Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 78
  1.    #1  
    Confiscate the pay, bonuses and stock options of every single ceo responsible for the complete and utter devastation of each and every company which failed from subprime mortgage investments.

    This would mean not only seizing their bank accounts, but additionally their homes and assets purchased with their severance packages, bonuses and or annual salaries. No negotiations whatsoever.


    You don't punish the taxpayers for the actions of what is nothing more than a veritable freaking mob. You punish the mob. You crush them, remove them, and establish/enforce laws or regulations preventing egregious criminal negligence like this from recurring.

    As is known, these executives drove our country into the drainage system, and yet somehow we allow these cretins to depart with billions of dollars in pay plus bonuses from those years of debauchery AND award them severance packages for putting our mortgage firms on the brink of destruction.

    Then we make taxpayers bail out these bastards when we know with damned certainty these banks wouldn't do the same for us.

    How no one on capital hill hasn't proposed a focused effort on seizing these thieves' (the ceo's) bank accounts vs taking MORE taxpayer money is absolutely stunning to me.

    The taxpayers are hurting here. They can't afford tax increases. These satanical ceo's ABSOLUTELY can. Go after them. Period. End of story.

    That is the one AND only bailout solution I will accept.

    How can it be, as we tout ourselves to be such a stable, just and righteous nation, that the outrageous crimes of corporate america are rescued from failure by those who, for the most part, make their living the HONEST way?

    Are we to set that precedent and send that message that executives are to be held to different standards than the rest of us?

    To hell with that. Punish the right people here. All the money we need for this bailout is in THEIR pockets. This country must have the frickin balls to do the right thing.

    God damn, this pisses me off.
    Last edited by logmein; 09/25/2008 at 10:53 PM.
  2.    #2  
    By the way, this may not cover ALL the outstanding debt, but it's certainly a damn good and sensible start towards the solution....

    Incidentally, I also think we should go after all managers within these failed banks who pushed their employees to lend these subprime bombs.

    Go after them all.
  3. #3  
    How about just letting free enterprise have free rein - cut the capital gains tax, in fact just plain cut taxes for a couple of years. Also those that caused it, both politicians and CEOs, et cetera, they need to pay the price. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080925/...ailout_ceo_pay
  4.    #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    How about just letting free enterprise have free rein - cut the capital gains tax, in fact just plain cut taxes for a couple of years. Also those that caused it, both politicians and CEOs, et cetera, they need to pay the price. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080925/...ailout_ceo_pay
    I would agree with going after the politicians who helped cause this as well. I also think we should slash capital gains taxes for sure.

    Less pressure would be placed on social security as people would have more money to retire on. More money to help pay for their healthcare costs too. More money to help the economy stay healthy and recover.

    Why punish people who are saving for retirement? They are trying to move away from depending on social security by doing so, wouldn't you want to reward them in doing this? i think so.

    Looking at how this nation spends all of our taxes anyway is truly disturbing in many cases. Surprisingly careless, irresponsible and wasteful. Why give more to them when they haven't been able to prove that they are consistently good financial stewards?

    So yes. Cut taxes and target all those responsible for this mess instead.
  5.    #5  
    "......nstead, they issued a statement of economic rescue principles that calls for Wall Street to fund the recovery by injecting private capital - not taxpayer dollars - into the financial markets. Easing tax laws would prompt investors to put in their own dollars, they said."....

    -cnn

    I think this is a better direction than that of a $700 billion tax bill.

    But again, I strongly feel we should strip guilty execs of their wealth and let them feel what it's like to lose a home, their retirement savings, and all assets.

    Karma's a *****. Let's let her do her job not get in her way, shall we?
  6. #6  
    Excess wealth and jail time. Enron was nothing as like this and yet prosecutions were screamed for and obtained. The same must happen here.

