'Why are they still being paid?': Comments of the week

On Wells Fargo’s investors voting to reelect 12 board members and elect three more nominated by the company at its latest annual meeting:

“Nearly all of the current executives and board members were serving in their positions during the time millions of phony accounts were being created. Now they want to continue in their positions despite violating their fiduciary responsibilities by either participating in this criminal behavior or incompetently failing to identify it. Why are they still on the board? Why are they still being paid, and most importantly, why were they re-nominated and reelected?

Related article:

Tears, shouts and a police escort: The scene at Wells’ annual meeting

A retort to an op-ed questioning the narrative that Dodd-Frank killed lending:

"I guess you have no idea how America's Community Banks have been affected. Some 20+% of our non-interest expense goes to consumer compliance activities. Imagine how many more loans we could make without that albatross hanging around our necks. That is a defacto ‘tax’ imposed by the government on our activities."

Related article:

Dodd-Frank is not the enemy. Bad loans are

Agreeing with an argument that ultralow interest rates are no longer benefiting the average U.S. household:

"The Fed and most economists are not carefully distinguishing temporary matters from more permanent matters. Low interest rates are not ‘normal’ and after a long enough period can be constraining as they are now. Ironically, increasing interest rates today will stimulate economic growth as explained here. More bankers need to recognize this and encourage the Fed to continue normalizing interest rates. This will not be harmful as most anticipate."

Related article:

Low interest rates are hurting the middle class

On financial services groups and stakeholders increasingly willing to take the regulatory regime to court:

"Regulators have used fear and intimidation tactics against banks for years. They can damage your business (and career) if it feels like a fun thing to do that month. The fact more banks weren't publicly fighting back had less to do with what was fair (or legal), and more to do with fear of what regulators threatened if they fought them. This is especially true when the rules and their interpretations are being made up on the fly. Bully tactics work until the victims begin fighting back."

Related article:

Courts are new weapon of choice for banks looking to shift policy

On calls to recapitalize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from critics of their "sweep" payments to Treasury:

"The GSEs are supported by $187bn in taxpayer funds in the form of preferred stock. The sweep is compensation for this ongoing support. This argument about "recap and release" is an attempt to rip off taxpayers and enrich a bunch of hedge funds."

Related article:

A GSE risk we can no longer ignore: Doing nothing