Goldman Sachs and Wall Street Bonuses in General

[nyinvestordude]

So we hear that Goldman is going to set aside $16.5billion in bonuses for its employees, with an average bonus of $622,000 per employee. They are just the largest. BMW opened a showroom in the financial district to make it easier for the employees with the obscene bonuses to spend some of their "loot"..lol. Is this too exhorbitant? Is this capitalism gone amok? Thoughts please

[Eugenious]

So we hear that Goldman is going to set aside $16.5billion in bonuses for its employees, with an average bonus of $622,000 per employee. They are just the largest. BMW opened a showroom in the financial district to make it easier for the employees with the obscene bonuses to spend some of their "loot"..lol. Is this too exhorbitant? Is this capitalism gone amok? Thoughts please

Ok first of all just because GS is spending billions on bonuses does not mean everyone gets half a mil. Most GS employees get much less, way less than 100k even. This is more than people get at most companies outside wall street though so it's still incredible.

Yes it's pretty crazy when you consider that 1 in 5 new yorkers lives under or at the poverty line, but this is capitalism and wall street always takes care of itself.

Most people who make money on wall street usually work 10 -12 hr days and 80 hr weeks as well as making their companies huge amounts of money.

[Jake]

Most people who make money on wall street usually work 10 -12 hr days and 80 hr weeks as well as making their companies huge amounts of money.

Very true, and may I add these are people who have the best education possible and make for their companies many times more money than they are paid for in this bonus.

I have always LOVED working in the financial district because you very much earn what you deserve. People in most industries are simply support for the product, on wall st. brokers ARE the product.

[NYCDOC]

Not enough time to waste debating this but wake up and look a little deeper . . . guys on wall street don't earn what their worth, things are certainly out of balance here. A system that is this uneven is bound to destroy itself. And this is coming from someone who has always been a strong believer in the capitalist system until recently.

[nyinvestordude]

Ok first of all just because GS is spending billions on bonuses does not mean everyone gets half a mil. Most GS employees get much less, way less than 100k even. This is more than people get at most companies outside wall street though so it's still incredible.

Yes it's pretty crazy when you consider that 1 in 5 new yorkers lives under or at the poverty line, but this is capitalism and wall street always takes care of itself.

Most people who make money on wall street usually work 10 -12 hr days and 80 hr weeks as well as making their companies huge amounts of money.

Whoa...I never said everyone. I know that 622,000 is related to the trading and investment banking portion of the firm. I didnt think I needed to include that the receptionists or maintenance people at Goldman Sachs were not included in that pool. I believe the markets are shell games at best and even though these traders make as much as they do, the "Wall St Superstars" are all engaging in some form of illegal backroom dealing anyway.

I agree with the following posts that this system cannot support itself.

[antinimby]

Not enough time to waste debating this but wake up and look a little deeper . . . guys on wall street don't earn what their worth, things are certainly out of balance here. A system that is this uneven is bound to destroy itself. And this is coming from someone who has always been a strong believer in the capitalist system until recently.

Err...why do you think that is so?

A few recent headlines about people making bonuses and all of sudden our capitalist system is out-of-balance?

In case you've forgotten, people have been making lots of money for a very long time now.

Forget the Wall Street guys.

The tens of millions they made from bonuses is pocket change compared the billions that the really, really rich guys like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Paul Allen, etc. (and the list goes on and on) make.

There are endless superstar athletes, Hollywood actors, rock stars, television personalities, etc. that make more money.

How come you didn't complain about the capitalist system before?

I smell envy and resentment.

[Jake]

We should certainly go after the neurosurgeons, nobody earning their money there either.

[antinimby]

While we're at, what about lottery jackpot winners?

They didn't certainly didn't earn it either.

Let's do away with wealth altogether.

Every man, woman and child will have an equal share of money!

Everyone will be well fed, clothed, have their own home with white picket fences and live happily ever after.

[pianoman11686]

^That would be the altruist vision of an "equally shabby" universe. I think I'll pass.

[Punzie]

. . .
Every man, woman and child will have an equal share of money!

Everyone will be well fed, clothed, have their own home with white picket fences and live happily ever after.

Actually, that sounds kind of nice.

[Gulcrapek]

My cousin must be making a bonus of over $300,000... when she took leave a couple of years ago, the company had to hire three people to replace her. Overkill, sure, but she's probably one of the ones that almost deserves that much...

[NYCDOC]

I definitely haven't just started thinking that our system of capitalism is out of balance, because of the Goldman bonuses. Anyone who has done a little reading or who pays attention to the news notices that this is not a new problem.

Has anyone read Lou Dobb's "War on the Middle Class?" He details alot of facts about how American capitalism in recent years has gotten out of control.

In reference to the comments above regarding the amount of money that some make such as Bill Gates . . . Someone like him who created a successful product and changed the world with his vision deserves to receive a substantial return as a result of his labor. On the other hand guys like the CEO of Home Depot who drive the company into the ground and still get multi million dollar packages, how does that make sense?

And along the same lines I don't see how these wall street brokers are really performing a service to deserve their pay. In fact, I think that the system has actually become more harmful than helpful. The market moves up and down with little reason or sense these days. A rich man's system of betting rather than a system that oversees the efficiency of a corporation.

Also, by no means am I an idealist. I am just someone who is frustrated with the direction that our national economy is trending and I see wall street and the corporate system as a big part of the problem.

[antinimby]

NYDOC, you are sounding just as absurd as you did in your previous post.

Whew, there's a lot of your very obvious ignorance for me to cover that I don't even know where to begin, but I'll try to do it one at a time.

First, you say that according to Lou Dobbs, the American economic system is getting bad.

Can you elaborate more than just say it's getting bad?

We are the richest nation in the world. If it's bad here, I'd hate to see what it's like for someone at...say...10 or 25 or 98th place.

And at what point was it still good?

The 1800's or was it still good during the 1900's as well?

Did stock trading and thus Wall Street not exist then?

Was there no poor people back then?

If our American economic system is not ideal, can you tell me what economic system is better?

Examples, please.

Now, it's my turn.

While I won't ever claim to be a historian or an economist, even I know that every company and thus every worker--regardless of what you may think their worth to the overall society is--is an integral part of that society and thus contributes to our way of life.

Some require more skills and knowledge than others and so therefore they are rewarded for that. I don't see anything wrong with that.

If a company does not have the proper leadership, it will not be able to compete in the marketplace with another, therefore it is critical for the company to get the right talent, the right person for the job.

While you might not think highly of the CEO of Home Depot, as you say, his job to his company is extremely critical.

A wrong decision can have dire consequences to the overall company's success and that in turn will affect every worker in it.

Surely you don't want the average worker, which you seem to hold more dearly than the big shot CEO, to lose his job and have nothing to support his children, do you?

So then if this CEO position is so critical, shouldn't you want to "entice" the best and the brightest with a good compensation package?

A sales clerk is easy to find, a competent company leader is harder to find. Other companies will want him/her as well.

$15 and hour won't do it when Lowe's will gladly pay him/her $20.

Do you get it now?

Now, on to the next subject, Microsoft.

Microsoft is public traded company.

In order for them to operate and contribute their "vision" to the world as you say, they need to generate revenue for their stockholders, who in turn provides the capital for Microsoft to operate.

In order to do this, Wall Street comes into play.

Wall Street provides a very critical service here despite what you might think about them.

Without Wall Street, Microsoft won't be able to do their thing and whatever "vision" they may have will not get realized.

You seem to resent Wall Street traders but have very little knowledge of how things work.

Instead of reading Lou Dobbs and one man's angry ramblings about the "terrible" American economic system, you should read an introductory book on economics first.

[Punzie]

We are the richest nation in the world. If it's bad here, I'd hate to see what it's like for someone at...say...10 or 25 or 98th place.

There's an old saying:
"Next to Hitler and Stalin, Mussolini looked pretty darned good."

And at what point was it still good?

The 1800's or was it still good during the 1900's as well?

Agreed, it's better to be a paraplegic than a quadroplegic.

__________________________

I don't base the American ideal on what other countries look like, or what we looked like in the past.

I base the American ideal on what we could look like.

[antinimby]

There's an old saying:
"Next to Hitler and Stalin, Mussolini looked pretty darned good."

Maybe to you, but not to me.

And the saying can't be that old either, it was just last century.

Agreed, it's better to be a paraplegic than a quadroplegic.

And it's better still to be abled-bodied, so what's your point?

I don't base the American ideal on what other countries look like, or what we looked like in the past.
I base the American ideal on what we could look like.

And what exactly is that?