One doesn’t have to be rich to be a cheat. Henrietta and the CEOs both are doing the exact same thing; one is doing it with hundred dollar bills, and the other with one dollar bills.
Tell me, because I truly want to know. What is the difference?
On a purely logical level, there is little difference. When you add real people and real money to the equation, things change drastically.
Perhaps you should ask all people who have lost huge chunks of their retirement and life savings what the difference is. I'm guessing that the hundred dollar bills will win out every single time.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 13.02.2009 @ 21:50
So, how does capping Banker’s pay fix the problem?
It doesn't necessarily fix the problem, but it gives bankers massive incentive to pay back the taxpayer loans, or forgo them completely. The faster they do that, the faster they can go back to their sweet big money gigs.
This is the best argument I’ve heard for never having socialized medicine.
So, you're concerned that taxpayers and government will tell you how healthy you need to be? That's a cool argument. I like that.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 13.02.2009 @ 21:42
I’ll disagree despite Chuck’s general populist ignorance on the causes and effects and the proper placement of blame of the crises..
Please, teach me what you know about where to place blame. You seem well informed.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 13.02.2009 @ 16:31
So, are we talking about unequal treatment? That bankers are lesser creatures and deserving of government intervention while you, I and other supreme beings should remain above that sort of thing? You are kidding yourself. If you support what the feds are doing to the bankers then you support the feds doing it to you – and me and everyone else.
Sarcasm noted. We loaned money to the banks. They upped their bonus schedules and used that money to pay out bonuses. The recipients of those bonuses took the money and in many cases walked away without so much as a thought as to what would happen to the bank, or how the taxpayers would get their money back. It's literally free money for them. So, in conclusion, congratulations to them for getting so much free money from us. Done and done.
For an example of how almost $700m taxpayer dollars can disappear like this, see Merrill Lynch before the buyout. It was a beautiful example of how to literally steal millions of dollars from your country and get patted on the back for it. I'm just sad I missed the boat.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 13.02.2009 @ 14:57
I suppose you wouldn’t mind if the government dictated how much you were worth, eh?
Of course I would mind. That's the rub. The bankers have us by the balls, and are laughing all the way to... er.. the bank. My favorite part is when they get taxpayer money, move up the bonus schedule, pay out the massive bonuses, then those people either resign or retire, millions in hand. So, congratulations taxpayers, you've been financially raped for a second time.
So, are we talking about unequal treatment? That bankers are lesser creatures and deserving of government intervention while you, I and other supreme beings should remain above that sort of thing? You are kidding yourself. If you support what the feds are doing to the bankers then you support the feds doing it to you - and me and everyone else.
ed.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 13.02.2009 @ 13:35
Congratulations to Geithner and his boss for concentrating on the real important stuff like playing the class warfare game by sticking it to the rich bankers.
I've got a lot of grudging respect for the rich bankers. Despite total incompetence, despite spectacular greed, despite colossal failure on a scale that's hard to even comprehend, despite all of this, these guys still manage to continue getting paid on a bonus schedule that the lower classes would never see in an entire lifetime.
If that's not Americana at its finest, I don't know what is. And you know what else? When they accelerate their bonus schedule and still manage to get their payout from taxpayer money (post failure), then good for them. I the end, they're actually the smart ones. They successfully gamed the system, gamed the taxpayers, gamed everyone they needed to, and got paid. Handsomely.
Good for them. No sense in trying to stick it to them now. They've won. We should really just stop bitching and concentrate on how we're going to pay the bill they've left us with. Complaining about it now just makes us seem low class.
All of what you say is true. But I draw the line at the government being able to dictate how much any employee - even a bumbling CEO of a huge bank - is worth.
I suppose you wouldn't mind if the government dictated how much you were worth, eh? And that's the point - once the feds get in the business of figuring out how valuable or how necessary someone is, they generally like it and wish to expand it just like all other federal initiatives in history.
ed.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 13.02.2009 @ 10:59
Sara, you might consider brushing up on your analogy skills.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 10.02.2009 @ 18:13
I dunno. The guy talked for an hour and didn't make me cringe or feel embarrassed. He took whatever questions were asked. I'd call that progress. Unfortunately, 'better than Bush' doesn't really set the bar very high.
heh - true enough. Except I flinched when he lied about tax cuts causing the financial crisis. That's insane. And his lie about the GOP "only" wanting tax cuts is another whopper. The Republican alternative has both spending and tax cuts in it.
ed.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 10.02.2009 @ 12:02
The sight of Congress flexing its muscles into the business arena, bringing up every corporate exec under the sun who may have done wrong, is not something that should turn you on.
Congress flexing it's muscles is something that should turn every American on. Unfortunately, a majority of those muscles have atrophied from lack of use.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 12.02.2009 @ 12:41
Not being open to new ideas and new ways of looking at the world has been our downfall both philosophically and electorally.
This is in perfect alignment with what behavioral scientists say is one of the primary and fundamental differences with liberals and conservatives.
Realizing that it is mostly a product of genetics is the first step to truly being able to communicate and accomplish things with those who have ideological differences.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 6.02.2009 @ 15:36