I LOVE Elizabeth Warren: All aboard - WOO WOO!!!

[Tom Skerritt 1,960]

Gutless Leadership

 

Video of her grilling Stumpf, the CEO of Wells Fargo, is just awesome! Would hate to get on her bad side. But she is so right on the money with this guy. Simply criminal what he and other senior executives at WF have done.

Edited May 4, 2017 by Tom Skerritt

[IC FBGCav 5,442]

Now imagine she was Hillary.

[Tom Skerritt 1,960]

2 minutes ago, FatUncleJerryBuss said:

Now imagine she was Hillary.

Hillary can appoint her to the Supreme Court. I'd be cool with that.

[chet 2,650]

She's goofy.  Everything she did today was for soundbite purposes IMO.  I'm not saying Stumpf didn't deserve to be skewered--he did IMO--but constantly blaming Wall Street only for the 2008 crisis shows how misinformed she is.

[IvanKaramazov 15,503]

Not a fan, but Wells Fargo deserves every bit of criticism that's coming their way.

[James Daulton 8,522]

Newsflash.  Big corporate executives don't give a #### about anything or anyone but themselves.  Corporate executive pay and their relationship with their boards is so incestual it's sickening. 

[Tom Skerritt 1,960]

4 minutes ago, James Daulton said:

Newsflash.  Big corporate executives don't give a #### about anything or anyone but themselves.  Corporate executive pay and their relationship with their boards is so incestual it's sickening. 

Agreed. Which is all the reason more that I am happy to see her call them out on it.

[Bob Sacamano 8,052]

10 minutes ago, James Daulton said:

Newsflash.  Big corporate executives don't give a #### about anything or anyone but themselves. 

As opposed to politicians?  With this thread you've given her all she cared to accomplish.

[The Commish 9,967]

Not defending my institution and I am generally a fan of Warren, but it's puzzling that she asks if executives were fired, Stumpf answers by saying there was a change at a regional level of the people who were directly overseeing the activities and she keeps pressing for a list of executives instead.  It comes off very witch hunt like and that none of the actions matter unless the people SHE thinks should be fired are fired.  Lots of people have been fired over this....listening to her you'd think nothing was done.  Overplaying her hand IMO.

[Tom Skerritt 1,960]

5 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Not defending my institution and I am generally a fan of Warren, but it's puzzling that she asks if executives were fired, Stumpf answers by saying there was a change at a regional level of the people who were directly overseeing the activities and she keeps pressing for a list of executives instead.  It comes off very witch hunt like and that none of the actions matter unless the people SHE thinks should be fired are fired.  Lots of people have been fired over this....listening to her you'd think nothing was done.  Overplaying her hand IMO.

You are severely uninformed if you think this has been handled appropriately. The people who have been fired earn between $12-$16 per hour. And these workers were pressured to create fraudulent accounts or risk being fired. Management and senior leadership knew about what was going on the entire time.

 

Upper management and executives have received their bonuses and retain their jobs. Low level employees were fired. Deplorable!

Edited September 20, 2016 by Tom Skerritt

[Abraham 2,604]

9 minutes ago, Tom Skerritt said:

You are severely uninformed if you think this has been handled appropriately. The people who have been fired earn between $12-$16 per hour. And these workers were pressured to create fraudulent accounts or risk being fired. Management and senior leadership knew about what was going on the entire time.

 

Upper management and executives have received their bonuses and retain their jobs. Low level employees were fired. Deplorable!

 

[chet 2,650]

5 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Not defending my institution and I am generally a fan of Warren, but it's puzzling that she asks if executives were fired, Stumpf answers by saying there was a change at a regional level of the people who were directly overseeing the activities and she keeps pressing for a list of executives instead.  It comes off very witch hunt like and that none of the actions matter unless the people SHE thinks should be fired are fired.  Lots of people have been fired over this....listening to her you'd think nothing was done.  Overplaying her hand IMO.

Stumpf made his bed by denying there was fraud today at the hearing.  Another interesting facts about this situation is that fired 5300 low level employees but didn't fire anyone even remotely senior.  And they let the woman whose division this fraud occurred in retire in July with a $100mm package.  If they'd fired her, she'd have collected about half that.  I watched about half of today's hearing and though Stumpf deserved everything he got.   

