求翻译这篇 5
http://www.fortunechina.com/business/c/2010-03/03/content_31735.htm...
http://www.fortunechina.com/business/c/2010-03/03/content_31735.htm
展开
4个回答
展开全部
巴尔通过科林
Warren Buffett has an elegant solution for the thorny problem of too-big-to-fail banks: Put the bankers' bank accounts on the line.沃伦巴菲特有一个棘手的问题解决得优雅，大到失效银行：将上线的银行家的银行帐户。
Buffett, the chairman of Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA, Fortune 500), lashed out at the damage wrought by overpaid, unaccountable finance-industry bigwigs in his annual letter to Berkshire shareholders, released Saturday.巴菲特的伯克希尔哈撒韦（布尔卡，财富500强）董事长抨击了由多付，他每年在伯克希尔股东的信中，星期六发表不负责任的金融业头面人物造成的损害。
Buffett has been criticizing overreaching corporate managers and complaisant directors for decades.巴菲特一直批评过头了几十年的企业经理和殷勤的董事。 But the question of how to motivate good corporate behavior has taken on new weight as Washington debates reining in the financial giants whose missteps brought the economy to its knees two years ago.但是，如何推动良好的企业行为的问题已作为华盛顿的失误在两年前提出的经济疲弱的金融巨头赖宁辩论新的重量。
The Obama administration last month proposed separating banks' proprietary trading activities from their federally subsidized deposit-gathering and lending ones.奥巴马政府上月提出的从他们的联邦资助分开存放，收集和贷款的银行的自营买卖活动。 Other proposed rules would increase the amount of capital banks hold against losses and how much cash they carry to deal with a surge of withdrawals.其他建议的规则将增加银行的资本额对持有多少现金损失和他们进行处理的提款潮。
But Buffett said there's a simpler way to cap risk-taking: Forcing lavishly compensated CEOs to take responsibility for assessing the risks at their firms -- and putting their own wealth at stake, to boot.不过巴菲特说，有一个简单的方法来第冒险：强制华丽补偿首席执行官采取了评估在其公司的风险责任 - 并把他们自己的财富在股权，启动。
"It is the behavior of these CEOs and directors that needs to be changed," he wrote. “这是这些CEO和董事的行为，需要改变，”他说。 "They have long benefitted from oversized financial carrots; some meaningful sticks now need to be employed as well." “他们有长期受惠超大金融胡萝卜，一些有意义的支现在需要受聘为好。”
The comment reflects a theme that has run through Buffett's letters to investors over the years: Shareholders are best served by managers who think like owners.该评论反映了一个具有贯穿巴菲特的信件，多年来投资者：股东最好的管理者谁喜欢业主认为服务的主题。 More often, he has said, they are ill served by executives who instead pursue value-destroying mergers or pile up debt in a bid to boost returns.更多的时候，他说，他们生病送达主管谁，而不是追求价值的破坏兼并或堆放在债务企图以提高回报。
Buffett, 79, is the controlling shareholder at Berkshire and has received $100,000 in annual salary for the past quarter-century.巴菲特79岁，是在Berkshire的控股股东，并已获得的年薪在过去四分之一世纪10万元。 Since he took over Berkshire in 1965, the company's net worth has increased at a 20% compound annual rate.自从他1965年接手伯克希尔公司，该公司的净资产增长了20％的复合年增长率。
So it's no surprise when he heaps scorn on the bankers who made tens of millions of dollars annually as they steered their financial supertankers onto the rocks.所以毫不奇怪，他堆的银行家谁提出的数百万美元，每年的蔑视，因为他们在岩石上指导他们的经济超级油轮。 The four biggest financial "fiascoes" -- presumably including the bailouts of AIG (AIG, Fortune 500), Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) and Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) -- cost investors more than $500 billion, by Buffett's count.四大金融“fiascoes” - 大概AIG的救助计划，包括（美国国际集团，财富500），花旗集团（C财富500）和美国银行（BAC，财富500） - 投资成本超过5000亿美元，由巴菲特的计数。
