I hope this is in the bail out bill. - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

SeattleUte · 09-29-2008, 04:02 AM

ALL the officers and directors of Morgan, Goldman, AIG, and any other firm benefiting from the bail out TOTALLY WIPED OUT. No net worth. No retirement. Starting over. That's what would happen to you or me if we made such a mammoth miscaculation. Say, if we put all our assets into WaMu last week expecting to get in when the stock was down and then rake it in after things turned around. That's essentially the penalty I suffered for my divorce. That's a minimal punishment for them after they brought the most powerful corporations in the world literally to their knees through gross incompetence. I'm not asking that they go to jail. But these officers and directors should have to give up every penny. They should be totally wiped out.

If that's not in the bill, we don't live in a meritocracy, there is no symetry between risk and reward, and it is most emphatically not so that where much is given much is expected, at least in America.

For some reason I doubt I'm going to find that language I'm hoping for in the bill.

TripletDaddy · 09-29-2008, 04:04 AM

No net worth? That would be awful.

Or are you assuming that all the officers had no liquidity and were completely tied to stock?

My guess is that many of those folks already owned homes and had other investments.

MikeWaters · 09-29-2008, 04:07 AM

This is one more piece of evidence that there is no distinction between the democrats and the republicans.

There are only the powerful and the powerless.

SeattleUte · 09-29-2008, 04:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

No net worth? That would be awful.

Or are you assuming that all the officers had no liquidity and were completely tied to stock?

My guess is that many of those folks already owned homes and had other investments.

Probably so, but they should have to give it all up. Or life aint fair.

Do you know why AIG got bailed out? Beacuse had it failed Goldman would have gone up like the Hindenburg. Paulsen is a former CEO of Goldman. I honestly think there's a lot to this that's all inside deal. Like all those select families getting all the great government jobs in Anna Karenina.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/bu...prod=permalink

MikeWaters · 09-29-2008, 04:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Probably so, but they should have to give it all up. Or life aint fair.

Do you know why AIG got bailed out? Beacuse had it failed Goldman would have gone up like the Hindenburg. Paulsen is a former CEO of Goldman. I honestly think there's a lot to this that's all inside deal. Like all those select families getting all the great government jobs in Anna Karenina.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/bu...prod=permalink

The important govt. jobs in America are as open to Americans as the important jobs in the LDS church are open to the average Mormon. That is, it's a fairly tight-knit incestuous circle.

Even the black guy trying to crash the pary--part of a political machine, connected at Ivy League, alumnus of elite private school, etc.

SeattleUte · 09-29-2008, 04:15 AM

Seriously, why should a small business owner have to live by his wits, he makes a mistake, and he's on the street, and no one cares that his kids lack even basic necessities. But these officers and directors of Goldman get to retain all their creature comforts, their palacial offices, etc. If they suffer anything it's only paper losses. Life in America aint fair. It's not. Not at a cosmic level. I know these investment are not special in terms of talent or ability. Haven't they shown that? okay, protect the banking system, but the folks who did this should be as personally destroyed as Elliot Spitzer.

I bet it won't happen.

MikeWaters · 09-29-2008, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Seriously, why should a small business owner have to live by his wits, he makes a mistake, and he's on the street, and no one cares that his kids lack even basic necessities. But these officers and directors of Goldman get to retain all their creature comforts, their palacial offices, etc. If they suffer anything it's only paper losses. Life in America aint fair. It's not. Not at a cosmic level. I know these investment are not special in terms of talent or ability. Haven't they shown that? okay, protect the banking system, but the folks who did this should be as personally destroyed as Elliot Spitzer.

I bet it won't happen.

these people own the govt.

SeattleUte · 09-29-2008, 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

these people own the govt.

What better proof of this could we have? The CEO's of Goldman and AIG call the Treasury Secretary on Friday and by the time the weekend's over AIG has an $85 billion hand out. Were you or I consuslted? We found out about this after it happened. This is such fucking bull shit.

PaloAltoCougar · 09-29-2008, 04:38 AM

The idea of forcing directors and officers to forfeit their net worth may be satisfying given everyone's anger about the gargantuan mess we're in, but it's also silly to think for a second that would ever happen. The Fifth Amendment would be a good place to start for reasons why.

