home

CNBC Believes In "Indispensable Men"

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 01:43:29 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

While CNBC continues to protest that it does too cover Wall Street critically, CNBC host Mark Haines is still selling the "Indispensable Men" theory. Via TPM:

CNBC, the Fox News for Wall Street's "Masters of the Universe." Kudos to Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) for pushing back.

Speaking for me only

< March Madness Friday | Appeals Court Denies Bond for Bernie Madoff >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    CNBC Believes In "Indispensable Men" | 35 comments (35 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    If Galbraith is correct (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 02:13:27 PM EST
    they have already been dispensed with no matter how much friggin money you throw into the blackhole.  They were dispensed with by their own hand, and few of us realize it yet. We are mistaking the twitching of the nerves dying as signs of life.

    Mark Haines says no one will take those (5.00 / 5) (#5)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 02:37:17 PM EST
     Wall Street jobs at a salary of $100,000.00 (or $250,000.00..whatever)

    Wanna bet?

    For years, Corporate America has cheered for the new global economy where jobs have been out-sourced. Dean Baker said some time ago, watch the howling of a different tune when Wall Street jobs can be shipped overseas or outsourced.

    "We have to import cheap labor, [or have to outsource,] because Americans won't work for $100,00.00 a year!"

    Unbelieveable (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 02:45:09 PM EST
    I'm so tired of being held hostage by the bullcrap ginned up fear of others.  What used to be "Wall Street" will never look the same again in my lifetime and if you want to work there you better get used to the facts of life like the rest of us.

    Parent
    Zactly (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 04:01:24 PM EST
    I can't watch CNBC anymore....used to like Dylan and his calls for more transparency in the financials, Erin (before she posed the question, [people are saying] Is unemployment insurance a good thing, or does encourage slackers?) and Mark.

    (ah course my last bolded remark was fictional and satire...just saying in case you haven't had your nap yet!:)

    Parent

    The types of jobs (none / 0) (#13)
    by Green26 on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 04:36:24 PM EST
    being talked about, i.e. higher paid executives and big producers, cannot be outsourced.

    Some producers can take other jobs, or takes jobs with companies in other capital markets (like London, Hong Kong, Singapore).

    Investment banking and senior sales positions depend on personal relationships with clients. Investment bankers need to have some proximity to the big law firms, although that is less important than it once was.

    No one is going do a senior level executive level job at a Wall St. firm for $100,000. That's entry level salary (with bonuses on top of that). No one is going to work for $250,000 if bonuses are going to be limited or taxed at an unually high rate.

    Parent

    salesmen are indispensable? (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by souvarine on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 05:11:21 PM EST
    So these people are highly paid schmoozers? Liddy's concern about the "complexity" of these deals was just cover for overpriced salesmen?

    This may come as a shock to you but the technical ability people are looking for when they hire an H1-B is harder to find than good talkers. What you are really saying is that these people used their social position to defraud the world public. Those social connections aren't particularly helpful as we try to unwind the fraud. In fact, as we see here, those connections get in the way, since people are very reluctant to admit to their peers that their promises were worthless.


    Parent

    So you think people (none / 0) (#16)
    by Green26 on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 05:23:38 PM EST
    who sell stocks and bonds, including those who sell huge amounts to institutions, are just "good talkers"?

    How about the people who know the market so well that they can price, i.e. set the price, of newly issued stocks and bonds? Are they just "good talkers"?

    How about the investment bankers who advise companies in buying and selling other companies? Are they just "good talkers"?

    Parent

    For the most part, they are (none / 0) (#18)
    by souvarine on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 05:40:58 PM EST
    No, I think the people with the technical skills to do the analysis and properly price risk are easily outsourced. The people with the skills to analyse these contracts and unwind them most profitably to the American taxpayer are unlikely to be found among the people who used their social connections to sell this mountain of fraud to institutions.

    And yes, the investment bankers I know tend to be reasonably sharp Ivy leaguers who use their social connections, and their ability to talk, to arrange deals. In fact, having read their expense reports, they spend an inordinate amount of money hosting social events to seal these deals.

    For the more complete argument, read Simon Johnson today in the NY Times. Just being American doesn't make these people different from their counterparts in previous crises in other countries. They are deluded by the same sense of entitlement.