[Zigg 938]

So a CEO was scolded, but will anything come of it?  I wish that was a real question.

[HellToupee 12,068]

Wells Fargo deserves severe criticism but everything Warren does is phony. It's a work , the rubes eat it up every time like lapdogs. 

 

[The Commish 9,967]

25 minutes ago, Tom Skerritt said:

You are severely uninformed if you think this has been handled appropriately

Didn't even come remotely close to saying this....even in an alternate universe of your choosing, I didn't come remotely close to saying this......

[wikkidpissah 12,258]

America sure could use a term or two where she's the Cheney. But she's not a good public figure - ran the worst major campaign i've ever seen against Scott Brown & continues to keep terrible counsel from her public image handlers.

[Walking Boot 7,276]

It's so sad that this is all one of our elected politicians has to do to stand out. Thousands of people screwed tens of thousands of people to fraudulently produce millions of dollars, and some politician simply talks mean to one of the people involved, and the unwashed masses eat it up.

She's not actually doing anything, no one ever does anything, no one fixes anything, and she's as corrupt a politician as the rest of them, but, she talks what people want to hear, they cheer, then go back to their bread and circuses.

 

Hooray

 

[Bob Sacamano 8,052]

There's bread? 

[cstu 6,084]

58 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

Wells Fargo deserves severe criticism but everything Warren does is phony. It's a work , the rubes eat it up every time like lapdogs. 

 

I used to get mad at posts like these, but now I just feel sad for you.  Hope you get all your problems worked out someday.

[Sinn Fein 29,574]

2 hours ago, FatUncleJerryBuss said:

Now imagine she was Hillary.

I imagine it would have gone something like this...

[Peyton Marino 4,713]

epic.

 

RACK HER!

[Ned 9,833]

2 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Not a fan, but Wells Fargo deserves every bit of criticism that's coming their way.

 

The last 45sec or so was the best part when she talked about the teller taking cash from the drawer. 

[HellToupee 12,068]

45 minutes ago, cstu said:

I used to get mad at posts like these, but now I just feel sad for you.  Hope you get all your problems worked out someday.

Thanks for the well wishes

[Slapdash 14,423]

1 hour ago, Walking Boot said:

It's so sad that this is all one of our elected politicians has to do to stand out. Thousands of people screwed tens of thousands of people to fraudulently produce millions of dollars, and some politician simply talks mean to one of the people involved, and the unwashed masses eat it up.

She's not actually doing anything, no one ever does anything, no one fixes anything, and she's as corrupt a politician as the rest of them, but, she talks what people want to hear, they cheer, then go back to their bread and circuses.

 

Hooray

 

Liz Warren essentially created the CFPB, which uncovered this fraud in the first place.  That is the definition of doing something and trying to fix things.  The only reason she is a Senator instead of running the agency is because Republicans would not confirm her. 

[St. Louis Bob 6,035]

I wish Stumph would have interrupted her with "whoa, whoa, Sacagawea!  Take a sip of firewater and become one with nature."

[Slapdash 14,423]

2 hours ago, The Commish said:

Not defending my institution and I am generally a fan of Warren, but it's puzzling that she asks if executives were fired, Stumpf answers by saying there was a change at a regional level of the people who were directly overseeing the activities and she keeps pressing for a list of executives instead.  It comes off very witch hunt like and that none of the actions matter unless the people SHE thinks should be fired are fired.  Lots of people have been fired over this....listening to her you'd think nothing was done.  Overplaying her hand IMO.

I viewed her comments differently.  Compensation schemes that overly rewarded employees for risky/fraudulent behavior also had a large role in the mortgage crisis.  Then, like now, we do not see the firms assigning responsibility or accountability to those that created these schemes or the control partners who did not catch it.  Getting rid of lower level employees who were responding to incentives seems like addressing the symptom rather than the problem. 

Maybe I'm missing some pieces of the response though.

