How many times do we have to tell you? NO BONUS. That's the conclusion of a remarkable story Bloomberg carried this week on Americans' reactions to banks and securities firms that are still planning on giving out annual bonuses.

Americans, it seems, don't want declines of 50 percent or 70 percent in the year-end bonuses paid to those who work at the nation's banks and securities firms, or at least the ones they now own, partly through the government's $700 billion bailout.

No, these Americans want Wall Street bonuses to go to zero.

The first time I heard the expression, "go to zero" was earlier this year, as the stock of the bond insurers that had been such a success in the municipal market collapsed due to their involvement in the mortgage market.

Now you hear it every day.

And now Americans are saying that the industry that brought the economy to its knees with its endless financial spinning should itself be brought low, demanding an end to the life-altering, lottery-like windfalls that Wall Street parcels out to itself every January or February. The industry, however, seems not to get it.

Maybe the survivors are in denial. Perhaps they believe that surely since they did a good job this year — presuming they don't work in mortgage securities or derivatives or whatever the real losers are — that they deserve the same bonuses they got during the seven fat years.

Or maybe they think if they get just one more good hit, they will have accumulated "the number" they need to retire and never work again.

And maybe they will get away with it. Maybe there are still so many recipients of Wall Street cash on Capitol Hill that the demands for an end to the gravy train will be blunted.

On the other hand, we may be in one of those rare times in history when, for a year or two, the gravity of the situation will trump politicians' financial self-interest. Someone, somewhere, will say, "Have you no sense of decency, sir?"

Representative Henry Waxman wants to get to the bottom of things. The California Democrat has asked the firms receiving Americans' largess to detail their bonus plans. And maybe this time, the full scope of Wall Street's payday will be revealed. Oh, the horror! By full, I mean full disclosure. Most Americans are already treated to how much the managers at the very top of these firms get, the $40 million, $50 million, $60 million that are outlined in annual financial disclosures and so eagerly reported.

But that's just the officers at the very top, who may as well be in fantasyland, anyway. You might as well talk about professional athletes and movie stars.

How about everyone else? I wager that those are the people the normal taxpayers are interested in now. These may be people they know, or certainly pass in the street or in a shop, not the ones who live air-conditioned, limousine-driven lives.

Why does the salesman get $4 million or $6 million or $8 million? Why does the analyst get $500,000? Why does the secretary get $25,000 or $40,000? How is it possible for some of these people to retire at age 45?

No need for names — just tell us all what the people do, and what they stand to collect, and explain why. What a great thing! This would be the Wall Street salary survey story of all time.

Of course, it would also be the last one, if the experts are correct and the investment bank "model" is broken forever. Regular banks don't pay 50 percent of their profits in bonuses.

The banks and securities firms say they set aside money for their bonus pools during the year. Americans contacted by Bloomberg News aren't buying it. They say the firms are taking the billions of dollars they got from the US government and using that to pay the bonuses.

"Their sense of entitlement is appalling," said S. Woods Bennett, a 57-year-old lawyer from Baltimore who was asked to comment on the survey.

What an amazing year 2008 has been. With the election of Barack Obama as president, it looks like Americans are unfazed by the subject of race, and in 2009 may even talk about it. Maybe we will break the final taboo and start talking about money, too, in real terms and using actual figures.

(Joe Mysak is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)