<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Limits on Banker Bonuses Are Meaningless</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jeffreymiron.com/2010/07/why-limits-on-banker-bonuses-are-meaningless/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jeffreymiron.com/2010/07/why-limits-on-banker-bonuses-are-meaningless/</link>
	<description>Libertarianism A to Z</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 22:53:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Marc</title>
		<link>http://jeffreymiron.com/2010/07/why-limits-on-banker-bonuses-are-meaningless/comment-page-1/#comment-1909</link>
		<dc:creator>Marc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 04:30:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreymiron.com/?p=1466#comment-1909</guid>
		<description>Do you believe everything you read? It says: &quot;If the possibility of large bonuses indeed generates excessive risk-taking, then bank stakeholders have ample incentive to adopt such limits without government coercion.&quot;

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&#039;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&#039;s robbery in plain daylight.

Or maybe we should call it &quot;income redistribution?&quot; Aha, now you understand why it is wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you believe everything you read? It says: &#8220;If the possibility of large bonuses indeed generates excessive risk-taking, then bank stakeholders have ample incentive to adopt such limits without government coercion.&#8221;</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>See, in the banking world you can risk other people&#8217;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&#8217;s robbery in plain daylight.</p>
<p>Or maybe we should call it &#8220;income redistribution?&#8221; Aha, now you understand why it is wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob K</title>
		<link>http://jeffreymiron.com/2010/07/why-limits-on-banker-bonuses-are-meaningless/comment-page-1/#comment-1633</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 12:31:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreymiron.com/?p=1466#comment-1633</guid>
		<description>oops, my mistake; ignore.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oops, my mistake; ignore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob K</title>
		<link>http://jeffreymiron.com/2010/07/why-limits-on-banker-bonuses-are-meaningless/comment-page-1/#comment-1632</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 12:30:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreymiron.com/?p=1466#comment-1632</guid>
		<description>? the link doesn&#039;t seem to work...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>? the link doesn&#8217;t seem to work&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

