CNBC host: Wall Street companies can’t ‘be run well’ by those making under $250,000 (1:51)

[underpants]

Run time: 01:51 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YG5SPutohlM   Posted on YouTube: March 19, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: March 20, 2009 By DU Member: underpants Views on DU: 975

 
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/19/cnbc-rich-wall-street/

As several bloggers and television pundits have noted, CNBC has consistently advocated on behalf of the interests of the rich during the recent financial crisis. Indeed, in an interview with Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) today, CNBC host Mark Haines made the curious claim that Americans who earn under $250,000 per year — or 98 percent of the population — can’t run Wall Street companies:

HAINES: Let’s get back to what I regard as a fundamental issue here. I know it’s politically unpopular, politically incorrect. I know it goes against all of the populist indignation that’s out there right now. But you can’t really, it seems to me, expect that these Wall Street companies are going to be run well by a bunch of people who don’t make more than $250,000.

[rfranklin]

1. "Let them eat cake!"

These assholes are so disconnected from reality.

[End Of The Road]

2. LOL! They haven't been "run well" by

They haven't been "run well" by those making OVER $250,000 HAVE THEY??

[Berry Cool]

4. No, they have not. And why?

I would wager it's because these people KNOW that it doesn't matter how well or poorly they run the company, they're going to get their over $250,000 salary AND their bonus, too--automatically--just for showing up to work and breathing every day for eight hours.

Where's the motivation in that to do a good job?

Sheesh! Talk about going Galt! These people did it a long time ago, in the sense that they tuned out of their jobs (not that they made themselves useful doing anything else). They just went on mental strike and let their conpanies go into the toilet. Why not? They were going to get the same rewards anyway, either way!

Now THAT's lack of motivation!

[underpants]

5. One word my friend

TALENT

Gotta have that TALENT to do such a masterful job

:sarcasm:

[liberal N proud]

3. And those making millions have done a good job?

:crazy:

[Joanne98]

6. Larry Kudlow "We don't want to companies run by D students"

They think their sooooo much more valuable than other people. What arrogance!

[underpants]

8. As opposed to things run by ' a Gentlemens C' student

[Why Syzygy]

7. White collar criminals are Expensive!

You don't expect them to steal on the cheap, do you?

[AlexDeLarge]

9. And they were run so well by those making over $250K

I bet I can run the company just as well as those guys and I'd be a bargain by taking only half of that.

[LatteLibertine]

10. It deserves repeating

"the talent" they have overcompensated are the very ones that destroyed their corporations. Pay should be performance based and "bonuses" should be grounded in the same. Period.

The "bail out" was simply taking privatize the profits and socialize the losses to a whole new level.

[Tansy_Gold]

11. Yes, it is a "taking" and isn't that what the libertarians have coronaries over?

I'm not picking on your grammar/typo/syntax goof, but sometimes those goofs point out important truths.

We all know how the righties wail about unconstitutional "takings." Well, haven't these "banks" effectively "taken" our money?

TG

[wackywaggin]

12. Just the opposite is true Mr. Haines

The folks with these high paying jobs got them through who they know not what they know. Also these folks are doomed to failure because they have never worked an honest day in their lives and can not relate to real work in the real world. They grew up and live in a pampered world where they went to the best private schools never having to work hard then immediately from school were rewarded with high paying jobs at the family or freinds businesses. They can not or do not represent the American people!

:smoke:

[florida08]

13. as the earlier poster

pointed out. GW is the poster boy of what the right connections and 'name' can do for you. Has little to do with aptitude or IQ. Now the guys on Wall Street have high IQ's but have been coerced and regardless of what they receive as a salary should feel remorse for being so damn bright they brought the country to it's knees. Is that too much to ask? Did I miss the Wall Street news about the gaming has stopped? They're no longing betting on short sales that a company will fail? They should be paid millions for that?
More pomposity from the elite who want us to stick to the SOP. Sorry that ship has sailed. You've driven us out of our homes and our jobs so stfu.:grr:

[postman07]

14. Interesting that they can't run a company

I am asked all the time to do things that I believe I deserve t be paid more. I Why is it that when it comes to the little guy, you're lucky to get the money you get, but when its a person in a big office they can't possibly exist with the gold pool. I don't get sick days, vacation or even health benefits, but i still manage to do my job.