the economy. They have resisted as much as possible, any banking regulation and oversight. Nothing has changed. They have kept all the horrible banking policies in place. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976/100 "2011-05-17T21:35:12Z")
I think it’s fitting and ironic that one offhanded post by me has achieved a thread a hundred posts long. IOW 1%. 😃 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interchangeable-carbon-blobs-only-1-generate-any-wealth/581976.md?page=6)