    It is appalling to think we are about to let the people "rescue us" that were directly responsible for the situation we are in.
  7. #7  
    Say you have 10 people in a room. 9 of them have done enough to get by, 1 has taken educated risks and earned 10x what the others have. Then you have a democratic vote to determine how the finances are distributed. Is it difficult to imagine 9 out of 10 wanting equal distribution? Is it fair?
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  8. #8  
    Another thought...if you're able to "crush" them under current legislation, what need have you for more?
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  9. TRgEOff's Avatar
    Posts
    589 Posts
    Global Posts
    591 Global Posts
    #9  
    [quote=****-richardson;1502721]Say you have 10 people in a room. 9 of them have done enough to get by, 1 has taken educated risks and earned 10x what the others have. Then you have a democratic vote to determine how the finances are distributed. Is it difficult to imagine 9 out of 10 wanting equal distribution? Is it fair?[/quote

    I think it's an unsellable script. I'm thinking that the poor dudes, in their typical short-term-thinking sort of way, grab the rich dude's wallet, split the credit cards, and live high on the road for as long as it lasts.
    geoff

    Treo 650 1.20 LAP.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    "......nstead, they issued a statement of economic rescue principles that calls for Wall Street to fund the recovery by injecting private capital - not taxpayer dollars - into the financial markets. Easing tax laws would prompt investors to put in their own dollars, they said."....

    -cnn

    I think this is a better direction than that of a $700 billion tax bill.

    But again, I strongly feel we should strip guilty execs of their wealth and let them feel what it's like to lose a home, their retirement savings, and all assets.

    Karma's a *****. Let's let her do her job not get in her way, shall we?

    Only problem with that is the exec won't feel a thing. They have money. They have more than enough money to "get buy."

    Your thinking would only hurt the "little people" in the company. How many execs do you think work in a company, compared to people who are not execs?

    Problem is I don't think many grasp the complexity of this issue. LOL
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  11.    #11  
    [QUOTE=TRgEOff;1502776]
    Quote Originally Posted by ****-richardson View Post
    Say you have 10 people in a room. 9 of them have done enough to get by, 1 has taken educated risks and earned 10x what the others have. Then you have a democratic vote to determine how the finances are distributed. Is it difficult to imagine 9 out of 10 wanting equal distribution? Is it fair?[/quote

    I think it's an unsellable script. I'm thinking that the poor dudes, in their typical short-term-thinking sort of way, grab the rich dude's wallet, split the credit cards, and live high on the road for as long as it lasts.

    The idea is that the absurdly wealthy ceo's wallet, grown by these criminal practices, wouldn't be "grabbed" to live high on the hog for a little while, you take it and use it to help pay off all the debt he helped create.

    Its very straightforward. Punishing the people for this ceo's act would the typical short sighted solution here, because the economy would suffer even greater damage by diminishing the consumer' s spending power even further.

    THAT would be short sighted. Frankly, stupid too.
  12.    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    Only problem with that is the exec won't feel a thing. They have money. They have more than enough money to "get buy."

    Your thinking would only hurt the "little people" in the company. How many execs do you think work in a company, compared to people who are not execs?

    Problem is I don't think many grasp the complexity of this issue. LOL
    First of all, don`t assume that many people can`t grasp the "complexity" of this issue. Please. Its not rocket science. That`s so typically the problem around here. One side always jumps to the tendency in underestimating the other`s potential for sophisticated thinking. That assumption is arrogant, as well as wrong.

    You would seize all the income accumulated from the period of subprime lending. So in other words, if the firm began pushing these loans from 1996 through 2006, you would seize any and all the ceo`s income earned from `96 to `06, including the severance pay or the golden parachutes. That would probably amount to anywhere from 50 to 100% of their total wealth. That WOULD hurt.

    This means taking anything ever purchased with that money during that time, whether that includes houses, vehicles, retirement contributions, etc. It also means going after the employees who pushed these subprime loans under that ceo in that same exact way. Too bad, but you have to punish ALL those responsible for this mess. The "little people" would get hurt by doing this? Cry me a river. If they played a role in this, they are accountable. Tough cookies.

    Some lessons MUST be learned the hard way, or else little is changed. Human nature.
    Last edited by logmein; 09/26/2008 at 09:49 AM.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    One side always jumps to the tendency in underestimating the other`s potential for sophisticated thinking.
    I can only go on what I read...

