Did You Enjoy Your Bonus, Wall Street? I Didn’t

When the United States decided to give a total of $700 billion to our banks in an effort to try and curb the economic crisis, the tax payer was told that there would be significant regulation on this money. It was our $700 billion being used to help the banks start lending to each other, so the hope was that there would be some sort of security with our money. Obviously we were wrong.

Last week, it was reported that Wall St. had given almost $20 billion in bonuses to their executives. That’s $20 billion dollars that came away from our taxes, increased our debt and deficit, and could have been used to do something else like prevent our bridges from crumbling.

President Obama is said to be working on a way to try and control the money more. That should have been done before we wrote a near blank check to these banks. If the bank wants tax dollars, that’s fine, but there had better not be money going to provide an $87,000 area rug or a $35,000 commode. Furthermore, that $20 billion should go towards freeing up more money to thaw the frozen banks, not make the top executives even wealthier than they already are.

President Obama finally spoke out against this issue when Citigroup, who had been given $20 billion in exchange for preferred stock, tried to spend $50 million on a corporate jet. Yes, that is exactly what we need our banks doing with our tax dollars to try and fix the economic problem. At least they can get around the country without having to buy a coach ticket. Come on, bankers, gain some maturity.

If we want to see our tax dollars being used in the proper way, there needs to be serious regulation on the money that the banks are given. It should not be spent on private jets, huge bonuses to executives, area rugs, or anything else along those lines.

Treasury Secretary Geithner said when he was being confirmed in that they were working on a plan to make it impossible for banks receiving tax dollars to give liquid compensation above a certain amount. Instead, if a bonus was given, it would have to be paid in restricted stock that could not be sold or liquidated until the government’s money was paid back.

This is a logical plan. When a bank provides a loan to someone, the borrower has to pay back each month regardless of what they may want to do. Well, the banks are now the borrowers and the tax payer is the banker; they had better pay us back before they start reaping the benefits of their work.

As Vice President Biden said so wonderfully, “I’d like to throw these guys in the brig. They’re thinking the same old thing that got us here, greed. They’re thinking, ‘Take care of me.’  ” I think it’s about time the banks stop thinking about their entitlement issues and start thinking about the country. And if not, go down with your ship and give up, but don’t use our tax dollars to finance your livelihood.

Comments

4 Responses to “Did You Enjoy Your Bonus, Wall Street? I Didn’t”
  1. Why, in this country, when Congress plans to spend Billions of tax money on unnecessary programs no one bats an eye, but when someone like John Thain spends $1,500 on a glorified trash can we grab our torches and pitchforks?

    Something to keep in mind: the Federal Government already sent Wall Street $700 Billion, and Detroit got $25 billion in guaranteed loans. With this $888 Billion plan in the Senate, and the 2009 Federal Budget having brought in only $2.7 Trillion (and called for $3.1 Trillion in spending), the question is: Who is footing the bill here?

    Do we really need to spend an additional $1.5 Billion on NASA during these economic times? Congress and it’s $888 Billion Stimulus bill thinks so…and as long as you aren’t up for an appointment in the Obama administration (thanks, Trevor Jones), it looks like you’ll be paying for it.

    Decadence apparently only applies to individuals – governments call it “Economic stimulus.” It’s alright to be angry, but don’t forget that we, the citizens of this floundering republic, let it happen.

  2. The reason I grab a pitchfork is because it is the money that the Federal Government sent to Wall St. that is paying for that glorified trash can. If John Thain wants to buy a glorified trash can, fine, go ahead. But do not use money that the Federal Government gave you which the Federal Government took from me with taxes. I shouldn’t be paying for your glorified trash can.

  3. Trevor Jones says:

    What we are seeing here is the rapid expansion of the State in combination with Keynesian economic planning of the troubled economy.

    It has been proven throughout history that economic planning is impossible to achieve successfully without directly perverting and destroying the very idea of a free market. It eliminates the competition naturally found within the capitalist system, and is what helped create the mess we’re in right now. It can’t be merely described as “greed” without first looking into the mentallity of the economic planner and the negative effects of debt spending throughout the entire system.

    Government waste has gone on long before these banks have been getting their billions, and it won’t stop there.

    There was actually ANOTHER Obama pick that withdrew because of tax “issues”, Nancy Killefer.

    All three of these people think that their tax “mistakes” might be a “distraction” to the Obama administration… and for good cause. Although I don’t think many people will pick up on the growing trend as of late…

Trackbacks

Check out what others are saying about this post...
  1. [...] bail outs, that’s almost equal to the amount of money that President Bush used when he created TARP. Or, it could go to education or stem cell research. In reality, though, it could go to a [...]



Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!