During the 2003 -- 06 boom years, three agencies, The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency gave out millions of dollars in bonuses to regulators of these agencies.

The bonuses were supposedly given out for "superior" performance. Records show that at least $19 million in bonuses was awarded.

Can you imagine this! American International Group (AIG) is paying its employees $100 million in bonuses.

This is after AIG was bailed out to the tune of $182 billion by the U.S. government. The government owns 80% of the insurance giant. AIG employees have agreed to a $20 million cut. However, some employees are screaming that that is not enough. They claim that their contracts dated earlier than the bailout must be honored.

The lack of public outcry or protest regarding bank bail-out recipient Citigroup Inc.'s (C) decision to allocate million-dollar pay packages to top executives, albeit in stock, not cash, should not surprise investors.

That's because, historically, the American people have never supported restricting individual bonuses or large compensation plans. The political science and public policy literature is voluminous on this subject -- I've worked with the data for more than 10 years -- and the stance over the years of the American people has been clear: high compensation -- base salary or bonus -- is OK.

Is another round of continent-hopping banks (and bank services) up ahead? Perhaps, if the analysis of Josef Ackermann, CEO of Germany-based Deutsche Bank (DB) is accurate.

Ackermann said Germany has a "comparative advantage" over other financial hubs because it is not expected to tax bonuses as Britain and France have done, Bloomberg News reported Sunday.

For more than a third of private equity employees, employee compensation either stayed the same or declined. A recent report by alternative investment research firm Preqin estimates that 38% of private equity employees saw base salary freezes in 2009, and 6% of firms participating in the survey indicated that they were cutting salaries this year. Of course, this means that 56% kicked base salaries up this year, though the average increase was a mere 2%.

For the employees of 22% of the firms participating in the Preqin survey, the brush with a pay cut was close as these companies considered a freeze. But 40% haven't cut or never considered it.

In a column that would seem more appropriate for a left-wing college campus news zine than The Wall Street Journal, McGill University professor Henry Mintzberg offers a proposal for how to change compensation practices in America: get rid of bonuses.

Mintzberg offers some well-worn -- and completely valid -- criticisms of stock-based compensation: golden parachutes, retention bonuses, etc. He explains the problems that come with assessing performance and raises another question that isn't talked about nearly enough: just how much of a role do CEOs really play in determining a company's success or failure?

Against the backdrop of heightened public criticism, The U.S. Federal Reserve is trying to encourage banks to take the first step in controlling excessive pay and bonuses. Regulators have established broad guidelines for pay incentives and bonuses. However, they are quite loose and do not nail down any specifics. Regulators are trying to coax compliance before the end of the year.

Britain has taken the lead and mandated that a percentage of bankers' bonuses should be deferred for a number of years.

Why is there such a public outcry to curb excessive bankers' pay and bonuses?

We have a human disaster of enormous proportions. We have 15 million persons unemployed. Thousands are on the brink of losing their homes. As of this December, 1.7 million unemployed will exhaust their benefits. They may be homeless at this holiday time. Some 400,000 persons exhausted their benefits in the month of October.

Now, as reported in BusinessWeek, one lone economist, Katerina Alexandraki, is asking Wall Streeters to give their bonuses to the homeless and unemployed. She has set up a website, Bonus for Homes, and started a campaign to distribute the monies to low-income earners and the unemployed.

The rally in the stock market and the return to profitability for some of the top banks has been hailed as a sign of a turnaround -- and proof that the interventionist financial policies of the past year worked.

But not so fast. In reality, a huge chunk of the profits banks are earnings can be directly attributed to their ability to borrow money at artificially low interest rates.

According to a report from the Center for Economic and Policy Research found that below market interest rates offered by The Federal Reserve accounted for 41% of JPMorgan's profits. At Bank of America, the number was 47%.

If you've worked as a broker you know the game. The house sets quotas. You must meet the quotas or its good-bye.

As a broker, your first and foremost obligation is to the client. You can make recommendations, but in the last analysis, the decision to buy or sell a security rests with the client. Brokers, however, are often under the gun by management to tout certain securities to their clients that may not be in their best interests.

Reportedly, Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) staff will be receiving the largest bonus payouts in the company's 150-year history, thanks to a solid first half of 2009. This news has kicked off a bit of concern that large investment banks that survived the credit crunch would hamper any attempts at financial regulation reforms. The main reason that Goldman Sachs was able to perform well in the quarter was a general lack of competition and a surge in revenue thanks to the company's trading of foreign currency, bonds, and fixed-income products.

A week ago, the London staff of Goldman Sachs was told that they could expect larger bonuses -- as long as the company's predictions for its most profitable year ever come to fruition. Next month's second-quarter earnings report are expected to show a jump in profits. An example of how strong the quarter was, Warren Buffet spent $5 billion to purchase GS shares in January -- and the Oracle of Omaha has made $1 billion on this investment.

When the history of this financial crisis is written, this story story will be a contender as a standout example of its kind. It is one of the slickest, under the table, sleight of hand deals ever.

Picture this. The financial markets are falling apart right and left. Lehman, Bear Stearns and Merrill are going down for the count. In the midst of this confusion Bank of America Corp (NYSE: BAC) is in the process of taking over Merrill Lynch. Merrill executives and employees are in a state of panic but at the last moment they regain their composure and have the audacity (word is too mild) to pay themselves $3.6 billion in bonuses just days before the BofA takeover.

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal has been pawing through the data on American International Group's (NYSE: AIG) post-bailout bonus payments, and he's uncovered a bit of a discrepancy. Blumenthal says that the bonus payments totaled $218 million -- more than 30% higher than the widely reported $165 million figure.

Blumenthal said he isn't sure of the reason behind the discrepancy, and AIG denies that the discrepancy exists. Either way, Blumenthal isn't happy about it.

Suddenly, I have found myself playing the role of Don Quixote tilting at the windmills of poor executive decisions. I didn't intend to play this role, but the inhabitants of boardrooms and the corner offices are making the job so easy.

The latest example of poor decisions and announcement comes courtesy of Macy's (NYSE: M). The retailer announced on Monday that it would lay off roughly 7,000 workers and cut its dividend in half in hopes of saving money. So, what is the next announcement that the company makes? If you guessed performance bonus payments to executives, give yourself a pat on the back.

Ohio-based regional bank Huntington Bancshares (NASDAQ: HBAN) reported today a series of drastic measures meant to reduce costs by $100 million in 2009. Huntington will cut 500 jobs, or about 4% of its workforce; freeze salaries at 2008 levels; eliminate executive and incentive awards for 2008; and discontinue the company's 401(k) match contribution.

"It is important that our customers and shareholders know that we are well-positioned to deal with this challenging environment," said Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer Stephen Steinour in a statement. "Our liquidity position is strong."