So Your Company Wants Bailout Money…
Welcome to the United States of Alphabitch. That's right, fuckers. Around these parts, you don't get billions of dollars of taxpayer money handed to you on a silver platter, no strings attached. We know what "government BY the people, OF the people and FOR the people" means, you spendthirft fuckwads … it means the people aren't obligated to pay for your colossal fuckups unless there's something in it for them, and we're here to make sure there is.
Now, obviously it's not in the nation's best interest to let the economy crumble to bits and swirl down the shitter, and we understand that. Therefore it is somewhat important that we keep your thieving asses in business. However, it is in the nation's best interest that you stop being self-obsessed, psychopathic pirates about your business dealings, so with that in mind, here's F*cking C*nts' Official 10 Point Corporate Bailout Package:
5 things to do before you get a bailout check…
- Every employee of any company that asks for a handout must agree to work at the same wage/benefit package as the company's lowest paid employee. CEO, CIO, CTO, COO … directors, officers, upper- middle- and lower-management … the whole fucking lot of them. The resulting difference in payroll expenses shall be deducted from the requested bailout amount, because your executives can obviously put that money to better use than re-tiling their Olympic-size indoor swimming pools every season, no? (Oh, and let's just specify, for the sake of being specific: no fucking bonuses … yes, I'm talking to you, financial industry!)
- Anyone working for a company requesting a bailout who is found to have approved or accepted a raise or bonus payment within the previous five years (an international company does not go bankrupt overnight, you know), who was in a position to have any significant knowledge of the company's financial difficulties, must pay said funds back. These paybacks are also to be deducted from the total of any bailout funds. If this means your corporate officers need to sell all their posh vacation homes, so be it. They won't be able to afford property taxes on all of them with their new wages anyway.
- Any company-held assets found to be unnecessary to the day-to-day operation of the core business (such as executive jets, retreat facilities, corporate gym/spa/resort memberships, etc.) shall be auctioned off prior to receipt of any bailout funds. And guess what? Any revenue from said auctions also gets deducted from any requested bailout funds.
- After all this? You still want/need a bailout? OK, first we're going to do some math. Not including anyone who makes more than 5Xs as much as your lowest paid employee, we're going to figure out whether it'd be cheaper to put the remaining employees on unemployment or bailout your entire company. If unemployment is cheaper, you and your entire management team can go fuck yourselves. We'll take care of the little guys, and sell your company at auction to someone with some fucking business sense.
- When all this penny pinching is said and done, if a bailout does indeed seem to be the cheapest way to keep an economy-anchoring company in business, the government will take shares of the company equal in value to the amount of bailout funds given (starting by taking all stock owned by company directors and officers, and proceeding down the remaining shareholder list sorted by quantity of stock held). The company must show a consistent profit for a period of 5 years before they're allowed to buy back any of those shares.
…and 5 things for after we've given you shit-tons of money
- The officers, directors and management-level employees of companies receiving bailouts are not eligible for employment within the US, should they decide this is all too unbearable and opt to quit their jobs in search of alternative employment. And should they decide it's better to leave the country than put up with the just desserts of their greed, they summarily forfeit their US citizenship and shall not be eligible for long term residency at any point in the future.
- Now, we know pretty much everyone in this rarefied strata of wealth has a nest egg (or 12) offshore somewhere, to sustain them through hard times such as these. So, lest a veritable mob of impoverished former corporate superstars decide that life as an American expatriate actually sounds pretty nice, all overseas assets of all officers and directors in bailed-out companies will be frozen until their companies are solvent again … and all frozen assets are forfeit to the US Government to help cover bailout costs, should any of the downtrodden elite choose to leave the whole solvency business in someone else's hands while they emigrate to greener pastures.
- The CEO, COO, CTO, CIO, and any other C*Os in the company, along with the President, Vice Presidents, Partners, Junior Partners, Directors, and any other bearers of ridiculous corporate honorifics, are to sit down and write a letter of apology to anyone in the company whose wage/benefit package got cut as per point #1, along with any personal employees now out of work as a result (we imagine this will put a great many nannies, gardeners, personal shoppers, housekeepers, and other luxury service providers out of work … there's the broken eggs for your omelet, folks). Also, a hand signed form-letter of apology will be mailed to all company shareholders and employees of any contractors impacted by bailout-related cutbacks.
- Postage for #8 will be paid by auctioning off any ridiculous small luxury goods owned by those doing the apologizing: Rolexes, automobiles with an MSRP over $50,000, expensive cutlery and other table and/or servingware of unusual value (ie. More expensive than you'll find at Williams Sonoma … I'm being generous here.), diamond cufflinks and tie tacks, and so on … actually, make that anything with diamonds in or on it. Diamonds are ridiculous.
