Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23
  1.    #1  
    Last edited by palandri; 10/25/2009 at 06:50 AM.
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  2. #2  
    And if you had gone into banking and that was your paycheck would you be complaining? I doubt it.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  3.    #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof View Post
    And if you had gone into banking and that was your paycheck would you be complaining? I doubt it.
    What makes them that much better than you or me? Are they gods of some sort?
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  4. #4  
    They aren't better than you or me just much more successful, ambitious, educated and cunning. Their reward for all this is 18 million dollars. It's capitalism, which is the accepted norm in the western world. Would it be nice to see wealth distributed more evenly and have a healthier, smarter and stronger USA, sure would, but that's not how it works.....and with a 2 party system it's not changing anytime soon.

    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    What makes them that much better than you or me? Are they gods of some sort?
  5. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    They aren't better than you or me just much more successful, ambitious, educated and cunning. Their reward for all this is 18 million dollars. It's capitalism, which is the accepted norm in the western world. Would it be nice to see wealth distributed more evenly and have a healthier, smarter and stronger USA, sure would, but that's not how it works.....and with a 2 party system it's not changing anytime soon.
    I think an equitable distribution of wealth is completely unobjectionable. The real question is twofold. First, what should the definition of "equitable" be? Second, what mechanism should be used to achieve that wealth distribution?
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    It's capitalism, which is the accepted norm in the western world.
    Capitalisim... thats what we call a govt bailout now?
  7. #7  
    18 mil is the rate... when I fix your computer and you complain of paying me $120... maybe the gov't should step in and decide I need to be paid $30.

    Maybe the gov't should step in an regulate all of our pay....

    Okay, they made 18 mil... so what. That is the rate. My cousin has a high school diploma and makes over $100 per hour... that is the rate in his field.

    This is where this bailout sht has left us... I say leave it the hell alone and get the money back.

    If they don't pay the going rate, guess what? The people go someplace else.

    Like my cousin when the a company in Mexico wanted to fly him to Mexico to work... for the going rate. But he was able to secure a job paying the same in the USA so he stayed here.

    You don't bail out private companies and hold them.... you don't regulate said companies afterwards.... this is all insane. We are building a mess....

    Thanks Bush... Obama Fix it Now... don't go deeper.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  8. #8  
    Well since the govt steped in to save their company and jobs i would think this is f'd up. You cant say help we need money then turn around and pay yourself 10's of millions. They should go to jail.
  9. #9  
    Also this mess isnt bush's fault its clintons. The Clinton administration removed the safeguards that prevented bad loans. a democratic congress was elected and they sat back and let the current crisis happen. Clinton also had the chance to take out Osama Bin Laden in 1996 and chickened out and when Bush took over from Clinton the country was facing a recession.

    The clinton administration and the banks are the people responsible for our failing economy. We should not have bailed them out and they should not be paying themselfs millions with our money. By throwing billions into the economy they've done nothing but put our country more in debt. They shouldve left it alone and let it fix itself. Has anyone seen any improvements? Other than the fact that bank of america is still down the block there havent been improvements. Also my neighbors who bought houses with no down payments that they couldnt afford still live there. So now we are helping the people who did this and ruining our economy more. We need to let them fail so things will reset. My neighbors cant afford those houses. They will still be missing payments in 5 years so what are we doing?
    Last edited by bigwood212; 10/25/2009 at 09:32 PM.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by bigwood212 View Post
    Also this mess isnt bush's fault its clintons. The Clinton administration removed the safeguards that prevented bad loans. a democratic congress was elected and they sat back and let the current crisis happen. Clinton also had the chance to take out Osama Bin Laden in 1996 and chickened out and when Bush took over from Clinton the country was facing a recession.

    The clinton administration and the banks are the people responsible for our failing economy. We should not have bailed them out and they should not be paying themselfs millions with our money. By throwing billions into the economy they've done nothing but put our country more in debt. They shouldve left it alone and let it fix itself. Has anyone seen any improvements? Other than the fact that bank of america is still down the block there havent been improvements. Also my neighbors who bought houses with no down payments that they couldnt afford still live there. So now we are helping the people who did this and ruining our economy more. We need to let them fail so things will reset. My neighbors cant afford those houses. They will still be missing payments in 5 years so what are we doing?
    QFT
  11. #11  
    At this point it does not matter who is at blame. We learn from the past and move on. No government bailout. Companies fail. We are all still on an equal paying field be it high or low. New investors move in and we start back up. That's what has made us great in the past and that's what will make us great again. However since the government is in the middle now, it will just take longer. We should only hope that we don't lose most of our rights as a free people with free choice.

    Those that work hard can make big money. The sad part is those that don't get off their **** and choose not to improve their life seem to be the ones that complain most. If you want your fair share, you have two options. Works harder or go back to school. In the end the right way is to not complain and just WORK TO EARN IT.
  12. #12  
    The problem is these companies' Boards are composed of the same greedy bums as the overpaid executives and do not police the salaries properly to protect the shareholders interests.

    The pending Shareholder Bill of Rights will hopefully address this.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    The problem is these companies' Boards are composed of the same greedy bums as the overpaid executives and do not police the salaries properly to protect the shareholders interests.

