Citigroup Three Card Monty Policy on Executive Compensation

One would think that under the Obama administration of “greater transparency and accountability” that the 36% government owned Citigroup would wise up to the fact taxpayers are no longer tolerating huge compensations for, well absolutely nothing in return for shareholders but massive risk taking and losses.
Today, the NY Times reported that many of the bailed out banks who have received and continue to possess taxpayers’ money are looking for ways to divert previous “bonus” money to their base salaries.  No matter how they funnel money into the pockets of Wall St fat cats, they are simply raping their shareholders and taxing people who struggle to keep their jobs, their homes and pay their taxes.
Then why wouldn’t President Obama, Treasury Secretary Geithner, Senator Dodd and Congressperson Barney Frank do something about?
Even at the behest of taxpayers not to bailout failed businesses, the previous and current administration also failed to elect directors to the board of Citigroup!  How can that be?  36% shareholder and no representation on the Board of Directors.
Say what?
Doing a little research, you can easily detect the international political underpinnings to Citigroup.  Citigroup is made up of large concentration of foreign investors, mainly Middle East and Far East money.  A royal Saudi prince is the single largest shareholder as well as other various investment groups in the Middle East and Singapore.
So it is this writer’s opinion that because of the money ties to the Middle East, the current administration have no issue in bailing these people out with taxpayers’ money and at the same time, let them decide what to do with that money, even if it means it never makes it back to the taxpayers with interest.

One would think that under the Obama administration of “greater transparency and accountability” that the 36% government owned Citigroup’s Board and senior executives would wise up to the fact taxpayers are no longer tolerating huge compensations for, well absolutely nothing in return for shareholders but massive risk taking and losses.  Wrong!

Today the NY Times reported Citigroup as well as other banks that received and continue to possess taxpayers’ money are looking for ways to divert previous “bonus” money to their base salaries.  No matter how they funnel money into the pockets of Wall St fat cats, they are simply raping their shareholders and taxing people who struggle to keep their jobs, their homes and pay their taxes.

Then why wouldn’t President Obama, Treasury Secretary Geithner, Congressional leaders such as Dodd and Frank do something about it given the tough rhetoric during campaigning?

Even at the behest of taxpayers not to bailout failed businesses, the previous and current administration also failed to elect directors to the board of Citigroup!  How can that be?  36% shareholder and no representation on the Board of Directors of Citigroup?

Say what?

Doing a little research, you can easily detect the international political underpinnings to Citigroup.  Citigroup is made up of large concentration of foreign investors, mainly Middle East and Far East money.  A royal Saudi prince is the single largest shareholder as well as other various investment groups in the Middle East and Singapore.

So it is this writer’s opinion that because of the money ties to the Middle East, the current Obama administration has no qualms in bailing these foreign investors out of failed Citigroup with taxpayers’ money but simultaneously let Citigroup decide what to do with that money, even if it means taxpayers’ money never making it back to the taxpayers with interest.

How’s that for fiduciary responsibility post Madoff and Stanford?

Comments Trackbacks / Pingbacks (81)

Team Obama’s Summers & Geithner’s “White” Wash of Bailout Banks to Avoid Bankruptcy Proceedings

While President Obama is jetting throughout Europe, more bad economic news have hit the fan.  Joblessness continue to be on the rise with sign of slowing, services provided by states such as unemployment benefits previously extended are quickly depleting, state and local taxes on the rise with fiscal budget deficits, and retirement and pensions plans are under pressure due to drop in value and the lack of contributions.

Critics continue to berate the Team Obama economic plan and its ability to solve the crisis as home prices continue to fall and there is lack of marketability of toxic assets to investors other than the banks themselves.  In the latest critical comments offered by experts, the supposed bank stress test move is nothing more than a “scam”, a white wash placebo to calm the American people.  This critique comes quickly on the heels of the news that FASB will relax and make changes to their “mark to market” accounting rules.

How long will American voters and taxpayers wait for results despite trillions of their money are going out the door to failed private corporations?  Take this poll.

The bank stress tests currently underway are “a complete sham,” says William Black, a former senior bank regulator and S&L prosecutor, and currently an Associate Professor of Economics and Law at the University of Missouri – Kansas City. “It’s a Potemkin model. Built to fool people.” Like many others, Black believes the “worst case scenario” used in the stress test don’t go far enough.