[lod001 3,989]

2 hours ago, Zigg said:

So a CEO was scolded, but will anything come of it?  I wish that was a real question.

Absolutely nothing. CEO's who get caught ####### up, get called before congress, sit up there getting grilled, not giving a ####, knowing it's just for show. Warren accomplished nothing. ZERO. They all suck on both sides yet they still can fool the masses.

[The Commish 9,967]

6 minutes ago, Slapdash said:

2 hours ago, The Commish said:

Not defending my institution and I am generally a fan of Warren, but it's puzzling that she asks if executives were fired, Stumpf answers by saying there was a change at a regional level of the people who were directly overseeing the activities and she keeps pressing for a list of executives instead.  It comes off very witch hunt like and that none of the actions matter unless the people SHE thinks should be fired are fired.  Lots of people have been fired over this....listening to her you'd think nothing was done.  Overplaying her hand IMO.

I viewed her comments differently.  Compensation schemes that overly rewarded employees for risky/fraudulent behavior also had a large role in the mortgage crisis.  Then, like now, we do not see the firms assigning responsibility or accountability to those that created these schemes or the control partners who did not catch it.  Getting rid of lower level employees who were responding to incentives seems like addressing the symptom rather than the problem. 

Maybe I'm missing some pieces of the response though

It's my understanding that those who developed the program are gone....they've been fired.  The program is also gone.  There is plenty of things to be pissed at the highest level executives.  There's no question about that.  And if you're an ultimate "the buck stops here" guy, I guess you can somehow make the leap that the CEO of a company has intimate enough knowledge of these lower level (like 20-30 levels lower) programs that are to motivate the minions.  

Again, I'm not defending the actions of my company.  I think it's absurd.  I just think there was a bit more theater than necessary here by Warren.  That's all.  Now, if the government ends up dropping the hammer on them, then this gets my undivided attention, but I suspect it ends with  

Just a guess.

Edited September 21, 2016 by The Commish

[Slapdash 14,423]

7 minutes ago, The Commish said:

It's my understanding that those who developed the program are gone....they've been fired.  The program is also gone.  There is plenty of things to be pissed at the highest level executives.  There's no question about that.  And if you're an ultimate "the buck stops here" guy, I guess you can somehow make the leap that the CEO of a company has intimate enough knowledge of these lower level (like 20-30 levels lower) programs that are to motivate the minions.  

Again, I'm not defending the actions of my company.  I think it's absurd.  I just think there was a bit more theater than necessary here by Warren.  That's all.  Now, if the government ends up dropping the hammer on them, then this gets my undivided attention, but I suspect it ends with  

Just a guess.

Fair enough.  Haven't read much more in the media than the 5.3k fired comments.  FWIW, I've always thought Stumpf is a pretty good CEO compared to his industry counterparts. 

 

[Shutout 1,724]

2 minutes ago, The Commish said:

It's my understanding that those who developed the program are gone....they've been fired.  The program is also gone.  There is plenty of things to be pissed at the highest level executives.  There's no question about that.  And if you're an ultimate "the buck stops here" guy, I guess you can somehow make the leap that the CEO of a company has intimate enough knowledge of these lower level (like 20-30 levels lower) programs that are to motivate the minions.  

Again, I'm not defending the actions of my company.  I think it's absurd.  I just think there was a bit more theater than necessary here by Warren.  That's all.  Now, if the government ends up dropping the hammer on them, then this gets my undivided attention, but I suspect it ends with  

Just a guess.

I agree that is was a lot more show and production than substance but I in no way agree with the allusion that the CEO wouldn't have knowledge or is somehow exempt from serious accountability.  We all know in BIG business, you've got some pretty sharp people out there that know what they are doing within the confines of what is allowed in their respective systems. There is info being shared.  That is not to say that the CEO hatched this "program" idea one night while drinking scotch and smoking a stogie, but it is almost completely unbelievable to think that somewhere along the way that the data that reported how the company was doing didn't include some semblance of "we are creating 'x' amount of accounts", etc...something that was a clear indicator (and being watched by people in the know) of this type of tactic that was important to the company.