However, it might not be a stretch to impose a few major penalties, including the forfeiture of all stock and options held by D's & O's of the assisted corporations, on the ground that without the assistance, the stock and options would be worthless anyway. A tougher penalty would be to impose a forfeiture of all profits made on the sale of stock within the last [two? four?] years, a kind of Section 16(b) short-swing profits penalty, albeit with a much wider amplitude than the current six months. Imposing the rule after the fact wouldn't pass constitutional muster, but I wonder if it could fly if it were imposed as another condition of assistance. Executives who resisted could be tarred and feathered and the next annual meeting of stockholders.

Archaea · 09-29-2008, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

The idea of forcing directors and officers to forfeit their net worth may be satisfying given everyone's anger about the gargantuan mess we're in, but it's also silly to think for a second that would ever happen. The Fifth Amendment would be a good place to start for reasons why.

However, it might not be a stretch to impose a few major penalties, including the forfeiture of all stock and options held by D's & O's of the assisted corporations, on the ground that without the assistance, the stock and options would be worthless anyway. A tougher penalty would be to impose a forfeiture of all profits made on the sale of stock within the last [two? four?] years, a kind of Section 16(b) short-swing profits penalty, albeit with a much wider amplitude than the current six months. Imposing the rule after the fact wouldn't pass constitutional muster, but I wonder if it could fly if it were imposed as another condition of assistance. Executives who resisted could be tarred and feathered and the next annual meeting of stockholders.

Yours is the more realistic approach but I like Seattle's suggestion and the attempt to save Goldman is ludicrous.

09-29-2008, 04:02 AM	#1
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	I hope this is in the bail out bill. ALL the officers and directors of Morgan, Goldman, AIG, and any other firm benefiting from the bail out TOTALLY WIPED OUT. No net worth. No retirement. Starting over. That's what would happen to you or me if we made such a mammoth miscaculation. Say, if we put all our assets into WaMu last week expecting to get in when the stock was down and then rake it in after things turned around. That's essentially the penalty I suffered for my divorce. That's a minimal punishment for them after they brought the most powerful corporations in the world literally to their knees through gross incompetence. I'm not asking that they go to jail. But these officers and directors should have to give up every penny. They should be totally wiped out. If that's not in the bill, we don't live in a meritocracy, there is no symetry between risk and reward, and it is most emphatically not so that where much is given much is expected, at least in America. For some reason I doubt I'm going to find that language I'm hoping for in the bill. __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster Last edited by SeattleUte; 09-29-2008 at 04:05 AM.

09-29-2008, 04:04 AM	#2
TripletDaddy Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 9,483	No net worth? That would be awful. Or are you assuming that all the officers had no liquidity and were completely tied to stock? My guess is that many of those folks already owned homes and had other investments. __________________ Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte

09-29-2008, 04:15 AM	#6
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	Seriously, why should a small business owner have to live by his wits, he makes a mistake, and he's on the street, and no one cares that his kids lack even basic necessities. But these officers and directors of Goldman get to retain all their creature comforts, their palacial offices, etc. If they suffer anything it's only paper losses. Life in America aint fair. It's not. Not at a cosmic level. I know these investment are not special in terms of talent or ability. Haven't they shown that? okay, protect the banking system, but the folks who did this should be as personally destroyed as Elliot Spitzer. I bet it won't happen. __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster

09-29-2008, 04:07 AM	#3
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,367	This is one more piece of evidence that there is no distinction between the democrats and the republicans. There are only the powerful and the powerless.

09-29-2008, 04:38 AM	#9
PaloAltoCougar Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 580	The idea of forcing directors and officers to forfeit their net worth may be satisfying given everyone's anger about the gargantuan mess we're in, but it's also silly to think for a second that would ever happen. The Fifth Amendment would be a good place to start for reasons why. However, it might not be a stretch to impose a few major penalties, including the forfeiture of all stock and options held by D's & O's of the assisted corporations, on the ground that without the assistance, the stock and options would be worthless anyway. A tougher penalty would be to impose a forfeiture of all profits made on the sale of stock within the last [two? four?] years, a kind of Section 16(b) short-swing profits penalty, albeit with a much wider amplitude than the current six months. Imposing the rule after the fact wouldn't pass constitutional muster, but I wonder if it could fly if it were imposed as another condition of assistance. Executives who resisted could be tarred and feathered and the next annual meeting of stockholders.