    Parent

    of course your previous point is well taken that (none / 0) (#19)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 05:44:46 PM EST
    senior management and sales wouldn't work for that dough. But the whole system is flawed. Do we need (most of) those jobs at all?

    Are these the highly paid traders and execs you're talking about that deserve millions and millions in income and are irreplaceable because they know the market so well and have rich pals?

    One Merrill Lynch trader apparently gambled away more than $120 million in the currency markets. Others seemingly lost hundreds of millions on tricky credit derivatives.

    And that's why they deserve the big bucks?

    snip

    But questions over the Merrill losses -- in particular, who knew about them, and when -- keep swirling. Merrill hemorrhaged $13.8 billion during the final three months of 2008 alone.

    snip


    Nor was the extent of the loss fully known when Merrill paid out $3.6 billion in bonuses, which were based on estimates of the firm's performance as of Dec. 8. When the problems became clear, Bank of America was forced to seek a second, multibillion-dollar rescue from Washington.


    Parent
    everyone, even the pope, (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by cpinva on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 03:51:53 PM EST
    is "dispensable". there's always someone ready, willing and able to replace you. that's actually the real storyline at these institutions: produce huge numbers, or you're gone, replaced by someone else who can.

    same thing goes for high powered law and accounting firms; if you're not deemed to be on a partnership track, you get bounced. there's always someone to replace you.

    all the business would go overseas (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by souvarine on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 04:00:57 PM EST
    Haines: "All the business would go overseas, that's the bottom line."

    Too bad it didn't, then the EU would be bailing our banks out, instead of us bailing them out through AIG. A poster on DeLong's blog suggested H1-Z visas so we could replace these high-paid geniuses with low-cost developing world geniuses.

    My point as well above. (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 04:03:13 PM EST
    Let the pain of globalization and no good jobs and low-paid imported labor....let them share that pain...see how they like that.

    Parent
    The bonus revelations (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by cal1942 on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 04:49:12 PM EST
    have gotten the American people to a long overdue level of rage.

    Let's hope that this final straw will arouse enough anger to demand total reform, a complete fundamental reordering of the finance industry.

    My reaction is that (none / 0) (#2)
    by Green26 on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 02:14:25 PM EST
    with people like Brad Sherman in Congress, no wonder Congress has trouble getting much right.

    After the US has pumped 100's of billions into banks and other financial institutions, supposed leaders like this guy are spending too much of their time focusing on bonuses, including bonuses that have already been paid?

    They ought to spend more time considering, writing and reading their bills. Or, maybe considering how big the deficit is going to get.

    I think it's laughable that Congress passes a bill that permits the recent AIG bonuses, and then they are outraged that the bonuses have been paid.

    My reaction (5.00 / 5) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 02:20:55 PM EST
    is just the opposite. We need more Brad Shermans.

    Parent
    Amen (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 03:06:04 PM EST


    Parent
    I thought what Rep Sherman was saying (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by ding7777 on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 02:25:44 PM EST
    is that he wants AIG to go into receivership (void all AIG contracts) or have AIG stop taking government money.

    Parent
    Fannie Mae CEO concerned about canceling (none / 0) (#17)
    by Green26 on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 05:39:18 PM EST
    bonuses. From the AP:

    "Mortgage giant Fannie Mae's chief executive and a top government regulator warned Friday that canceling bonuses for workers at institutions receiving federal bailout money could undermine efforts to stabilize the U.S. housing market.

    Herbert Allison, who was installed by government regulators as CEO of the Washington-based company last fall, sent a companywide e-mail Friday defending Fannie Mae's bonus program for thousands of workers.

    "I am deeply concerned that eliminating our retention plan would jeopardize our ability to fulfill the mission the government has given us to address the housing crisis," he wrote, citing President Barack Obama's plan to prevent up to 9 million foreclosures.

    more threats (none / 0) (#20)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 05:45:44 PM EST


    Parent
    The Fannie CEO was picked by (none / 0) (#21)
    by Green26 on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 05:58:24 PM EST
    the regulators and does not receive a salary.

    What's his incentive to make a "threat"?

    What's his incentive to be dishonest about or exaggerate what he said?

    Parent

    I'm just saying, (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 06:13:30 PM EST
    every attempt to rein in the greed has been met with the threat of "it will all collapse"

    I'm not saying he is being dishonest. He may be right about the employees who don't get their bonuses will take their ball and go home. It doesn't matter. The whole system is corrupt, and the sacrifices must shared by more than hourly wage earners.

