Why Limits on Banker Bonuses Are Meaningless
by Jeffrey Miron on July 8th, 2010
3 Comments
At forbes.com.
Categories:
My Blog
This entry was posted
on Thursday, July 8th, 2010 at 4:44 am and is filed under My Blog.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Bob K
? the link doesn’t seem to work…
Bob K
oops, my mistake; ignore.
Marc
Do you believe everything you read? It says: “If the possibility of large bonuses indeed generates excessive risk-taking, then bank stakeholders have ample incentive to adopt such limits without government coercion.”
What nonsense. If one bank limits banker bonuses then of course it runs the risk that their best bankers choose another employer. But if ALL banks do it, this risk does not exist.
See, in the banking world you can risk other people’s money and get a bonus big enough to retire. Then the next year the bet turns bad and the banker can keep their retirement money and quit. But the pension funds and small investors have lost their retirement money. That’s robbery in plain daylight.
Or maybe we should call it “income redistribution?” Aha, now you understand why it is wrong.