This is not quite so simple as some want to see it. You have to distingusih between: [1] Keeping liguidity (funds) in banks (and corporations in trouble) if you want them to continue to function ... if you think it is in the BEST PUBLIC INTEREST to keep them afloat and [2] Excessive Compensation and Perks that top bank and corp execs take out. These are NOT the same issue.
In fact it is undisputably in the best interest of the PUBLIC that we not allow banks to collapse. We know from prior experience and its basic Money and Banking course that if any banks start to fail, confidence in other banks is undermined and that when confidence in banks is undermined it can (and has) cause a "run on the bank" (massive withdrawals of cash by fearful depositors). Therefore, it is essential that the government do everything it can and must to keep the banks from crashing (by funding them with more cash OR by squeezing big bangs to absorb .. merge with .. in trouble smaller banks .. as we've seen). These are 2 of the best tools available to avert bank closings and depositor panic and the collapse of the banking system. This is what FDIC insurance on bank accounts is about ... to prevent panic about your "insured" deposits .. put in after the bank failures, stock market crash and depression of the 30's (when there was no such insurance).
Now ... excessive pay is a different issue. I agree it is way out of control ... the excesses that many corporate and banking executives have gone to are as close to "sinful" as any business matter can get. It has been going on for a long time, but it has risen to new heights of GREED and SELF DEALING in recent years. When it was done while the profits and the stocks were soaring, one could try to make a straight faced argument that these greedy multimillion dollar executives deserve or earned millions "extra" as bonus or incentive money ... YES, that can be hard to swallow too in many cases .... but no it is absurd to argue that in these bad economic times, and as their businesses go down and some are about to go under and they are running to congress with hands out for loans and help that these GREEDY, SELF-DEALING executives of companies that are crashing should STILL be getting those excessive bonuses and incentives as they drive their companies in the gound (at least they are at the wheel and that is the direction the companies are going "on their watch"). And to add insult to injury, the worst scenario of all is when they continue with excessive bonuses and incentives and outrageously high compensation AT THE SAME TIME they are getting taxpayer money from congress! That is so absurd, I understand the questioner suggesting they look like criminals at that point.
At the present time under traditional laws and legal views in USA, it is NOT against the law for these executives to request/get and take ALL THEY WANT AND CAN GET their corporate BOARDS OF DIRECTORS to approve. Some of them are truly greedy pigs, but it is their BOARDS OF DIRECTORS who approve their pigging-out and authorize the bonues, incentives and excessive pay salaries. WE NEED NEW LAWS and/or MORE AGGRESSIVE APPLICATION of EXISTING LAWS APPLIED DIFFERENTLY via the courts to GO AFTER THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS. Sue them for allowing it and seek to recover money out of their pockets for failing to do their duty. Then the next level and step would be to go after the executives to seek to recover money they LEGALLY received but got in gross excess of what is fair and reasonable. The only legal theory that comes to mind immediately would be to sue directors and executives for "breach of the fiduciary duty" which they have to the shareholders ... that is their legal duty to run the company in a way that is fair and reasonable for the shareholders (and not just run it to line thier own pockets). I am not aware of any movement in that direction, but that would be my first suggestion on an area that shareholders and their lawyers should consider pursuing. Of couse, as soon as that should happen, many will yell at how the lawyers are taking 1/3 or so of whatever they recover for the shareholders (as legal fees). It would be best if government of some non-profit/public interest group could go after executives and board memebers for "looting" the corporation/shareholders by excessive compensation and perks in breach of fiduciary duty to the shareholders.
In terms of thinking it is a crime, you can forget that. The executives (with few rare exceptions where it does become a crime) got board of directors to vote for and approve all this excessive compenstation and there is no legal limit under current laws on HOW EXCESSIVELY YOU CAN PAY EXECUTIVES in PUBLIC COMPANIES. [Note: in terms of "perks" there are and long have been abuses in that area and much of that is done without board approval and sometimes the directors are aware, sometimes they are participants in that "looting" and sometimes they are in the dark on that, as the executives are hauling off the goodies for themselves (and friends and family) Just as there is no limit on how much an owner can pay an athelete (with similar absurd salaries and signing bonuses) or how much a studio can pay a movie star (again being in extraordinary amounts). The Team Owner and the Studios however are NOT public companies with shareholders (in most cases) and so those owners can spend what ever they want on "talent inventory" and sell it at whatever prices they can get to try and maximize attendance and wins ... they have no fiduciary duty to any public investors, as private entities. Such is NOT so for the stock exchange listed, "public" companies.
I hope I have laid out a direction that some lawyers might follow and that we'll see progress in the law in this area ... holding "looting" executives and fiduciary duty breaching directors personally liable for the excesses.