    BTD has talked about the flaw in the likes of Sec. Geitner and Summers being in charge of the economic fixing.....the flaw being that they have a vested interest in maintaining the old/new system. Perhaps this regulator has the same bias.

    Parent

    The other view is that the people (none / 0) (#24)
    by Green26 on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 06:24:36 PM EST
    warning about the negative impacts of these drastics limits on comp are in fact completely right.

    I don't see how Gaithner and Summers have any vested interest. Just because someone is knowledgeable about something, or has worked in a particular area, doesn't mean they don't know what they're talking about.

    I realize that few of you are going to listen to the likes of me on this subject, but I have worked in and around the finance area for almost 35 years--and I'm telling you that these comp limits are going to be a distaster. Affected people are not only grumbling; they are looking for high ground.

    Parent

    Join the club searching for high ground. (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 06:57:49 PM EST
    I respect your experience. You obviously have knowledge and insight into the industry and I know that you are not just blowing it out your ...
    (sorry)

    But don't you see? It's hard to feel sorry for those grumbling about comp limits, however justified those complaints might seem to be. The average income in this country is just under $50,000.00 a year, as I'm sure you know. Perhaps the grumblers would settle for that. Most of us have to.

    And I wish them luck in their search for the high ground, as that route is already crowded.


    Parent

    I am not suggesting that anyone (none / 0) (#32)
    by Green26 on Sat Mar 21, 2009 at 12:12:04 AM EST
    feel sorry for the people whose comp is being capped.

    I want the bailed out companies to succeed. I want the US economy and financial system to improve. I want the US to recapture as much as it can from the investments in made in failing companies. I want lending to increase. I want unemployment to decrease.

    I want there to be some basic fairness in what is being done. If someone has been promised a retention bonus if they stay for a period of time at a company that is not doing well, where the morale is bad, and/or where the work is tough, then they deserve the benefit of their bargain. Also, the banks that were asked/told to take TARP funds, but really didn't want or need the funds, should not now, retroactively, have the rules changed on them.

    I'd also like to see Congress focus on things that are truly important in our country at this time. These are tough times. There are important decisions to be made. Can these people not look forward? Do they have to look back, and look for someone to punish?

    In my view, capping and taxing comp is a good way to make sure that the bailout doesn't succeed as well as it otherwise would, and to increase the chances that the economy will not improve as fast as it otherwise would.

    Parent

    these would be the very (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by cpinva on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 11:57:56 PM EST
    The other view is that the people warning about the negative impacts of these drastics limits on comp are in fact completely right.

    same people who kept telling us how wonderful the market was.

    no, i don't agree with your view. these are the very same people who've cried wolf, every time the minimum wage was raised; the whole business sector of the economy would collapse in a heap.

    in fact, these people have been constantly wrong, about damn near everything, except maybe where the bathrooms are located. maybe. they have zero credibility. anyone who listens to them seriously is a fool.

    Parent

    What's your basis for saying these (none / 0) (#33)
    by Green26 on Sat Mar 21, 2009 at 12:15:52 AM EST
    are the same people who said those other things previously?

    My guess is that you have zero basis for saying what you just said.

    Show us where the CEO of Fannie Mae said any of those things previously.

    I can guarantee you that I wasn't saying those things previously.

    Another thing. Your statement about the minimum wage is total BS. Show us some example of where people said the "whole business sector of the economy would collapse".

    Parent

    self regard (none / 0) (#23)
    by souvarine on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 06:21:03 PM EST
    I've met Herb Allison, when he was at TIAA-CREF. He managed to avoid many of the mistakes of his peers. But he came up through Merrill, he lives in a $25 million Connecticut mansion, he is one of the people who think guys like him deserve that kind of money.

    His incentive is to defend his way of life, his whole career.


    Parent

    He's not defending his way of life. (none / 0) (#25)
    by Green26 on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 06:26:55 PM EST
    He's trying to keep the people necessary to do the job he signed on to do.

    Have you ever run an organization? Do you not realize that you need to compensate, and generally be good to, good people, if you want them to stay around, work hard and do a good job.

    Parent

    yep (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by souvarine on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 06:35:52 PM EST
    Yes, I have, which is why I know that no-one is indispensable. I've fired a fair number of people who thought they were.