- Anyone involved in asking for a handout who can be connected to any past or present lobbying efforts championing the reduction of government oversight and/or regulation of their industry, or who made any public or otherwise recorded statements trumpeting the benefits of "The Free Market," lassez faire capitalism, or any other such hypocritical bullshit, will have the words "Socialist Panhandler" tattooed on their foreheads, and be forced to wear grey Mao pajamas until such time as their company is fully solvent again. The tattoos however, may not be removed … ever.
You got Dugg.
http://digg.com/business_finance/So_Your_Company_Wants_Bailout_Money
18th December 2008 at 6:26 pm | permalink |Finally, a bail out plan I can fully support! The last item is my absolute favourite.
18th December 2008 at 6:40 pm | permalink |An excellent list. Especially point 10. This whole fiasco just demonstrates the ridiculousness of transferring wealth and responsibility from individuals to the intangible consensual delusions we call 'corporations.'
It shocks me that despite even the latest round of overwhelming evidence, so many people still believe in free market capitalism.
18th December 2008 at 11:10 pm | permalink |but what about the CEOs who really need their summer homes to "get away"? If they sold their extra houses than how would they relax, visit family? YOU NEVER THINK ABOUT THE LITTLE PEOPLE.
p.s. i like the whole plan, the fact that people are in support of bailing these assfuck's companies out without even looking to seek some kind of punishment for the corporate leaders is ludicrous. Also, some serious jail time should be in order for malpractice of those companies accountants.
19th December 2008 at 6:17 am | permalink |The last item is really the first one I thought of … but I figured it needed to be backed up by something that actually made some practical sense. ;-)
@Kavan: Yeah, I think the whole "no government oversight" thing ought to be considered discredited at this point. But then I suppose some people might argue that the few shreds of regulation we have at the moment are the real problem? Dunno. It's mind-boggling.
But then, there are also people who believe the earth is only 6000 years old, and virgins can get pregnant … I suppose the idea of a functional "free market" is just another faith-based reality system? ;-)
@morgan: Y'know, as much as I like the idea of jail time, I think making them work to save the companies while being paid the same wage as the janitor would actually be worse (and more relevant) punishment. I'm all for making the punishment fit the crime … and given they'd be sent to minimum security "country club" prisons anyhow, jail time would almost be more of a vacation than anything. ;-)
19th December 2008 at 2:51 pm | permalink |I’m just putting out questions here ok.
19th December 2008 at 2:59 pm | permalink |Hasn’t raw capitalism finally showed its true face by now?
Doesn’t capitalism turn our small minds into endless greed?
Can we ever obtain peace on earth with capitalism as the main driving force?
Do we want our children to carry on the capitalist baptisism in they’re way of thinking and behavior?
And do you think earth will survive much more capitalism?
just asking.
@bill: I didn't mean to put across the impression that I'm PRO free-market-lassez-faire-unfettered-greed-etc. I'm not. I think any situation with large amounts of money involved needs to have the ever living FUCK regulated out of it.
Obviously, given how well US markets are doing after 28 years mostly dominated by pro-deregulation Republicans. ;-)
19th December 2008 at 6:39 pm | permalink |I wasn’t referring to you ab, just puttin’ out questions you know :)
20th December 2008 at 4:59 am | permalink |@alpha – "Every employee of any company that asks for a handout must agree to work at the same wage/benefit package as the company's lowest paid employee. CEO, CIO, CTO, COO … directors, officers, upper- middle- and lower-management … the whole fucking lot of them."
How would you be able to maintain or recruit quality individuals?
20th December 2008 at 9:11 am | permalink |@bill: Just making sure. ;-)
@Rick: Well, if a company is begging for a life preserver from the gov't, apparently their existing pay scale didn't do a very good job of attracting quality individuals in the first place. hehe
Anyhow, I didn't say they couldn't raise the wages or improve the benefits for their lowest paid employee while they were at it. They'd just have to find a pay level they could afford to pay everyone in the company.
But really, perhaps the wage idea should only apply to the people affected by point #6? It'd still save millions and millions of dollars a year.
20th December 2008 at 3:44 pm | permalink |Interesting list. #1 would never fly though. Sorry I am not going to get reduce my wages because of some jackoff. That would just cause all the actual workers to leave. You;d gut the company and cause a bigger problem. If you focus on the board then that is different. You can't cut out the support structure though.
#2 is actually illegal under current law. #6 is well, just plain dumb. Not to mention opens a whole nasty can of worms. #7 also is not legal, the whole point of a corporation is to protect the individuals. If they can prove some kind of breaking of the law though then it is fair game.
Otherwise have fun. ;)
21st December 2008 at 10:12 am | permalink |@Rick:
21st December 2008 at 12:48 pm | permalink |You may have noticed that these companies have failed and are now asking for a huge bailout. Maybe the idea of quality individuals needs to be radically rethought. Hell, most of the MBA's actually reduce the companies ability to function (I used to work for Morgan Stanley, trust me on this one)
@Larry:
You might have noticed that forcing someone to have Socialist Panhandler tattooed on their forehead is not exactly legal either… I think this list is great but it is obviously never going to be enacted.
@ Rick: Your arguments sound as though you're somehow advocating for the execs who played pirate captain of this sinking ship.
First, Traverse is correct in that we need to radically re-think what it means to be a "quality individual." Actually, it shouldn't be that radical … merely begin to vest more value and credence in intellectual integrity/honesty, and less weight given to the maximization of profits and quarter-over-quarter growth.
Second, there needs to be a concerted effort to eliminate and strictly control the benefit/bonus plans of any organization receiving bailout assistance. When a "private institution" is so tightly tied to the overall health of the economy, and the mismanagement of that "private enterprise" has such a disastrous effect on tangential or even unrelated sectors of the economy (remember, the worst is not here yet), then a government-backed bailout of those "private institutions" renders those employees quasi-government employees—at least until solvency is restored and the markets stabilized.
The bailout isn't meant to be Monopoly money to fund extravagances or luxuries … it is meant to bring stability to the markets and permit economic recovery.
21st December 2008 at 1:35 pm | permalink |@Traverse you should check the legal books, there are some unusual punishments that have been assigned in the past. Not that far maybe but yeah. I know the list for what it is but as someone seeing some of this up close I felt the need to comment.
You have to recall what most of these people did was not illegal, much was unethical, and all of it was stupid.
21st December 2008 at 3:49 pm | permalink |@Larry: Well, I did revise #1 in my comment to Rick … I think #1 would apply to the people affected by #6, not to mid- to lower-level employees. As for #6 and #7, if you look at the whole thing as being as much a set of legal penalties as a business restructuring plan, they're basically the parts of the penalty that prevent fleeing.
See, like Becca was saying, if you're running a company that is so large and/or so intertwined with the nation's fundamental financial systems that the government needs to bail your ass out to keep the whole mess from imploding, I think you ought to have more legal responsibilities than Jim Bob running the neighborhood convenience store.
Seriously, of course this list isn't anything that's actually ever going to happen … but if you look at the basic ideas behind it, I think it's mostly sound:
1. If a company wants bailout money, they need to revise their corporate culture to NOT be spending that money on ANYTHING that isn't essential to their fundamental operations.
2. The government bailout effort should be strictly engineered so as to do the most good, at the least possible expense to the taxpayer.
3. The corporate officers/directors responsible for the company bankruptcy should NOT be able to simply quit, walk away, and leave the mess for someone else to deal with.
4. There should be some kind of punishment for the responsible parties … gross mismanagement to the point where your fuckups are putting the entire nation's economy at risk and costing taxpayers billions of dollars to save your ass, SHOULD be a fucking crime. Period.
These fuckwits are supposedly in the positions they're in because they know how to run a business, no? They SHOULD NEVER have ended up in this position. And now they're more or less waltzing off with fucktons of taxpayer money for doing it, rather than actually suffering the consequences of their actions.
Corporations are designed to shield individuals from legal responsibility, sure. Whether I think that's a load of shit or not (and I do) is irrelevant. However, as I've heard it, corporations were also originally at the legal mercy of the jurisidiction where they were headquartered. If their actions were NOT in the best interests of the community they served, their incorporati
21st December 2008 at 5:31 pm | permalink |Well I blame the regulators, or lack of mostly. They let the wolves in the henhouse.
21st December 2008 at 6:38 pm | permalink |@Becca, Traverse – WTF? You got all that from a single sentence?:)
First, from my home here in Michigan, I can go 25 miles in any direction and find a large production or office facility belonging to one of the big three(.5 mile for suppliers). Twenty five or thirty years ago you could find two, maybe three times that many . When my parents and grandparents were graduating high school, it was almost a foregone conclusion that you would go to work for the auto industry . Back then the mentality in this area was, "get a job at GM and be set for life". Most of the older members of my family either work for, or are retired from GM. So, yes Traverse , I've noticed the situation.
Second , I'm not and would not, advocate for these executives. They get paid big money to make the big decisions. They should accept the responsibility for their collective failures.
Third, "First, Traverse is correct in that we need to radically re-think what it means to be a "quality individual."
That's fine, my point was, the person fitting that description will expect to be paid according to industry standards. Without getting into a whole pay scale discussion, people are generally paid accordingly for their skills. That was the only reason I brought up the question.
Lastly, my convoluted thoughts on the bailout (in my own words:) If there was any way to remove the human element, I would say let them fail. I didn't like the bailout of the financial sector and I don't like this one. Unfortunately, either way the little person is going to be hurt the worst. In my area the impact of a total collapse would be devastating.
Now, I don't see the big three going away with or without this loan. They may file for bankruptcy,( something similar to the airlines), or, I also think a merger of some kind is still possible. The things is, you have this massive worldwide infrastructure, designed and built for producing cars. That alone is worth saving, even if it is under a new name.
In my biased opinion, I would like to see the big three pull through this, but, I have a feeling that we're still throwing good money after bad.
23rd December 2008 at 5:49 am | permalink |@Rick:
23rd December 2008 at 6:54 am | permalink |No, I responded to a single sentence. I got the ideas behind it from working IT for Morgan Stanley, having a good general understanding of corporate governance and having live outside of this economic system as well as inside it (so I can actually view it objectively, something that is impossible if you have never been outside it).
As to the big three going away, you might be surprised. Cars may not be as big a part of society in the near future as they have been in the near past. It may be that we have way more capacity for car building than we will ever need.
@Alpha:
Yeah, corporations actually managed to slip many of their current perks through regulation by piggy-backing on the post slavery civil rights laws. They had lawyers argue that the newly minted laws preventing prejudice also applied to them.
"I think making them work to save the companies while being paid the same wage as the janitor would actually be worse (and more relevant) punishment."
Absolutely love that one :)
"But really, perhaps the wage idea should only apply to the people affected by point #6? It'd still save millions and millions of dollars a year."
No the original idea was absolutely perfect – true to the f*ckingc*nts principle.
@Larry – don't you get it at all? – Thousands of people who run small businesses well, see corporate mismanagement getting bailed out by government, while their own businesses are being driven to the wall by economic circumstances. They don't see these bailouts as fair, as all they see is the inept corporate lackeys keeping their riches and passing the hardship down to their suppliers and employees.
@alpha – brilliant post, this brings f*ckingc*nts out of its US Election dominated shell and back on to the world scene with a real bang :)
@Larry – "You have to recall what most of these people did was not illegal, much was unethical, and all of it was stupid." – you redeem yourself well with this post – although it does raise the questions of 'WHY' was what these people did not illegal, 'WHY' do ethical considerations not seem to matter to corporate institutions and 'HOW' did these stupid people get into such positions within corporations.
@Rick – I understand exactly where you are coming from – quote "Unfortunately, either way the little person is going to be hurt the worst. In my area the impact of a total collapse would be devastating." – and I totally agree here, the problem is that those who are responsible are, at the moment getting away scot free.
Is giving a billion dollars to Corporate Entity A – a good idea – or would it be better to say. we have a billion dollars to bail out industry. lets take corporate entity A's supplier list an give out that momeny pro rata to those companies based the country that supply corporate entity A. This would give local suppliers and suppliers who depend on corporate entity A the opportunity to diversify their business into new markets.
23rd December 2008 at 4:59 pm | permalink |gee ian I am glad I can redeem myself for you, really. Ethics do matter of course, but there is the law and there is ethics. They are not really the same thing now are they?
I do know how people see it, but I that doesn't mean it should not be done. Dumping a bunch of cash on small business would not be the same thing. One thing you have to understand keeping some of these players afloat is about keeping the credit lenders going. Without them you'd have to nationalize the entire economy. That would be a bad thing, much worse really than what we have I think.
23rd December 2008 at 5:38 pm | permalink |"Ethics do matter of course, but there is the law and there is ethics. They are not really the same thing now are they?"
I totally agree, the law appears to be a way to allow those in positions of power not to have to worry about ethics. Invariably laws get written that allow those who already have power and money to gain more of it at the expense of those who don't
"Dumping a bunch of cash on small business would not be the same thing."
Yes I know – its just tough to see people who have worked hard to build up a business, screwed because of the ineptitude of someone who has played the corporate politics power trip game to the nth degree. And especially so when the consequences for the small business person and their emloyees (loss of homes, jobs) are so much greater than for the inept executive of the corporate entity (golden handshake and retirement in a luxury villa in the carribean).
You could easily find amongst those small business who have gone to the wall half a dozen people who could replace the entire board of a large corporate and run the company with more fiscal prudence, more ethics and more vigour – than you would ever find from within the management structure of the organisation itself, where most of the personnel are better at backstabbing their own coleagues than actually promoting the interests of the company that they work for.
23rd December 2008 at 6:32 pm | permalink |"One thing you have to understand keeping some of these players afloat is about keeping the credit lenders going. Without them you'd have to nationalize the entire economy. That would be a bad thing, much worse really than what we have I think."
Having thought about this – I really think that it is more that the politicians are FRIGHTENED by the possible consequences of finance lenders going bust and thus have to do something to stop it happpening. If they were truly free market liberals they would have let the market sort out its own problems and not worried about a couple of financial institutions going bust.
24th December 2008 at 6:18 am | permalink |