Shareholders didn't cause those meltdowns, but "they have borne the burden, with 90% or more of the value of their holdings wiped out in most cases of failure," Buffett wrote.股东并未造成的崩溃，但“他们所要负担90％的控股抹去他们在大多数情况下，失败的超时值或更多的负担，”巴菲特说。 "The CEOs and directors of the failed companies, however, have largely gone unscathed." “的CEO和失败的公司的董事，但是，大体上已经消失毫发无损。”
It's bad enough that corporate insiders escaped major financial harm in the bailout debacle.真是糟糕透了，企业内部人逃脱了这次救援行动的主要金融崩溃的伤害。 But some even managed to keep their jobs: While Citi and BofA have shaken up their boards, 13 pre-bailout directors remain at the two banks.但是，有些人甚至设法保住他们的工作：虽然花旗和美国银行已经动摇了他们的议会，13前救助董事留在两家银行。 Vikram Pandit continues as CEO of Citi, while Ken Lewis only recently stepped down as CEO of Bank of America.维克拉姆班滴继续担任首席执行官，花旗集团，而肯刘易斯最近才辞去了美国银行的总裁。
Consider too the modest toll paid by the execs who were behind two other major collapses of 2008, former Bear Stearns Chairman Jimmy Cayne and longtime Lehman Brothers chief Dick Fuld.考虑太多的温和收费由高层谁背后的另外两个2008年，前贝尔斯登主席麦凯恩和长期雷曼兄弟首席迪克福尔德支付了重大坍塌。
While both owned sizable amounts of company stock, neither by any means had the lion's share of his wealth tied to the firm.尽管这两个庞大的国有公司股票的金额，都没有以任何方式了大部分的财富分享他的公司联系在一起。 Fuld, for instance, sold nearly $500 million of Lehman stock in the years leading up to the firm's September 2008 failure.福尔德，例如，销售领先的高达近几年美元的雷曼兄弟公司股票5.0亿的2008年9月失败。 And while Bear's collapse cost Cayne $1 billion, he was still worth $600 million after its March 2008 panic sale to JPMorgan Chase.尽管贝尔斯登的崩溃成本凯恩10亿美元，他仍然是值得6亿美元后，2008年3月出售给摩根大通的恐慌。
Thus the bill for the firms' lever-up-and-bet-big strategy was largely borne by smaller shareholders, including many employees, and the taxpayers who must now foot the bill for extraordinary government aid extended later in 2008 to the rest of the financial sector.从而为公司的杠杆起来就打赌，大策略的草案，主要是由小股东承担，其中包括许多员工和纳税人谁现在必须作出特殊脚政府援助法案在2008年晚些时候扩展到其它金融部门。
Since the crash, the notion that executives should have more skin in the game has become commonplace.由于飞机坠毁的概念，即管理人员应该有更多的游戏中的皮肤已经变得很普遍。 Big Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500), which Berkshire owns preferred shares of, and Morgan Stanley (MS, Fortune 500) are now paying top executives largely in stock that must be held over a period of years, in the name of coupling risk with reward.华尔街大型公司，如高盛证券（GS，财富500强），其中伯克希尔持有的优先股，以及摩根士丹利（MS，财富500），现在已见到的股票必须年满1年期间，举行了高层管理人员主要是奖励的耦合与风险的名称。
But officers' and directors' commitment to shareholders must go further, Buffett said.但是，人员和董事对股东的承诺必须更进一步，巴菲特说。
Boards that don't insist the CEO take responsibility for risk management are "derelict" in their duty, Buffett wrote.议会不坚持首席执行官采取风险管理的责任是“失职的责任”，巴菲特写道。 And in cases where a failure to act prudently results in government assistance, "the financial consequences for [the CEO] and his board should be severe."而在失败的情况下，以审慎行事的政府援助的结果，他说：“[首席执行官]和他的董事会应该是严重的财政后果。”
Warren Buffett has an elegant solution for the thorny problem of too-big-to-fail banks: Put the bankers' bank accounts on the line.沃伦巴菲特有一个棘手的问题解决得优雅，大到失效银行：将上线的银行家的银行帐户。
Buffett, the chairman of Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA, Fortune 500), lashed out at the damage wrought by overpaid, unaccountable finance-industry bigwigs in his annual letter to Berkshire shareholders, released Saturday.巴菲特的伯克希尔哈撒韦（布尔卡，财富500强）董事长抨击了由多付，他每年在伯克希尔股东的信中，星期六发表不负责任的金融业头面人物造成的损害。