To say otherwise is ridiculous. It is just simply not possible that something that was so directly tied into profitability ran unchecked on such a large scale for so long without being noticed and refined.  It is akin to if, by absolute randomness, a Wal-Mart employee stumbled over the concept that somehow when the store sold bread it was 10 times more valuable than what common knowledge dictated.  And then every Wal-Mart suddenly started pushing bread like crazy. It doesn't take long for someone in district, regional, national levels (or however a particular company is set up) to take notice and start asking "what exactly is it that is suddenly putting so much bread on our table?" and for them to want to promote that idea and get higher ups to support it.    

The CEO knew.  He is responsible. More so than hundreds of middle class workers who went to the gallows. 

 

[Slapdash 14,423]

@Shutout :  I think you are drastically overstating the efficiency of information in large, bureaucratic organizations

[AhrnCityPahnder 4,544]

1 hour ago, Walking Boot said:

It's so sad that this is all one of our elected politicians has to do to stand out. Thousands of people screwed tens of thousands of people to fraudulently produce millions of dollars, and some politician simply talks mean to one of the people involved, and the unwashed masses eat it up.

If the alternative was skipping the dog and pony show and getting to the part of the story where Shady banking execs saw jail time, I think I'd be good with that.  

So far our options are absolutely nothing happens, or Warren does this today.      Of course people eat it up.  

[Slapdash 14,423]

4 minutes ago, AhrnCityPahnder said:

1 hour ago, Walking Boot said:

It's so sad that this is all one of our elected politicians has to do to stand out. Thousands of people screwed tens of thousands of people to fraudulently produce millions of dollars, and some politician simply talks mean to one of the people involved, and the unwashed masses eat it up.

If the alternative was skipping the dog and pony show and getting to the part of the story where Shady banking execs saw jail time, I think I'd be good with that.  

So far our options are absolutely nothing happens, or Warren does this today.      Of course people eat it up.  

Another alternative is working to create a government agency who would investigate and find this type of activity...WHICH IS ####### EXACTLY WHAT WARREN DID

Edited September 21, 2016 by Slapdash
dfa

[The Commish 9,967]

8 minutes ago, Shutout said:

I agree that is was a lot more show and production than substance but I in no way agree with the allusion that the CEO wouldn't have knowledge or is somehow exempt from serious accountability.  We all know in BIG business, you've got some pretty sharp people out there that know what they are doing within the confines of what is allowed in their respective systems. There is info being shared.  That is not to say that the CEO hatched this "program" idea one night while drinking scotch and smoking a stogie, but it is almost completely unbelievable to think that somewhere along the way that the data that reported how the company was doing didn't include some semblance of "we are creating 'x' amount of accounts", etc...something that was a clear indicator (and being watched by people in the know) of this type of tactic that was important to the company.

To say otherwise is ridiculous. It is just simply not possible that something that was so directly tied into profitability ran unchecked on such a large scale for so long without being noticed and refined.  It is akin to if, by absolute randomness, a Wal-Mart employee stumbled over the concept that somehow when the store sold bread it was 10 times more valuable than what common knowledge dictated.  And then every Wal-Mart suddenly started pushing bread like crazy. It doesn't take long for someone in district, regional, national levels (or however a particular company is set up) to take notice and start asking "what exactly is it that is suddenly putting so much bread on our table?" and for them to want to promote that idea and get higher ups to support it.    

The CEO knew.  He is responsible. More so than hundreds of middle class workers who went to the gallows. 

 

I don't know what to tell you Shutout.  I am in an organization of 1500 people all working on a single application.  I don't know 90% of the people in my organization and we all work on the same application much less WHAT they are working on.  The only time I get insight into other areas is if our projects have cross over impact.  Now, think about an organization of 250K.  Is it really reasonable to believe that the guy at the top knew the specifics of what a person at the very bottom of the ladder was doing?  

Again, I am not absolving anyone of anything, but I think there is a significant disconnect (or appreciation) for how large of an organization we are talking about.  There is no question in my mind that the board along with the CEO had a 10,000 foot plan to grow a segment of the business.  That is then thrown over the wall for the minions to "figure it out".  Unless there was a follow up by the CEO and board with the people who came up with the solution, I simply can't see how any particulars would get up that far.

