Home // Opinion // Opinion Columnists // Ron Bartizek

Economy might gain if pay got spread around Ron Bartizek Business LOCAL

Sunday October 25, 2009 | 01:00 AM

The Wall Street propaganda machine is hard at work again, spewing out arguments that bloated executive paychecks are alternately well-deserved or have no impact on the average American.

“You plain folk don’t need to worry your little heads about this” is the message.

At the same time, investment banks and brokerage houses are spending hundreds of millions to lobby Congress against proposed regulations that would rein in or at least open to public scrutiny their most reckless schemes.

While average investors await recovery in their 401(k) accounts, Goldman Sachs, the poster child for big-bucks bonuses, is expected to dole out the largest pool of cash in the company’s history, more than $22 billion. That averages out to about $700,000 for each of the company’s 31,700 employees. But of course that’s not how these things work; top executives will claim the bulk of the money with many of them raking in $5 million, or in some cases, much more.

Defenders of Wall Street’s skewed system will say that, while they seem outsized, such rewards have been earned by people with the skill and guts to take risks that make even more money for their clients while greasing the wheels of the overall economy. That sounds palatable when Main Street is prospering because businesses can get the money they need to expand and hire. It’s less believable when – beyond rising stock prices – there’s little evidence of a strong recovery.

Ironically, the present success of Goldman, Morgan Stanley and some other firms is partly the result of last year’s financial meltdown. The forced closure of competitors like Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns has left the field of play open.

To help the survivors, the government allowed them to become traditional bank holding companies, giving them access to consumer deposits and cheap funds from the Federal Reserve. They also raised capital by selling billions in FDIC-insured bonds, again tapping into low-cost cash.

But Goldman and other high-fliers don’t make the bulk of their profit the old-fashioned way, by lending money that mom and pop can use to expand their store. Instead they employ rooms full of supercomputers to make big bets – sometimes risky -- on the direction of stock, bond and commodities prices.

I’m not sure how solid the ground is under moral outrage at what sure seems like excessive pay. But it’s possible these bonanzas are evidence of something else that merits consideration; how can the economy and securities markets be operating efficiently when a relatively small group of people can take such a huge cash pile out in only one year?

Shouldn’t compensation – on Wall Street and in other corner offices – be constrained by the need to compete for every dime of revenue and profit? Does “lean and mean” not apply to investment banks?

Defenders will argue that billion-dollar traders are alchemists whose magic touch can’t be replicated. I think it’s equally likely they have used carefully crafted relationships with regulators and presidential administrations of all stripes to game the system in their favor. And, as we’ve seen recently, to justify bailouts when they get caught in their own web of chicanery.

Here’s another way to think of Goldman’s bonus pool; it equals the 2007 median income ($50,740) of 450,000 American households. You really have to wonder if the economy would be healthier if those folks had a few extra dollars to spend on clothes, home improvements and cars.

About the Author

Ron Bartizek covers business for the Times Leader. Reach him at (570) 970-7157 or rbartizek@timesleader.com.

Ron Bartizek has more than 30 years' newspaper industry experience, in advertising, news, general management and ownership. He has been business editor of the Times Leader since mid-2005.