Buffett has been criticizing overreaching corporate managers and complaisant directors for decades.巴菲特一直批评过头了几十年的企业经理和殷勤的董事。 But the question of how to motivate good corporate behavior has taken on new weight as Washington debates reining in the financial giants whose missteps brought the economy to its knees two years ago.但是，如何推动良好的企业行为的问题已作为华盛顿的失误在两年前提出的经济疲弱的金融巨头赖宁辩论新的重量。
The Obama administration last month proposed separating banks' proprietary trading activities from their federally subsidized deposit-gathering and lending ones.奥巴马政府上月提出的从他们的联邦资助分开存放，收集和贷款的银行的自营买卖活动。 Other proposed rules would increase the amount of capital banks hold against losses and how much cash they carry to deal with a surge of withdrawals.其他建议的规则将增加银行的资本额对持有多少现金损失和他们进行处理的提款潮。
But Buffett said there's a simpler way to cap risk-taking: Forcing lavishly compensated CEOs to take responsibility for assessing the risks at their firms -- and putting their own wealth at stake, to boot.不过巴菲特说，有一个简单的方法来第冒险：强制华丽补偿首席执行官采取了评估在其公司的风险责任 - 并把他们自己的财富在股权，启动。
"It is the behavior of these CEOs and directors that needs to be changed," he wrote. “这是这些CEO和董事的行为，需要改变，”他说。 "They have long benefitted from oversized financial carrots; some meaningful sticks now need to be employed as well." “他们有长期受惠超大金融胡萝卜，一些有意义的支现在需要受聘为好。”
The comment reflects a theme that has run through Buffett's letters to investors over the years: Shareholders are best served by managers who think like owners.该评论反映了一个具有贯穿巴菲特的信件，多年来投资者：股东最好的管理者谁喜欢业主认为服务的主题。 More often, he has said, they are ill served by executives who instead pursue value-destroying mergers or pile up debt in a bid to boost returns.更多的时候，他说，他们生病送达主管谁，而不是追求价值的破坏兼并或堆放在债务企图以提高回报。
Buffett, 79, is the controlling shareholder at Berkshire and has received $100,000 in annual salary for the past quarter-century.巴菲特79岁，是在Berkshire的控股股东，并已获得的年薪在过去四分之一世纪10万元。 Since he took over Berkshire in 1965, the company's net worth has increased at a 20% compound annual rate.自从他1965年接手伯克希尔公司，该公司的净资产增长了20％的复合年增长率。
So it's no surprise when he heaps scorn on the bankers who made tens of millions of dollars annually as they steered their financial supertankers onto the rocks.所以毫不奇怪，他堆的银行家谁提出的数百万美元，每年的蔑视，因为他们在岩石上指导他们的经济超级油轮。 The four biggest financial "fiascoes" -- presumably including the bailouts of AIG (AIG, Fortune 500), Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) and Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) -- cost investors more than $500 billion, by Buffett's count.四大金融“fiascoes” - 大概AIG的救助计划，包括（美国国际集团，财富500），花旗集团（C财富500）和美国银行（BAC，财富500） - 投资成本超过5000亿美元，由巴菲特的计数。
Shareholders didn't cause those meltdowns, but "they have borne the burden, with 90% or more of the value of their holdings wiped out in most cases of failure," Buffett wrote.股东并未造成的崩溃，但“他们所要负担90％的控股抹去他们在大多数情况下，失败的超时值或更多的负担，”巴菲特说。 "The CEOs and directors of the failed companies, however, have largely gone unscathed." “的CEO和失败的公司的董事，但是，大体上已经消失毫发无损。”
It's bad enough that corporate insiders escaped major financial harm in the bailout debacle.真是糟糕透了，企业内部人逃脱了这次救援行动的主要金融崩溃的伤害。 But some even managed to keep their jobs: While Citi and BofA have shaken up their boards, 13 pre-bailout directors remain at the two banks.但是，有些人甚至设法保住他们的工作：虽然花旗和美国银行已经动摇了他们的议会，13前救助董事留在两家银行。 Vikram Pandit continues as CEO of Citi, while Ken Lewis only recently stepped down as CEO of Bank of America.维克拉姆班滴继续担任首席执行官，花旗集团，而肯刘易斯最近才辞去了美国银行的总裁。