    You would seize all the income accumulated from the period of subprime lending. So in other words, if the firm began pushing these loans from 1996 through 2006, you would seize any and all the ceo`s income earned from `96 to `06, including the severance pay or the golden parachutes. That would probably amount to anywhere from 50 to 100% of their total wealth. That WOULD hurt.
    Potential for sophisticated thinking does always equal sophisticated thinking.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  14.    #14  
    I'm going on what I read here too. You are a presumptuous *******.


    rather than work towards a civil discussion, you'd rather it be contentious.
    Last edited by logmein; 09/26/2008 at 11:04 AM.
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    I'm going on what I read here too. You are a presumptuous *******.
    You sound angry.

    Aw... Robin Hood not deliver your lunch yet?
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  16.    #16  
    So why do you take pleasure in making me angry, champ?

    In any case, there's a level of maturity lacking in your responses here, theog. why don't you do us all a favor and simply stay out of the thread. Your willful divisiveness is unwelcome.
    Last edited by logmein; 09/26/2008 at 12:30 PM.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    In any case, there's a level of maturity lacking in your responses here, theog.
    Level of maturity? Seems you forgot this PM you sent me.

    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    What`s with the chip on your shoulder?

    What`s your god damned problem? I am simply voicing opinions on issues around here just as YOU and any other individuals do. I never directed sarcastic remarks at you in the beginning of the thread, so why do you jump in here unprovoked to immediately insult my intelligence?

    You think your little smart *** comments are cute, but its a good thing we aren`t in the same room. I`d wipe that right off your face, pal.
    Actually pretty funny... I forwarded it to one of my gym buddies... we got a good kick out the last part.

    All fun... chill, dude. ROFL
    Last edited by theog; 09/26/2008 at 05:44 PM.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  18.    #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    Level of maturity? Seems you forgot this PM you sent me.



    Actually pretty funny... I forwarded it to one of my gym buddies... we got a good kick out the last part.

    All fun... chill, dude. ROFL
    Hey, you initiated this. Are you saying your little provocations here were supposed to be indicative of some level of maturity on your part? Are you serious?

    Please. Your only intention here was to inflame an argument. Its obvious.

    LOL. "Your gym buddies" Now THAT is pretty funny.
    I'm glad your (giggle) "gym buddies" got a kick out of the last part. You'd probably get quite a bit more than just a kick out of it, and it WOULD be very amusing to see.

    All fun indeed, but YOU chill dude. If you'd rather have folks be cool around here, then don't go trolling threads insulting or provoking them.

    The pm was in response to your rude, wise *** digs here. If you can't or have no intention of being civil, stay out of the threads. Period.
    Last edited by logmein; 09/26/2008 at 10:56 PM.
  19.    #19  
    Another possible solution to at least attempt to slow the rate of foreclosures is to fix everyone's interest rate at the number they originally signed their adjustable arm with - 5 or 6 % rather than the 8 % or higher which they pay when it adjusts.

    The banks won't make the returns they expected but its a much better alternative than watching foreclosures they know with certainty will take place when interest rates are hiked higher.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    Hey, you initiated this. Are you saying your little provocations here were supposed to be indicative of some level of maturity on your part? Are you serious?

    Please. Your only intention here was to inflame an argument. Its obvious.

    LOL. "Your gym buddies" Now THAT is pretty funny.
    I'm glad your (giggle) "gym buddies" got a kick out of the last part. You'd probably get quite a bit more than just a kick out of it, and it WOULD be very amusing to see.

    All fun indeed, but YOU chill dude. If you'd rather have folks be cool around here, then don't go trolling threads insulting or provoking them.

    The pm was in response to your rude, wise *** digs here. If you can't or have no intention of being civil, stay out of the threads. Period.


    You give me great pleasure... I love your posts... listening to you rant and rave. It is amusing.

    Sounds like someone does not belong in "off topic." Can't handle a bit of heat when someone calls BS on your post? Oh, well... lol
    Last edited by theog; 09/27/2008 at 01:48 AM.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions