NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,000 A Year...

[SmoothOperator]

Well cry me a river if they have to give up the butler in order to make a $500,000 a year salary "stretch". Unbelievable.
-----

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/fashion/08halfmill.html?_r=1

Five hundred thousand dollars — the amount President Obama wants to set as the top pay for banking executives whose firms accept government bailout money — seems like a lot, and it is a lot. To many people in many places, it is a princely sum to live on. But in the neighborhoods of New York City and its suburban enclaves where successful bankers live, half a million a year can go very fast.

“As hard as it is to believe, bankers who are living on the Upper East Side making $2 or $3 million a year have set up a life for themselves in which they are also at zero at the end of the year with credit cards and mortgage bills that are inescapable”.

<span style="font-weight: bold">The total costs here, which do not include a lot of things, like kennels for the dog when the family is away, summer camp, spas and other grooming for the human members of the family, donations to charity, and frozen hot chocolates at Serendipity, are $790,750, which would require about a $1.6-million salary to compensate for taxes. Give or take a few score thousand of dollars. </span>

[SmoothOperator]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

Also love this part, I must be in the wrong line of work when a chauffeur can make a minimum of $75K.

-----------

<span style="font-weight: bold">Many top executives have cars and drivers. A chauffeur’s pay is between $75,000 and $125,000 a year, the higher end for former police officers who can double as bodyguards, said a limousine driver who spoke anonymously because he does not want to alienate his society customers</span>.

[Nunya]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

[CeaBee]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

i was reading jaded's post on the high cost of living in New York...


Jaded's post

[SmoothOperator]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ceabee</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i was reading jaded's post on the high cost of living in New York...


Jaded's post </div></div>

Unlike the common man they have hard assets that they can sell, like that second or third home and the villa in Aspen, if they can't make $500,000 work. They can also move to cheaper digs, do away with the personal trainers, drive their own car and take cheaper or less vacations. Let us not forget that they screwed up and they are coming hat in hand to beg for taxpayer money, everyone has to feel a little pain here.

[Gen]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

<span style="font-style: italic">perhaps they should be introduced to Jacks 99 cents store located at various points in the city, mi nuh shop there but if the ress a the country can nyam tainted food from china dem can galang a jacks guh nyam tainted chinese food fi 99 cents too </span>

<span style="font-weight: bold">Jack's 99 Cent Store: The Biggest Savings Center in Midtown Manhattan </span>

Ever since dollar stores have come in to effect, I have been a consumer at them. They sell the same things that other stores might sell, but for only a dollar. Considering all the dollar stores I've been to, never did I thin that I would come across one that has everything and more.

Jack's 99 Cent Store is located on West 32nd Street between 6th &amp; 7th Avenue in Midtown Manhattan. It sits right in the middle of the block behind Manhattan Mall. There is an entrance on both West 31st street and West 32nd Street. It is the biggest 99 cent store I have ever been to and the one that I go to almost every single day of the week.

There are three floors inside of the biggest 99 cent store I have ever shopped at. On the first is where you find everything that is 99 cents or less. Floor two is what they consider Jack's World where you find things for 99 cents and more. The third floor is 99 cents or more as well. And with all the floors within this one store, I have found myself there for an excessive amount of time. And it never grows old for me.

Everything you need is located underneath this one roof. It is the front tables that indicate what hot items I am going to find and if it is necessary for me to even go any further. And judging from how many people stand around that front table, I always get the urge to walk in and check it out for myself. And everyday it is something different and something that I am amazed to find.

jacks yahsuh

[Tuff Gong]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...


Maybe they can't sometimes making a million dollars mean you have way more responsibility. I think the shareholders of companies should determine compensation. When the State become the major shareholder then they have that right, but it does not mean a person making a few million dollars a year is bad in my eyes, there are cost involve that a person on the outside could not fathom.

[Gen]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

and quite frankly if they cannot manage their own money, they don't need to be managing anyone else's assets.

[Gen]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

like what suh ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Maybe they can't sometimes making a million dollars mean you have way more responsibility. I think the shareholders of companies should determine compensation. When the State become the major shareholder then they have that right, but it does not mean a person making a few million dollars a year is bad in my eyes, <span style="font-weight: bold">there are cost involve that a person on the outside could not fathom.</span> </div></div>

[Gen]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

i live responsibly and well within my means, suh mi nuh understand why my tax money haffi a bail out dem eediat yah, this country soon have a tax revolt

[SmoothOperator]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Maybe they can't sometimes making a million dollars mean you have way more responsibility. I think the shareholders of companies should determine compensation. When the State become the major shareholder then they have that right, but it does not mean a person making a few million dollars a year is bad in my eyes, there are cost involve that a person on the outside could not fathom. </div></div>

I say if you have to take taxpayer money to keep your company afloat you should be forced to abide by the compensation limits. I think $500,000 is a VERY generous amount. If they have an issue with the compensation limits set by TARP simply don't take the money and the board and shareholders can set compensation at however many millions they see fit. There is something very wrong about begging for taxpayer money for a company's survival and drawing down a $10 million a year salary and not making any adjustments to executive compensation. They don't have to take the TARP bailout money if they don't want to.

[Gen]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

i have an even better idea, let them reject the 500K, quit the job and see if they can find a similar position somewhere else in this economy. I guarantee there are at least 2,000 other bankers out there with similar experience/education looking for a job. dem is dyam renk and brite.

[halfwaytree]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SmoothOperator</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Maybe they can't sometimes making a million dollars mean you have way more responsibility. I think the shareholders of companies should determine compensation. When the State become the major shareholder then they have that right, but it does not mean a person making a few million dollars a year is bad in my eyes, there are cost involve that a person on the outside could not fathom. </div></div>

I say if you have to take taxpayer money to keep your company afloat you should be forced to abide by the compensation limits. I think $500,000 is a VERY generous amount. If they have an issue with the compensation limits set by TARP simply don't take the money and the board and shareholders can set compensation at however many millions they see fit. There is something very wrong about begging for taxpayer money for a company's survival and drawing down a $10 million a year salary and not making any adjustments to executive compensation. They don't have to take the TARP bailout money if they don't want to. </div></div>

Exactly!!!!

[SmoothOperator]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

Here is an example of the cost involved that a person on the outside just cannot fathom. Oh the sacrifices these bankers have to make. I tell you these people are not living in the real world. Now why would a parchment waste basket cost $1405, and how about the $87,000 rug.

===========================

When John Thain became Merrill Lynch’s CEO in early 2008, he hired Michael S. Smith Design to revamp his office suite, spending approximately $1.22 million according to documents.

The following is a list of the items in his suite:
— Area Rug: $87,784
— Mahogany Pedestal Table: $25,713
— 19th Century Credenza: $68,179
— Pendant Light Furniture: $19,751
— 4 Pairs of Curtains: $28,091
— Pair of Guest Chairs: $87,784
— George IV Chair: $18,468
— 6 Wall Sconces: $2,741
<span style="font-weight: bold">— Parchment Waste Can: $1,405</span>
— Roman Shade Fabric: $10,967
— Roman Shades: $7,315
— Coffee Table: $5,852
— Commode on Legs: $35,115

http://www.freep.com/article/20090201/COL01/902010414/A+CEO+s+office+decorated+with+greed

[Tuff Gong]

Re: NY Times: Bankers Can't Live On $500,00 A Year...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SmoothOperator</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I say if you have to take taxpayer money to keep your company afloat you should be forced to abide by the compensation limits.</div></div>I agree, but generally I don't take issue with what folks make, because I know there are intangibles that cannot be easily seen from the outside.
As an example many folks hold of the salary of the POTUS. While is base salary is US$1/2Mil his substantive salary is much more when you think of all that goes with it.