Consider too the modest toll paid by the execs who were behind two other major collapses of 2008, former Bear Stearns Chairman Jimmy Cayne and longtime Lehman Brothers chief Dick Fuld.考虑太多的温和收费由高层谁背后的另外两个2008年，前贝尔斯登主席麦凯恩和长期雷曼兄弟首席迪克福尔德支付了重大坍塌。
While both owned sizable amounts of company stock, neither by any means had the lion's share of his wealth tied to the firm.尽管这两个庞大的国有公司股票的金额，都没有以任何方式了大部分的财富分享他的公司联系在一起。 Fuld, for instance, sold nearly $500 million of Lehman stock in the years leading up to the firm's September 2008 failure.福尔德，例如，销售领先的高达近几年美元的雷曼兄弟公司股票5.0亿的2008年9月失败。 And while Bear's collapse cost Cayne $1 billion, he was still worth $600 million after its March 2008 panic sale to JPMorgan Chase.尽管贝尔斯登的崩溃成本凯恩10亿美元，他仍然是值得6亿美元后，2008年3月出售给摩根大通的恐慌。
Thus the bill for the firms' lever-up-and-bet-big strategy was largely borne by smaller shareholders, including many employees, and the taxpayers who must now foot the bill for extraordinary government aid extended later in 2008 to the rest of the financial sector.从而为公司的杠杆起来就打赌，大策略的草案，主要是由小股东承担，其中包括许多员工和纳税人谁现在必须作出特殊脚政府援助法案在2008年晚些时候扩展到其它金融部门。
Since the crash, the notion that executives should have more skin in the game has become commonplace.由于飞机坠毁的概念，即管理人员应该有更多的游戏中的皮肤已经变得很普遍。 Big Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500), which Berkshire owns preferred shares of, and Morgan Stanley (MS, Fortune 500) are now paying top executives largely in stock that must be held over a period of years, in the name of coupling risk with reward.华尔街大型公司，如高盛证券（GS，财富500强），其中伯克希尔持有的优先股，以及摩根士丹利（MS，财富500），现在已见到的股票必须年满1年期间，举行了高层管理人员主要是奖励的耦合与风险的名称。
But officers' and directors' commitment to shareholders must go further, Buffett said.但是，人员和董事对股东的承诺必须更进一步，巴菲特说。
Boards that don't insist the CEO take responsibility for risk management are "derelict" in their duty, Buffett wrote.议会不坚持首席执行官采取风险管理的责任是“失职的责任”，巴菲特写道。 And in cases where a failure to act prudently results in government assistance, "the financial consequences for [the CEO] and his board should be severe."而在失败的情况下，以审慎行事的政府援助的结果，他说：“[首席执行官]和他的董事会应该是严重的财政后果。”
参考资料： 谷歌翻译
已赞过
已踩过<
评论
收起
你对这个回答的评价是？
展开全部
科林Barr 沃伦Buffett让一雅致的棘手的问题的解决方案太-对-不及格银行大-:有关线表达银行家银行帐户. Buffett,伯克希尔哈撒韦((BRKA,财富杂志500)的主席猛烈抨击对的损坏,被overpaid,没有责任财政-工业要人在他的年度的给巴克夏猪股东的信中造成的损失星期六发布的. Buffett一直在批评伸得过远社团的经理和几十年来殷勤的主管.但是两年以前怎样驱使好社团的行为的问题已经使财政巨人慢下来谁的失足的使经济屈服新重量阿斯华盛顿辩论从事. 上个月Obama行政当局建议把银行所有人的贸易活动和他们的联合地津贴存款-集会和出借那些分离.其它建议的规定将增加处理一阵撤消重要银行着力点对着丢失和他们带着多少现金的总量. 但是Buffett说那里有一种更的简单的方式要结束冒风险:强迫非常大方地补偿首席执行官采取对在他们的公司--估计风险的责任和放他们的自己财富阿特桩子,向靴. 他写作"它是这些首席执行官的行为和主管那应该是改变".他们已经长时间从过大的财政胡萝卜受益;现在一些有意义柴棍应该是也使用. 意见反映出a,在过去多年中主题其已经开车送通过Buffett的给投资者的信的:股东被像所有者思考的经理最好为服务.更常常,他已经说,被经理,其反而追求价值-破坏合并或者积累债务在朝派a的为那些公亩毛病服务叫牌增强回报. Buffett,79在巴克夏猪是控制的股东和已经在年薪薪水中收到100000美元在过去四分之一-世纪中.自他接管巴克夏猪在朝派1965以来,公司的净值已经在一20%复合年度速度方面增加. 