    The pending Shareholder Bill of Rights will hopefully address this.
    If they did not protect shareholders interest then they would/will fold. Since the government is balling some out, now these board members and the upper management will assume that they can get away with it even more since they only have to ask for a bailout. We need to go back. When there is no profit the shareholders sell the stock and go elsewhere. In the end the bad companies go away and the good ones excel. We need less taxation and Government regulation. Let the free market decide.
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    If they did not protect shareholders interest then they would/will fold. Since the government is balling some out, now these board members and the upper management will assume that they can get away with it even more since they only have to ask for a bailout. We need to go back. When there is no profit the shareholders sell the stock and go elsewhere. In the end the bad companies go away and the good ones excel. We need less taxation and Government regulation. Let the free market decide.
    In case you missed recent history, the companies you speak of were taken off their leash by not only the Bush admin but yes the Clinton admin. They took risks for extreme profits and looked at coming failure, but their failure would have lead to an era of Mad Max Thunderdome (translated too big to fail).

    The point is, they had to be stabilized and the tax payers got ticked and pulled out their torches and pitch forks so the admin has created a scenario where those executives must succeed to see the benefits of the tax payers loan.

    Moral of the story is government regulation is needed to prevent "too big to fail" scenarios. (btw anyone pick up that new book Too Big Too Fail?)
  15. #15  
    Yeah, sorta like some of those people who were in the banking industries that cashed out before the fall that made millions and then got a job from Barry. You really need to include them in the discussion. some made more than $18 million.
  16. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #16  
    Hello Everyone,

    This bailout nonsense sure as hell isn't capitalism. I personally think it is ludicrous to have a company that sucks (needing a bailout) giving massive pay to the people who preside over it sucking. Success=good pay, failure=fired.

    However, the government should have no part in setting pay for any private company (but let's be honest--they are no longer that), and shouldn't be bailing them out either. Bailout fever is the real failure of the Bush administration, and the Obama administration is apparently more than happy to be the "third term," in this regard.

    It is disgusting however, that the government is acting as of they are protecting the public when they've got their cronies (many of them tax cheats) as part of this mess.

    Once again, the taxpayer and citizens are being fooled, and we are allowing the culprits and their cronies to gain more and more power. How "fixed" do you think things will be when those who cause the problems are the same people who are supposed to be fixing them?

    Government Regulation is needed to prevent "too big to fail." Nonsense. Government CREATES "too big to fail." Government IS the failure behind all of these HIGHLY REGULATED companies. The banking industry is totally in bed with government, with a revolving door between the two.

    Disasters such as this is what you get when you trust the wolf to watch the hen-house and that's exactly what "government regulation" is.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 10/26/2009 at 08:59 AM. Reason: Additional point
  17. #17  
    Over government regulation in the housing industry had a big part to do with where we are today. We need less government regulation. NO government bailouts. When one company fails another takes over and we excel higher. There will always be bad companies. There will always be better ones. There is not one thing that I can think of that is regulated by the government that helps and where capitalism would not do a better job. If I think about it I should come up with a few. But my point is, the Gov. hurts us more then helps us. Heck, look at California and my (going down the toilet ) state, New York. Regulation is killing us, if it has not already. We have a mass movement of companies and people leaving the state. Increase regulation on a national level and more will move out of the country.
  18. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    Over government regulation in the housing industry had a big part to do with where we are today. We need less government regulation. NO government bailouts. When one company fails another takes over and we excel higher. There will always be bad companies. There will always be better ones. There is not one thing that I can think of that is regulated by the government that helps and where capitalism would not do a better job. If I think about it I should come up with a few. But my point is, the Gov. hurts us more then helps us. Heck, look at California and my (going down the toilet ) state, New York. Regulation is killing us, if it has not already. We have a mass movement of companies and people leaving the state. Increase regulation on a national level and more will move out of the country.
    Hello,

    I think that SOME level of government regulation is acceptable--essentially which would entail prosecuting fraud. That's their best role. I also think that establishing safety standards for things like Seat belts is useful--although this could also be accomplished by privately run certification standards as well.

    What we've had for 100 years is government placing burdens on business, all in the name of protecting the public, but without much regard to how much damage they do. How much drag does this government intrusion place on the economy, which ends up harming everyone? Hard to say, but it is significant. In actuality, this often harms the public more directly as well. For example--statistically, for every X pounds taken out of a car (to meet government fuel economy standards), leads to Y deaths.

    Unintended Consequences is the key thing to think about with these promises of "protection" that the government touts, and that's assuming that they are 100% honest (which they are not).

    Government can play a vital role--as a watchdog and prosecutor of crimes (fraud mainly) in business. That's useful. Government micromanaging business, when it can't even come close to running itself properly--that's not a good idea in my view.

    In terms of the Housing Market Collapse--the Government's fingerprints are all over that, going way back. Also--prime enablers of that are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and those places were filled with people who soaked a lot of money from the citizens--making millions of dollars. President Obama was advised by some of these folks, and made one of them (Rahm Emmanuel) his Chief of Staff.

    Why do we let government get away with this blame game which inevitably leads to them taking more power and money away from the citizens, because THEY did something wrong? This is insanity. Wolves watching the Hen house.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 10/26/2009 at 10:03 AM. Reason: Additional Point
  19. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    The pending Shareholder Bill of Rights will hopefully address this.
    Thanks for reminding me of this. Personally, anything with Schumer's name on it is suspect. I can't stand him. But I'm willing to look at both sides on this. All of the articles I've found are dated April or May. Any idea of where it is in the process?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  20. #20  
    The anti-gov't/pro free market rhetoric flying around in here is charming, however, I would suggest one take an honest assessment of what occurred in these financial institutions and why so many felt they were too big to fail.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions