Hey, he's been paid almost a half of a billion dollars before his exit. If a doctor performed this way, he'd be sued, and rightfully so, for malpractice.

It's the compensation system that results in "booking" non-existent profits with accounting devices, and then "earning" bonuses" based on non-existent so-called short-term profits.

There was a lot of booked front-end "profit" on these non-performing loans, or at least what happened was defined as "profit" for distribution of bonuses.

But then, the government had a hand in creating this situation as fiscal responsibility was set side to accommodate the idea of giving people the opportunity to own homes. The probability that a high percentage of the loans would go into default was of no moment. The "advocates of the poor," who were clamoring for such loan policies, and who so fervently opposed "red-lining," are now the ones claiming that "the poor" were exploited by having these loans made available to them.

It's the usual BS with advocacy of unsustainable policies and practices, and then those responsible distancing themselves from what they advanced. Of course, this could not have been accomplished without the complicity of Wall Street, which bundled and sold packages of worthless paper, signed by people without the resources to meet obligations they had undertaken. And the smart guys bought the paper.

It appears that Kuwait and China are now investing in these financial institutions. And they are securing interests at bargain prices as the American dollar is devalued. The price of oil as measured in American dollars is misleading. The dollar has declined to some 2/3rds the value of the Euro. So denominated in terms of the Euro, oil is two-thirds of its price in US dollars.

We can't transfer our assets to other countries quickly enough, so in the future we are going to have to purchase carbon credits also, and relieve ourselves of wealth to accommodate the growing economies of China and India. Pollution rights are for sale. They will not reduce pollution, but they'll enrich good old Al Gore, who has set up a company to broker carbon credits. Al Avarice Gore, the man from Greed.

Alimony is the screwing you get for the screwing you got. But what are carbon credits? Con man compensation?

By the way, growing wheat and sorghum creates a process that locks up carbon in little rocks for centuries. What are they called, phyloliths, or something similar?

Oops! That's a typo. That's phytoliths with a "t."

Isn't it just the way in this day and age of 'he who dies with the most wins'?

Here's a guy that led his company into terrible trouble, yet he's rewarded.

Same as the fired Home Depot CEO who walked away with $300,000,000 after losing money - all the while refusing to raise the pay of starting employees above $8 an hour. We all know where that money went now, don't we?

"The "advocates of the poor,"...are now the ones claiming that "the poor" were exploited by having these loans made available to them."

Well, there was some value there, and the bankers got their fees and profits and bonuses, as you pointed out, and the hopeful homeowners now have nothing.

"It's the usual BS with advocacy of unsustainable policies and practices, and then those responsible distancing themselves from what they advanced."

You're right. None of the bankers want to take any responsibility for their actions. Or as the November cover of Fortune asked: What Were They Smoking?

"The company entered into a new employment agreement with Mozilo in 2007"

Board members deciding what their friends and colleagues should be paid.

All to have the favors returned when the tables are reversed...of course.

This is a case in which the man with the best lawyers wins. That will of course be after the shareholders sue his rotten but for a return of about 97.475% of what he has received in pay and all other compensation. Unfortunately due to all of that undeserved money, this cretin will have a room full of the finest attorneys money can buy. As a result, the only survivors of the lawsuit will be the grandchildren of all parties.

I am your long lost orphan son!

"$115 million! Wow! Do you know how many $400 haircuts I could get with that?!" -- John Edwards

The media and legal abuse of this poor man is why we need less regulation! If the free market were left alone, this wouldn't even be considered an issue.
Paulie Girls.

Let's give everybody free housing and then there would be no subprime problem.
NG3, Danni and others

Well at least BOA is bailing out CHL and not the US taxpayer.

It really is obscene that this guy and other like him get sooooo much money for screwing up.

And AU--how much should a person get who knows how to mix paint and point you to the plumbing section--and point to which friggin bolt to buy??

$8.00 plus benefits is pretty darn good--if that is what they get.

Murphy

Let's give everybody free housing and then there would be no subprime problem.
NG3, Danni and others

You got a quote from us for that, member, or you just making shit up cause you've been busted on the whole Ron Paul says "we doan need no stinkin' regulations" position?

Well at least BOA is bailing out CHL and not the US taxpayer.

One of the big reasons BOA is buying CHL is for the large tax write-offs they'll get during restructuring. The government will have to make up this lost revenue someplace. Care to guess where?

The media and legal abuse of this poor man is why we need less regulation! If the free market were left alone, this wouldn't even be considered an issue.
Paulie Girls.

Posted by northguy3

Wrong liberal breath. What we need is for the government to quit bailing their sorry asses out everytime they do something stupid. Droping the intrest rates so much hasn't helped the situation out and damn sure hasn't helped the dollar on the world market.

Seems to me that the problem is too much government, not the other way around.

We are paying it, at the gas pump.

One of the few things I see that really makes me wanna be a pinko commie.. the other are those annoying Diva Sweet 16 shows with spoiled brats "but I wanted a Black Ferrari wah wah "...

Seems to me that the problem is too much government, not the other way around.

Ken Lay said the same thing. And Eernie Ebbers is a big deregulation guy too.
You ever think that maybe we have the regulatory abilities of the government today because of the crime and corruption of the free markets in the past? The SEC wasn't created because of the honesty of the market, just as the FDA wasn't created because there were too many good products on the market.

That will of course be after the shareholders sue his rotten but for a return of about 97.475% of what he has received in pay and all other compensation.

I wonder how the free market people feel about this, when Countrywide shares are down 84%?
Did this CEO perform for the shareholders? Did he earn his money? Or did he make his millions by stealing from the shareholders?


And AU--how much should a person get who knows how to mix paint and point you to the plumbing section--and point to which friggin bolt to buy??

If running a company into the ground is worth $115 Mil, I'd say helping the paying customers is worth more than $8 an hour.
I'd like to see how you can argue otherwise.

Kids,

The CEOs of banks and investment firms who have been fired recently were not fired due to their failings but to their successes. They were Bull market CEOs and in place to make aggressive profits. They did this and then some. They are being "fired" so that Bear market CEOs can be hired to manage the companies during the short term loss periods coming up.

The "firings" are simply marketing ploys for the media to spread to people like you to believe the banks aren't happy with the performance of these CEOs.

I sure hope they know what they are doing or they could end up as the Bank of Antarctica.

Not one post here giving this dude any credit. he built the largest mortgage bank in the world, how much do YOU think he deserves. With BAC taking it over, he gets to cash in all of his chips.

Sure he fucked up, but after 20 years of working as their CEO. I say he deserves the money.

It reminds me of the S&L crisis. When the FSLIC closed banks, they'd retain the CEO and pay him by contract. he might have been responsible for the bamboozling, but he was one of the few who knew where the value was in the contracts, and how to get the most out of them.....

"Sure he fucked up, but after 20 years of working as their CEO. I say he deserves the money."

Do you believe in capitalism or not? Do you believe in the free market or not?

In a capitalistic society, business rise and fall, usually due to how they're run. If you run a successful business for 20 years, and then make monumentally bad business decisions, you stand to lose everything. That's capitalism. That's the free market. No one should be rewarded for making HUGELY bad business decisions, just because they've done better in the past.

Unless, of course, you belong to one of the businesses which own Congress, which by my count includes banking, oil, and pharmaceuticals, among others. Then it's The Golden Rule: you own the gold, you make the rules.

Dave
Your argument could be applied to lower level employees too. Typically they get fired with no compensation. Such logic gives CEO's too much leeway without just compensation.

It didn't fail, it was bought out Danforth. That's a big difference.

I know Ray, but that's not how things work. And even if share holders lost most everything!!

The real play was in their debt. If you purchased their CFC.B at 7 on Thursday, you could have been buying a 25% yield, and it traded up to 20 on Friday!!! Now if BAC assumes the debt, it will go from a CCC like credit to AA......

True but they did buy it. For 4 billion plus debt. His contract probably says he gets xxx if that happens. So it happened, he gets paid. He BUILT the company. And how did he lose it, he gave money away in loans. It's not like he stole money from mortgagee's.

For me I have a bigger deal with E trade. They are running commercials making fun of solvent banks, you know, with the bank employees "robbing" their bank customers. They have balls making fun if solid banks, while they fold under the weight of their shitty loans......

Dave
Unfortunately true. I just don't buy your argument that CEO's deserve that kind of compensation for wrecking a company. I wouldn't have any sympathy for Mozilo if he gets hit with lawsuits. From what I'm reading that's a real possibility for selling mortgages with over rated credit ratings.

Nothing to see here:

Just another version of the S&L scandal that happened under a different Bush's watch.

Move along, nothing to see.

"$115 million! Wow! Do you know how many $400 haircuts I could get with that?!" -- John Edwards

Posted by member2586 at 2008-01-12 11:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

According to member, people shouldn't be able to use their own money to buy a haircut from a famous stylist.


p.s. How much do you think Romney pays? Or is that just well-combed steel wool?

"p.s. How much do you think Romney pays? "

Well, we know he pays $300 for a makeup job.

"So it happened, he gets paid. He BUILT the company. And how did he lose it, he gave money away in loans. It's not like he stole money from mortgagee's."

No, he made very bad business decisions, which usually spell doom for business owners, not nine-figure golden parachutes.

Unless, of course, you belong to one of the businesses which own Congress, which by my count includes banking, oil, and pharmaceuticals, among others. Then it's The Golden Rule: you own the gold, you make the rules.

Posted by Danforth

says it all for me here:>)