当他蔑视银行家w的时候,So它不是惊奇ho made tens of millions of dollars annually as they steered their financial supertankers onto the rocks. The four biggest financial "fiascoes" -- presumably including the bailouts of AIG (AIG, Fortune 500), Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) and Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) -- cost investors more than $500 billion, by Buffett's count. Shareholders didn't cause those meltdowns, but "they have borne the burden, with 90% or more of the value of their holdings wiped out in most cases of failure," Buffett wrote. "The CEOs and directors of the failed companies, however, have largely gone unscathed." It's bad enough that corporate insiders escaped major financial harm in the bailout debacle. But some even managed to keep their jobs: While Citi and BofA have shaken up their boards, 13 pre-bailout directors remain at the two banks. Vikram Pandit continues as CEO of Citi, while Ken Lewis only recently stepped down as CEO of Bank of America. Consider too the modest toll paid by the execs who were behind two other major collapses of 2008, former Bear Stearns Chairman Jimmy Cayne and longtime Lehman Brothers chief Dick Fuld. While both owned sizable amounts of company stock, neither by any means had the lion's share of his wealth tied to the firm. Fuld, for instance, sold nearly $500 million of Lehman stock in the years leading up to the firm's September 2008 failure. And while Bear's collapse cost Cayne $1 billion, he was still worth $600 million after its March 2008 panic sale to JPMorgan Chase. Thus the bill for the firms' lever-up-and-bet-big strategy was largely borne by smaller shareholders, including many employees, and the taxpayers who must now foot the bill for extraordinary government aid extended later in 2008 to the rest of the financial sector. Since the crash, the notion that executives should have more skin in the game has become commonplace. Big Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500), which Berkshire owns preferred shares of, and Morgan Stanley (MS, Fortune 500) are now paying top executives largely in stock that must be held over a period of years, in the name of coupling risk with reward. But officers' and directors' commitment to shareholders must go further, Buffett said. Boards that don't insist the CEO take responsibility for risk management are "derelict" in their duty, Buffett wrote. And in cases where a failure to act prudently results in government assistance, "the financial consequences for [the CEO] and his board should be severe."
已赞过
已踩过<
评论
收起
你对这个回答的评价是？
展开全部
沃伦•巴菲特（Warren Buffett）有一个不失体面的办法能解决银行“大到不能倒”这个棘手问题：披露银行家的账户。
伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（Berkshire Hathaway）总裁巴菲特在周六公布的致伯克希尔股东年度信中猛烈抨击了那些拿着巨额薪酬却不负责任的金融大亨造成的损失。
数十年来，巴菲特一直在批评狡诈的企业经理人和讨好经理的董事们。两年前，一些金融巨头的失误导致了经济下滑。然而，随着华盛顿就严加监管一事来回争论，如何激发良好的企业行为这个问题变得更为沉重了。
上个月奥巴马政府提议将银行的所有权交易活动与联邦补贴的存贷款业务分离开来。其它拟议的规定会增加银行为抵御损失以及应对大量挤兑所持有的资金额。
然而，巴菲特表示有一种方法可以防范风险：迫使报酬丰厚的首席执行官承担各自公司的风险评估责任，让他们自己的财产有缩水的风险，通过这种方法来扭转局势。
他写道：“需要改变的正是这些首席执行官和董事的行为。 长期以来，他们一直受益于超大规模的金融机构带来的好处，现在也需要实施一些有意义的监管了。”
这一评论反映了近年来巴菲特致投资者信中的一个主题：要以所有者的思维方式思考问题才能最好地服务于股东。但他更常说的是那些反面案例——追求以牺牲利益为代价的兼并或堆砌债务以期提高回报的管理者，这些人不能很好地服务股东。
79岁的巴菲特是伯克希尔的控股人，在过去的25年里年薪十万美金。自从他于1965年接管伯克希尔以来，该公司的净值就以20% 的年复合增长率不断递增。
所以，当那些每年赚几千万美元的银行家开着金融超级坦克往石头上撞的时候，巴菲特对他们嗤之以鼻也就不足为奇了。四个最大的金融 “败笔”可能包括对美国国际集团（AIG），花旗集团（Citigroup），和美国银行（Bank of America）的救助。据巴菲特估算，救助资金超过5000亿美元。
巴菲特写道，“造成金融机构倒闭的并非是股东，但是他们却背上了这个包袱。在大部分银行破产的情况中，他们90%或更多的股票都蒸发了。但是，破产公司的首席执行官和董事却基本上毫发未损。”
在这次失败的救助行动中，企业内部人士财务状况无大恙已经够糟糕的了。但一些人甚至还保住了工作：虽然花旗和美国银行解聘了董事会，但13名救助行动以前的董事仍在这两家银行工作。潘伟迪（Vikram Pandit）继续留任花旗首席执行官，而肯•路易斯（Ken Lewis）直到最近才卸任美国银行首席执行官。
再考虑一下2008年另两大倒闭事件，幕后高管付出的代价也很小。他们是贝尔斯登（Bear Sterns）总裁吉米•凯恩（Jimmy Cayne）和长期任雷曼兄弟(Lehman Brothers)总裁的迪克•福尔德（Dick Fuld）.
虽然他们都有很多所在公司的股票，但没有一个人把财富中最多的一部分投到自家公司里。例如，在导致2008年9月雷曼破产之前的几年里，福尔德出售了将近5亿美元的雷曼股票。虽然贝尔斯登的破产致使凯恩损失了10亿美元，但在2008年3月该公司被匆忙出售给摩根大通（JPMorgan Chase）之后，他的身价仍有6亿美元。
因此，为这些公司“高杠杆、下大注”战略买单的基本上是小股东，包括很多雇员和纳税人。而这些纳税人现在必须为2008年晚些时候美国政府为拯救其它金融公司提供的巨额援助资金买单。
自从市场崩溃以来，公司高管应承担更多责任这种观点已成为一项共识。诸如摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）和伯克希尔拥有优先股的高盛（Goldman Sachs）这样的华尔街大公司，现在基本都以期权形式支付高管酬劳，名义上要让风险与报酬挂钩。
但是巴菲特表示政府官员和公司董事必须进一步对股东负责。
巴菲特写道，不坚持认为首席执行官应承担风险管理责任的董事会是在“玩忽职守”。而且一旦行为疏忽导致政府出手援救，“（首席执行官及其）董事会应该承担严重的经济责任。”
PS:你点一下“中文译文”就好了。。。
伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（Berkshire Hathaway）总裁巴菲特在周六公布的致伯克希尔股东年度信中猛烈抨击了那些拿着巨额薪酬却不负责任的金融大亨造成的损失。
数十年来，巴菲特一直在批评狡诈的企业经理人和讨好经理的董事们。两年前，一些金融巨头的失误导致了经济下滑。然而，随着华盛顿就严加监管一事来回争论，如何激发良好的企业行为这个问题变得更为沉重了。
上个月奥巴马政府提议将银行的所有权交易活动与联邦补贴的存贷款业务分离开来。其它拟议的规定会增加银行为抵御损失以及应对大量挤兑所持有的资金额。
然而，巴菲特表示有一种方法可以防范风险：迫使报酬丰厚的首席执行官承担各自公司的风险评估责任，让他们自己的财产有缩水的风险，通过这种方法来扭转局势。
他写道：“需要改变的正是这些首席执行官和董事的行为。 长期以来，他们一直受益于超大规模的金融机构带来的好处，现在也需要实施一些有意义的监管了。”
这一评论反映了近年来巴菲特致投资者信中的一个主题：要以所有者的思维方式思考问题才能最好地服务于股东。但他更常说的是那些反面案例——追求以牺牲利益为代价的兼并或堆砌债务以期提高回报的管理者，这些人不能很好地服务股东。
79岁的巴菲特是伯克希尔的控股人，在过去的25年里年薪十万美金。自从他于1965年接管伯克希尔以来，该公司的净值就以20% 的年复合增长率不断递增。
所以，当那些每年赚几千万美元的银行家开着金融超级坦克往石头上撞的时候，巴菲特对他们嗤之以鼻也就不足为奇了。四个最大的金融 “败笔”可能包括对美国国际集团（AIG），花旗集团（Citigroup），和美国银行（Bank of America）的救助。据巴菲特估算，救助资金超过5000亿美元。
巴菲特写道，“造成金融机构倒闭的并非是股东，但是他们却背上了这个包袱。在大部分银行破产的情况中，他们90%或更多的股票都蒸发了。但是，破产公司的首席执行官和董事却基本上毫发未损。”
在这次失败的救助行动中，企业内部人士财务状况无大恙已经够糟糕的了。但一些人甚至还保住了工作：虽然花旗和美国银行解聘了董事会，但13名救助行动以前的董事仍在这两家银行工作。潘伟迪（Vikram Pandit）继续留任花旗首席执行官，而肯•路易斯（Ken Lewis）直到最近才卸任美国银行首席执行官。
再考虑一下2008年另两大倒闭事件，幕后高管付出的代价也很小。他们是贝尔斯登（Bear Sterns）总裁吉米•凯恩（Jimmy Cayne）和长期任雷曼兄弟(Lehman Brothers)总裁的迪克•福尔德（Dick Fuld）.
虽然他们都有很多所在公司的股票，但没有一个人把财富中最多的一部分投到自家公司里。例如，在导致2008年9月雷曼破产之前的几年里，福尔德出售了将近5亿美元的雷曼股票。虽然贝尔斯登的破产致使凯恩损失了10亿美元，但在2008年3月该公司被匆忙出售给摩根大通（JPMorgan Chase）之后，他的身价仍有6亿美元。
因此，为这些公司“高杠杆、下大注”战略买单的基本上是小股东，包括很多雇员和纳税人。而这些纳税人现在必须为2008年晚些时候美国政府为拯救其它金融公司提供的巨额援助资金买单。
自从市场崩溃以来，公司高管应承担更多责任这种观点已成为一项共识。诸如摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）和伯克希尔拥有优先股的高盛（Goldman Sachs）这样的华尔街大公司，现在基本都以期权形式支付高管酬劳，名义上要让风险与报酬挂钩。
但是巴菲特表示政府官员和公司董事必须进一步对股东负责。
巴菲特写道，不坚持认为首席执行官应承担风险管理责任的董事会是在“玩忽职守”。而且一旦行为疏忽导致政府出手援救，“（首席执行官及其）董事会应该承担严重的经济责任。”
PS:你点一下“中文译文”就好了。。。
参考资料： http://www.fortunechina.com/business/c/2010-03/03/content_31740.htm
本回答被网友采纳
已赞过
已踩过<
评论
收起
你对这个回答的评价是？
展开全部
By Colin Barr
Warren Buffett has an elegant solution for the thorny problem of too-big-to-fail banks: Put the bankers' bank accounts on the line.
Buffett, the chairman of Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA, Fortune 500), lashed out at the damage wrought by overpaid, unaccountable finance-industry bigwigs in his annual letter to Berkshire shareholders, released Saturday.
Buffett has been criticizing overreaching corporate managers and complaisant directors for decades. But the question of how to motivate good corporate behavior has taken on new weight as Washington debates reining in the financial giants whose missteps brought the economy to its knees two years ago.
The Obama administration last month proposed separating banks' proprietary trading activities from their federally subsidized deposit-gathering and lending ones. Other proposed rules would increase the amount of capital banks hold against losses and how much cash they carry to deal with a surge of withdrawals.
But Buffett said there's a simpler way to cap risk-taking: Forcing lavishly compensated CEOs to take responsibility for assessing the risks at their firms -- and putting their own wealth at stake, to boot.
"It is the behavior of these CEOs and directors that needs to be changed," he wrote. "They have long benefitted from oversized financial carrots; some meaningful sticks now need to be employed as well."
The comment reflects a theme that has run through Buffett's letters to investors over the years: Shareholders are best served by managers who think like owners. More often, he has said, they are ill served by executives who instead pursue value-destroying mergers or pile up debt in a bid to boost returns.
Buffett, 79, is the controlling shareholder at Berkshire and has received $100,000 in annual salary for the past quarter-century. Since he took over Berkshire in 1965, the company's net worth has increased at a 20% compound annual rate.
So it's no surprise when he heaps scorn on the bankers who made tens of millions of dollars annually as they steered their financial supertankers onto the rocks. The four biggest financial "fiascoes" -- presumably including the bailouts of AIG (AIG, Fortune 500), Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) and Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) -- cost investors more than $500 billion, by Buffett's count.
Shareholders didn't cause those meltdowns, but "they have borne the burden, with 90% or more of the value of their holdings wiped out in most cases of failure," Buffett wrote. "The CEOs and directors of the failed companies, however, have largely gone unscathed."
It's bad enough that corporate insiders escaped major financial harm in the bailout debacle. But some even managed to keep their jobs: While Citi and BofA have shaken up their boards, 13 pre-bailout directors remain at the two banks. Vikram Pandit continues as CEO of Citi, while Ken Lewis only recently stepped down as CEO of Bank of America.
Consider too the modest toll paid by the execs who were behind two other major collapses of 2008, former Bear Stearns Chairman Jimmy Cayne and longtime Lehman Brothers chief Dick Fuld.
While both owned sizable amounts of company stock, neither by any means had the lion's share of his wealth tied to the firm. Fuld, for instance, sold nearly $500 million of Lehman stock in the years leading up to the firm's September 2008 failure. And while Bear's collapse cost Cayne $1 billion, he was still worth $600 million after its March 2008 panic sale to JPMorgan Chase.
Thus the bill for the firms' lever-up-and-bet-big strategy was largely borne by smaller shareholders, including many employees, and the taxpayers who must now foot the bill for extraordinary government aid extended later in 2008 to the rest of the financial sector.
Since the crash, the notion that executives should have more skin in the game has become commonplace. Big Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500), which Berkshire owns preferred shares of, and Morgan Stanley (MS, Fortune 500) are now paying top executives largely in stock that must be held over a period of years, in the name of coupling risk with reward.
But officers' and directors' commitment to shareholders must go further, Buffett said.
Boards that don't insist the CEO take responsibility for risk management are "derelict" in their duty, Buffett wrote. And in cases where a failure to act prudently results in government assistance, "the financial consequences for [the CEO] and his board should be severe."
Warren Buffett has an elegant solution for the thorny problem of too-big-to-fail banks: Put the bankers' bank accounts on the line.
Buffett, the chairman of Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA, Fortune 500), lashed out at the damage wrought by overpaid, unaccountable finance-industry bigwigs in his annual letter to Berkshire shareholders, released Saturday.
Buffett has been criticizing overreaching corporate managers and complaisant directors for decades. But the question of how to motivate good corporate behavior has taken on new weight as Washington debates reining in the financial giants whose missteps brought the economy to its knees two years ago.
The Obama administration last month proposed separating banks' proprietary trading activities from their federally subsidized deposit-gathering and lending ones. Other proposed rules would increase the amount of capital banks hold against losses and how much cash they carry to deal with a surge of withdrawals.
But Buffett said there's a simpler way to cap risk-taking: Forcing lavishly compensated CEOs to take responsibility for assessing the risks at their firms -- and putting their own wealth at stake, to boot.
"It is the behavior of these CEOs and directors that needs to be changed," he wrote. "They have long benefitted from oversized financial carrots; some meaningful sticks now need to be employed as well."
The comment reflects a theme that has run through Buffett's letters to investors over the years: Shareholders are best served by managers who think like owners. More often, he has said, they are ill served by executives who instead pursue value-destroying mergers or pile up debt in a bid to boost returns.
Buffett, 79, is the controlling shareholder at Berkshire and has received $100,000 in annual salary for the past quarter-century. Since he took over Berkshire in 1965, the company's net worth has increased at a 20% compound annual rate.
So it's no surprise when he heaps scorn on the bankers who made tens of millions of dollars annually as they steered their financial supertankers onto the rocks. The four biggest financial "fiascoes" -- presumably including the bailouts of AIG (AIG, Fortune 500), Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) and Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) -- cost investors more than $500 billion, by Buffett's count.
Shareholders didn't cause those meltdowns, but "they have borne the burden, with 90% or more of the value of their holdings wiped out in most cases of failure," Buffett wrote. "The CEOs and directors of the failed companies, however, have largely gone unscathed."
It's bad enough that corporate insiders escaped major financial harm in the bailout debacle. But some even managed to keep their jobs: While Citi and BofA have shaken up their boards, 13 pre-bailout directors remain at the two banks. Vikram Pandit continues as CEO of Citi, while Ken Lewis only recently stepped down as CEO of Bank of America.
Consider too the modest toll paid by the execs who were behind two other major collapses of 2008, former Bear Stearns Chairman Jimmy Cayne and longtime Lehman Brothers chief Dick Fuld.
While both owned sizable amounts of company stock, neither by any means had the lion's share of his wealth tied to the firm. Fuld, for instance, sold nearly $500 million of Lehman stock in the years leading up to the firm's September 2008 failure. And while Bear's collapse cost Cayne $1 billion, he was still worth $600 million after its March 2008 panic sale to JPMorgan Chase.
Thus the bill for the firms' lever-up-and-bet-big strategy was largely borne by smaller shareholders, including many employees, and the taxpayers who must now foot the bill for extraordinary government aid extended later in 2008 to the rest of the financial sector.
Since the crash, the notion that executives should have more skin in the game has become commonplace. Big Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500), which Berkshire owns preferred shares of, and Morgan Stanley (MS, Fortune 500) are now paying top executives largely in stock that must be held over a period of years, in the name of coupling risk with reward.
But officers' and directors' commitment to shareholders must go further, Buffett said.
Boards that don't insist the CEO take responsibility for risk management are "derelict" in their duty, Buffett wrote. And in cases where a failure to act prudently results in government assistance, "the financial consequences for [the CEO] and his board should be severe."
已赞过
已踩过<
评论
收起
你对这个回答的评价是？
更多回答（2）
推荐律师服务：
若未解决您的问题，请您详细描述您的问题，通过百度律临进行免费专业咨询