[Doctor Detroit 20,904]

Someone on CNBC said when asked about why the CEO's hand was in a bandage, that it happened when "he shook Warren's hand prior to sitting down." 

She roasted him, these banks get away with everything. 

[Shutout 1,724]

32 minutes ago, The Commish said:

I don't know what to tell you Shutout.  I am in an organization of 1500 people all working on a single application.  I don't know 90% of the people in my organization and we all work on the same application much less WHAT they are working on.  The only time I get insight into other areas is if our projects have cross over impact.  Now, think about an organization of 250K.  Is it really reasonable to believe that the guy at the top knew the specifics of what a person at the very bottom of the ladder was doing?  

Again, I am not absolving anyone of anything, but I think there is a significant disconnect (or appreciation) for how large of an organization we are talking about.  There is no question in my mind that the board along with the CEO had a 10,000 foot plan to grow a segment of the business.  That is then thrown over the wall for the minions to "figure it out".  Unless there was a follow up by the CEO and board with the people who came up with the solution, I simply can't see how any particulars would get up that far.

Maybe you are right. Slapdash had a similar thought. Maybe I'm just kind of lucky where I work. I work for a very large organization with 3000+ employees and many, many divisions and I have the fortune of sitting face to face on a regular basis with lots of different "arms and legs" of other divisions and departments.  I often find myself thinking "should I really know that much about the strategy of what 'department x' is cooking?"  

I'll say I know we are big about sharing info and collaboration. Maybe it is much more atypical than i thought.  It just surprises me if giant and global companies could truly have some consistent process running all over the country or world in a similar fashion and it somehow be so important (profitable), yet completely decentralized and not under organized management.  Heck, lol, i know departments that can't keep their vending machines filled in multiple locations without concerted organization.  

 

[Bob Sacamano 8,052]

"Opened 32 new accounts in Manteno this week. That seems suspicious. "

[IvanKaramazov 15,503]

1 hour ago, Ned said:

 

The last 45sec or so was the best part when she talked about the teller taking cash from the drawer. 

Yep.  I'm a pro-free market, pro-Wall Street libertarian.  This this is just completely clear cut for me.  You're opening up accounts in another person's name without their knowledge or consent, and sticking them with fees in the process.  I'm not a lawyer, but there's no way that's not criminal fraud.  The difference between free market ideologues like me and crony capitalists is that I'm completely in favor of holding firms responsible when they break the law, as opposed to changing the law to meet the needs of firms.  

[Sand 4,273]

28 minutes ago, Doctor Detroit said:

Someone on CNBC said when asked about why the CEO's hand was in a bandage, that it happened when "he shook Warren's hand prior to sitting down." 

She roasted him, these banks get away with everything. 

In the course of things this was pretty mild in comparison to others.  If you want real outrage think about what HSBC got away with - laundering 900M of Mexican cartel money and not a single soul went to jail.  They got a slap on the wrist with a monetary fine, that's it.  The HSBC case still makes my blood boil.  900 ####### million dollars and the US attorney's office basically said "meh".  

[Mario Kart 3,939]

Ultimately, we the people do have some power here. If you don't like what Wells Fargo did/does... don't bank with them. Take your money and go.

Footnote - I have never nor will I ever bank with them. Use your dollars as your voice here people.

[Treynwreck3 213]

My wife is an officer at a Fortune 100 company, with 13,000 employees under her charge (compensation). At the level of this corruption, she says that undeniably EVERYONE  knows it's happening, and doing nothing about it because they are all making MILLIONS as a result. WF dude could have fired himself, resigned, or retired. But to think he will/would ever give a penny back is ridiculous.

[scorchy 170]

Rick Scott was in charge of a company that had to pay the largest fine ever for Medicare fraud.  Then he got elected governor of Florida.  Until we start imprisoning execs for these things, nothing will ever change.  Fines are just a slap on the wrist.

[bananafish 6,170]

I like that she has asked Director Comey to explain why no action was taken against the 9 executives referred to the FBI for prosecution for the 2008 crisis in the same manner he explained the lack of a Hillary Clinton indictment. Does anyone know the answer to this besides "business as usual"?