He detailed these and related concerns in a recent interview with Naked Capitalism. But Black, who was counsel to the Federal Home Loan Bank Board during the S&L Crisis, says the program’s failings go way beyond such technical issues. “There is no real purpose [of the stress test] other than to fool us. To make us chumps,” Black says. Noting policymakers have long stated the problem is a lack of confidence, Black says Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is now essentially saying: “’If we lie and they believe us, all will be well.’ It’s Orwellian.”

The former regulator is extremely critical of Geithner, calling him a “failed regulator” now “adding to failed policy” by not allowing “banks that really need desperately to be closed” to fail. (On Saturday, Geithner said on Face the Nation, if banks need “exceptional assistance” in the future “then we’ll make sure that assistance comes with conditions,” including potentially changing management and the board, but did not say they’d be shut down.)

Black says the stress test must also be viewed in the context of Geithner’s toxic debt plan, which he calls “an enormous taxpayer subsidy for people who caused the problem.” The fact bank stocks have been rising since Geithner unveiled his plan is “bad news for taxpayers,” he says. “It’s the subsidy of all history.”

Comments Trackbacks / Pingbacks (2)

G-20 to give $1 trillion to IMF, World Bank, will more closely regulate financial system

President Obama and Treasury Tim Geithner clearly had an agenda of attempting to get G-20 nations to spend more stimulus within G-20 nations’ borders.  However, getting some early feedbacks from the G-20 representatives, President Obama and his cabinet decided to drop their initial targets for other nations.   What does the leading nations know that President Obama and Treasury Secretary don’t know?

President Obama, despite having dropped their targets for the G-20, they still persisted on urging the other leaders to spend to jump start the world economy that “knows no borders”.  But the Europeans are resisting such urgings saying they have done all that they can and cannot do more without jeopardizing their budgets.

In response to U.S. calls for more government spending, the EU has said it is doing its part with a package that amounts to between 3 and 4 percent of Europe’s gross domestic product. The $780 billion amounts to about 5.5 percent of the U.S. GDP, but is spread over two years.

While the U.S. is expected to continue to urge European countries to spend more, that will likely be a tough sell. With the exception of Germany, Great Britain and France, most European governments’ finances are already stretched to the limit.

However, despite a laundry lists of things to follow up on, the G-20 nations did agree to further expand the lending powers of the IMF to help the poors of the developing nations to ride through this world wide economic meltdown.

They also unveiled a $250 billion expansion in the IMF’s reserve currency — the special drawing right — to boost liquidity in the global financial system by expanding member countries’ foreign exchange reserves. They committed to selling IMF gold to help poor countries..

G-20 to give $1 trillion to IMF, World Bank

LONDON (AP) — G-20 leaders pledged an additional $1 trillion to restore credit, growth and jobs in the world economy on Thursday, announcing a broad raft of measures designed to hasten the end of the global financial crisis.

The leaders also declared a crackdown on tax havens, regulation of hedge funds and a new supervisory body to flag problems in the world financial system.

“Today the largest countries of the world have agreed on a global plan for economic recovery and reform,” said the host, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

A sweeping G-20 communique appeared to bridge the gap between the United States and major European countries over how far to push changes on regulation to curb the market excesses that led to the current crisis.

The result of the dramatic one-day gathering was swiftly praised by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Sarkozy praised President Barack Obama and Brown at the end of the meeting, despite having threatened earlier to walk out if unsatisfied with the outcome. The French leader said Obama helped in creating consensus and in persuading China to agree to publish lists of tax havens.

Sarkozy said Obama was a “very open man” and “completely in line with what we wanted: that politicians take their responsibilities.”

European and U.S. markets surged ahead Thursday as the outcome of the summit came into view.

While they did not announce any new stimulus measures — as some in the United States had hoped — Brown said the $1 trillion deal to boost funds for the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and other global institutions was unprecedented.

“For the first time we have a common approach to cleaning up banks around the world to restructuring of the world financial system. We have maintained our commitment to help the world’s poorest,” Brown said. “This is a collective action of people around the world working at their best.”

The G-20 leaders also said that developing nations — hard-hit and long complaining of marginalization — a greater say in world economic affairs. They said they would renounce protectionism and pledged $250 billion in trade finance over the next two years — a key measure to help struggling developing countries.

The leaders also agreed to new rules on linking executive pay to performance, Brown said.

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »