The Government strikes again: Gulf fisherman who don’t work get more than those who do

Now, I know you’re saying, “Oh brother Jim, why does this not surprise me?”. Well it does not surprise me but still, it such a sad example of how the government: a. does not value hard work and initiative and b. is clueless when it comes to compensation. Maybe its because no one in this White House has run a business?

Last night Wolf Blitzer interviews Gulf Pay Czar Ken Feinberg and asks him to explain why fisherman who worked to help clean up the oil spill are now being paid the same amount as fisherman who stayed home. The response from Feinberg is classic bureaucrat speak. Or maybe classic lkitigation lawyer … or both.

Feinberg explains if you lost $5000 as a Fisherman from loss of income … that’s all you get. That means, if the government paid you $3000 to help them clean up the Gulf …. then you get $2000 for loss of business. But what about those people who stayed home? Why those folks get $5000.

Hey, I’m just reporting … you decide.


Bottom line here, this is a perfect example of turning your life or your pay over to the government. They are deciders, no matter how illogical. And in typical Government fashion, it pays to stay on the sofa, or …. not let the government know you’re making extra cash?

Oh, it also pays to be a Wall Street Executive. Seems the pay czar treated them a little nicer than the folks who got their hands dirty.

This morning Feinberg released the results of a review of what the 419 banks that received government assistance paid their top executives in the year leading up to the financial cirisis and during. Perhaps surprisingly, Feinberg found that most banks paid their executives appropriately, rewarding them when reward was due. Only seventeen of the companies doled out wildly excessive compensation to top executives for little or no reason at all. Unsurprisingly, included in that list are the mainstays of Wall Street: Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America (i.e. Merrill Lynch). All told, the 17 firms handed out $1.6 billion in what Feinberg calls “ill-advised” payouts.

Feinberg is now moving onto the Gulf, where he’s got another tough job ahead of him. He has been appointed in charge of handing out compensation from the BP fund set up for people and companies impacted by the oil spill. But on his last day on the job policing Wall Street pay, it’s time to ask how well he did. Huge pay checks that seemed to have no relation to long-term performance or risks was one of the main factors leading up to the financial crisis. So did Feinberg do a good job of changing the-pay-for-no-performance culture on Wall Street? I’m not so sure.

This is what change looks like.

13 replies
  1. winnie888
    winnie888 says:

    I'm sitting here with my jaw in my LAP!  The unmitigated GALL!  This cannot possibly be for real!  Oh, my God!  And arrogant?

    For once, I'm speechless!

  2. JollyRoger
    JollyRoger says:

    This- is what change looks like!   Obama says: “I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money”   Who are you in your muddy clothes and oily toes to capitalize on this disaster when wealth must be spread around according to one's need as prescribed by anointed bureaucrats!   And ironically, the socialist and his wife, made millions last year…

  3. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    Well knock me over with a feather.  I guess incentives for helping out aren't on the agenda.  Imagine how Øbamacare will be run.


    Government think.  What an oxymoron.


    We're the government, and we're here to help you.  What did Reagan call those words?

  4. BEA
    BEA says:

    Sometimes I have to take a break from the news because it gives me a headache…from banging my head on the desk in disbelief!!!

  5. Gerry-M
    Gerry-M says:

    Unbelievable!! Why would anyone want to work? All King Obama has to do is print and pass out money. No one has to work, we can all sit back on our fat buts and become slugs. Ughhh!!!

  6. mathlady
    mathlady says:

    Love to be able to say I'm surprised, but I personally know at least a couple of people who are currently on unemployment who had multiple job offers, but didn't take the jobs because the compensation would have been a pay cut from their unemployment checks. As long as it is more lucrative to sit at home and get a check from the government than to actually drag your butt to work, people will do it. (On the other hand, fortunately I also know many people who would  choose to work at a job even if it meant less money simply because they have a sense of personal pride.)

  7. Murphy
    Murphy says:

    The Obanation theme song "Money for nothin' and your checks for free Now that ain't workin' that's the way you do it"

  8. Odonna
    Odonna says:

    When you think about the gas, wear and tear on their equipment, etc.  (Did they get expense reimbursement or just the flat fee?)  Those guys who were out there cleaning up were paid less than those who didn't clean up!

  9. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    It must be the fishermen's fault.  They clearly expected to be paid for their effort and wear and tear on their boats, as in any reasonable contract to work.  They forgot they were dealing with the government, where you are considered a statistic, not a person.


    Notice how none of this was disclosed to the fishermen prior to their "volunteering", i.e. transparency?


    This is how the Soviets ended up standing in line all day for a roll of toilet paper (and no guarantee there would be one waiting for you when you worked your way through the line).

    • winnie888
      winnie888 says:

      Dims, I must live in the Soviet Union, then, because in my house, I stand in line for the bathroom and the only tp is the tp I get out of the closet myself.  Rotten kids NEVER replace it when it's gone!

    • winnie888
      winnie888 says:

      @BEA…they'll be considered independent contractors (not the volunteers they turned out to be) and will probably be subject to a higher tax rate on that $5,000.  LOL

Comments are closed.