[Dondante 271]

8 hours ago, scorchy said:

Rick Scott was in charge of a company that had to pay the largest fine ever for Medicare fraud.  Then he got elected governor of Florida.  Until we start imprisoning execs for these things, nothing will ever change.  Fines are just a slap on the wrist.

Agree in principle, insofar as the corruption is life-altering punishment worthy. However, I'm not sure I want a system in place where private companies are in essence controlled by the government. This is where we vote with our dollars. If people were removing their money from WF in droves (as I have), in this particular example, I believe the appropriate people would lose their jobs. But just like most similar incidents in this country, people are lazy and as a result uninformed. We can't hope to legislate in an effort to overcome our apathetic nature. 

[Tom Skerritt 1,960]

9 hours ago, Treynwreck3 said:

My wife is an officer at a Fortune 100 company, with 13,000 employees under her charge (compensation). At the level of this corruption, she says that undeniably EVERYONE  knows it's happening, and doing nothing about it because they are all making MILLIONS as a result. WF dude could have fired himself, resigned, or retired. But to think he will/would ever give a penny back is ridiculous.

I agree. Which is why these people should be charged with fraud. 

 

Also, one of the things that Warren questioned this doosh with were transcripts from shareholder meetings. Month after month, Stumpf declared that account ratios were at record highs, encouraging people to invest in Wells Fargo. How did he think they were making these record account ratios every month?!? He HAD to know what was going on. And if he didn't, then he is incompetent. 

 

And so assuming he knew, he is complicit in the fraudulent scheme and should be prosecuted. Just MHO. 

[chet 2,650]

How about goofy Elizabeth Warren taking such a strong stance against politicians who have broken the law?  She's a two faced #### just like most of them.

[The Commish 9,967]

10 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Yep.  I'm a pro-free market, pro-Wall Street libertarian.  This this is just completely clear cut for me.  You're opening up accounts in another person's name without their knowledge or consent, and sticking them with fees in the process.  I'm not a lawyer, but there's no way that's not criminal fraud.  The difference between free market ideologues like me and crony capitalists is that I'm completely in favor of holding firms responsible when they break the law, as opposed to changing the law to meet the needs of firms.  

And I agree with every single word of this as well.  Anyone that was participating in this should be sent through the ringer IMO.  People won't like to hear this, but in this day and age of technology the ease with which one can do this sort of stuff is staggering.  Quite frankly, I am surprised more people haven't been caught doing these sorts of things.

[The Commish 9,967]

2 hours ago, bananafish said:

I like that she has asked Director Comey to explain why no action was taken against the 9 executives referred to the FBI for prosecution for the 2008 crisis in the same manner he explained the lack of a Hillary Clinton indictment. Does anyone know the answer to this besides "business as usual"?

Do you have a link to the questioning?  Seems weird to be asking Comey about FBI actions before he was director of the FBI  

[BigSteelThrill 4,733]

50 minutes ago, chet said:

How about goofy Elizabeth Warren taking such a strong stance against politicians who have broken the law?  She's a two faced #### just like most of them.

How about she just keep doing what she is doing (which is marvelous exposure) and some other senator/representative step-up and do what you are asking for. 

[parasaurolophus 4,465]

11 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Yep.  I'm a pro-free market, pro-Wall Street libertarian.  This this is just completely clear cut for me.  You're opening up accounts in another person's name without their knowledge or consent, and sticking them with fees in the process.  I'm not a lawyer, but there's no way that's not criminal fraud.  The difference between free market ideologues like me and crony capitalists is that I'm completely in favor of holding firms responsible when they break the law, as opposed to changing the law to meet the needs of firms.  

I still dont understand how the people that opened the accounts didnt get arrested. If their manager knew too, they should also be arrested. Up the chain.

The problem here is that politicians don't really want to do that or push for that. Democrats dont actually want justice, they just want the rich people to get punished. Republicans dont want the rich people to get in trouble. So the people that committed the crimes go unpunished and so does anybody that knew about it above them. Its a joke.