    Yes, you have to treat people fairly. But in my experience when an employee thinks he can hold you hostage your best bet is to let him go. Turns out people work harder when they realize they can be replaced.

    Parent

    zzzzzzzzzzz (none / 0) (#30)
    by lilburro on Sat Mar 21, 2009 at 12:03:29 AM EST
    wake me up when ANYONE at AIG does a demonstrably (read: bonus worthy) good job.

    Parent
    I am more inclined to agree with (none / 0) (#31)
    by Amiss on Sat Mar 21, 2009 at 12:04:07 AM EST
    Barney Frank on these "retention" bonuses. I see them as nothing more than attempt to extort money from the american taxpayer. Incentive bonuses on the other hand are another matter.

    Parent
    Some of you deserve to get what (none / 0) (#34)
    by Green26 on Sat Mar 21, 2009 at 12:20:26 AM EST
    you'll get if AIG, some of the big banks, Fannie Mae, etc. don't recover like they otherwise could/should or collapse (because they don't have enough of the best available people to run them now).

    What you'll get is a prolonged recession and financial crisis, not enough lending to help get the economy going, bigger budget deficits, higher and prolonged unemployment, higher taxes, etc.

    Penny wise; pound foolish.

    Parent

    Maybe Marx got it right (none / 0) (#26)
    by samtaylor2 on Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 06:29:06 PM EST
    Capitalism will eat itself alive

    Indespensible Men Theory In A Nutshell (none / 0) (#35)
    by john horse on Sat Mar 21, 2009 at 07:02:36 AM EST
    Lets review the way things are.

    Corporations like AIG, Morgan Stanley, and Citigroup are too big to fail.

    Bush and Cheney are too big for jail.

    That leaves the rest of us.  We're not too big to do either because we're dispensible, unlike them.

    Have some fun... (none / 0) (#36)
    by joze46 on Sat Mar 21, 2009 at 09:13:15 AM EST
    Most of the politicians especially Republicans these past eight years totally ran a partisan money market: America has no free market. Strikingly, when one thinks about the "Contract with America" stuff, well, here we have Bush and company for years stay the course, be steady, don't flinch, stay with me or you're against me, we have an ownership society, Yah, who owns it, don't worry, about the war, just go shopping. LOL.  

    But, keep looking over your shoulder because Al Qaeda is any where and every where, and we are wining the war. Not. Sure not now trillions of dollars have disappeared in secret accounts. Heck, at the eleventh hour in the days of post election Bush and Company "threw the big switch" and they were not sleeping, Bush being as elusive as always says "America we need a trillion dollars, immediately or the economy is going to collapse".

    The banks are too big to fail and who knows who gets the money for no one knows for what reasons. America clamped on that one real hard, trillions in tax dollars flying around, with Middle America saying, what the huh. Allen Greenspan hands off a Federal Reserve to Bernekie while America is flying off the economic cliff, the best part is his wife Andrea Mitchell gets to hand out privy insider cooked book recipes that would likely make Martha Stewart Shenanigans look like a girl scout jamboree, but some how because of her basic talent and connections as political commentary on MSNBC that's hard wired to CNBC. Sheesh.  Then one wonder why the market goes zip-paddy do da any which way, what a wonderful day. Plenty of sunshine today.  

    The best time to do this money stuff was at the hand off period where contracts are made with hand shake deals back room politics, all in layers of lobby people and stock market corruption with toxic assets, zombie banking predator loan schemes coincidental with the classic Madoff getting away with debacle Ponzied cooked books after decades.

    But poor Blagojevich is the biggest villain on the block, no Bush is better. Hey where is Fitzgerald? Sheesh, yet, last but always in your face the Poly-Anna media and the Bush family, Poppy,  taking all those free tax dollars he can through media cover ups saying gee we didn't see this coming. How did we get here? George did a fine job Gram pa Prescott would be proud America's banking community has no recourse but to implode like a Bin Laden improved explosive devise set off by the Arab flying acrobatic box cutter team. Some how they avoided America's fifty billion dollar security system.      

    Then someone out there says lets be fair? This is better than "Pirates of the Caribbean".  Every night is Saturday night live. Might as well stand in the unemployment line laughing, the new world order.

    Actually what we have here is tyrannical mainstream media rhetorical anarchy.
    This was only meant to be funny but its true.        

    CNBC Believes In "Indispensable Men" | 35 comments (35 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment