The Wall Street Bonuses Issue
-
OK... Here's my problem, and it's not with Obama. Though for context's sake, for any who aren't up on the issue: Obama says "That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful. Uh, and... Part of what we're gonna need... is... for... ... the, folks on Wall Street, who are... asking for help... to show some restraint and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility"[^] Biden says "I'd like to throw these guys in the brig ... They're thinking the same old thing that got us here - greed."[^] Now that we've done this (given billions to banks), we've opened a whole new can of worms that should not have been done. It helps to think of the government as a pasta-slurping mob boss. If you accept money from them, they own you. A large part of me agrees with everybody, that those bonuses should never have been handed out. Especially from borrowed tax payer money. However... I really don't want to see the government start to micro-manage what banks can and can't do. If they'd put two minutes of thought into those stinking bailouts, they could have easily put stipulations on those "loans". It's dispicable, the bonuses for a job well screwed, the AIG parties, all that crap. But I blame the government just as much for ramming these bailouts through without a second though while ignoring the vast majority of the people they work for telling them not to do it. And now it begins, Vinny and Luigi are gonna start busting knee caps, and nothing good will come of it... "The White House says its upcoming financial plan will clamp down on the salaries and bonuses paid to Wall Street employees whose firms receive taxpayer help." "Gibbs said it was "very safe to assume" the administration's plans will take on the issue of Wall Street pay and bonuses."[^] Does this mean new laws on the books for what should have been in the contracts for specific loans? I seriously doubt that anybody here thinks that the banks have done nothing wrong with bailout money
-
OK... Here's my problem, and it's not with Obama. Though for context's sake, for any who aren't up on the issue: Obama says "That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful. Uh, and... Part of what we're gonna need... is... for... ... the, folks on Wall Street, who are... asking for help... to show some restraint and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility"[^] Biden says "I'd like to throw these guys in the brig ... They're thinking the same old thing that got us here - greed."[^] Now that we've done this (given billions to banks), we've opened a whole new can of worms that should not have been done. It helps to think of the government as a pasta-slurping mob boss. If you accept money from them, they own you. A large part of me agrees with everybody, that those bonuses should never have been handed out. Especially from borrowed tax payer money. However... I really don't want to see the government start to micro-manage what banks can and can't do. If they'd put two minutes of thought into those stinking bailouts, they could have easily put stipulations on those "loans". It's dispicable, the bonuses for a job well screwed, the AIG parties, all that crap. But I blame the government just as much for ramming these bailouts through without a second though while ignoring the vast majority of the people they work for telling them not to do it. And now it begins, Vinny and Luigi are gonna start busting knee caps, and nothing good will come of it... "The White House says its upcoming financial plan will clamp down on the salaries and bonuses paid to Wall Street employees whose firms receive taxpayer help." "Gibbs said it was "very safe to assume" the administration's plans will take on the issue of Wall Street pay and bonuses."[^] Does this mean new laws on the books for what should have been in the contracts for specific loans? I seriously doubt that anybody here thinks that the banks have done nothing wrong with bailout money
I think we have to remember that there are two movements to this absurd symphony. The first is over and done: the panicky transfer of $350B to friends of Paulson with the happy complicity of Pelosi and Reid. That was done without a thought of requirements on the recipients. The second movement is starting, the next $350B to the same idiots and the new flies attracted to the feast. For the second part, the Fed certainly should impose contractual behavior requirements but it's too late to do anything but howl about the first part. Even new laws that tried to retroactively correct thinks would have a hard time standing in any court.
-
OK... Here's my problem, and it's not with Obama. Though for context's sake, for any who aren't up on the issue: Obama says "That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful. Uh, and... Part of what we're gonna need... is... for... ... the, folks on Wall Street, who are... asking for help... to show some restraint and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility"[^] Biden says "I'd like to throw these guys in the brig ... They're thinking the same old thing that got us here - greed."[^] Now that we've done this (given billions to banks), we've opened a whole new can of worms that should not have been done. It helps to think of the government as a pasta-slurping mob boss. If you accept money from them, they own you. A large part of me agrees with everybody, that those bonuses should never have been handed out. Especially from borrowed tax payer money. However... I really don't want to see the government start to micro-manage what banks can and can't do. If they'd put two minutes of thought into those stinking bailouts, they could have easily put stipulations on those "loans". It's dispicable, the bonuses for a job well screwed, the AIG parties, all that crap. But I blame the government just as much for ramming these bailouts through without a second though while ignoring the vast majority of the people they work for telling them not to do it. And now it begins, Vinny and Luigi are gonna start busting knee caps, and nothing good will come of it... "The White House says its upcoming financial plan will clamp down on the salaries and bonuses paid to Wall Street employees whose firms receive taxpayer help." "Gibbs said it was "very safe to assume" the administration's plans will take on the issue of Wall Street pay and bonuses."[^] Does this mean new laws on the books for what should have been in the contracts for specific loans? I seriously doubt that anybody here thinks that the banks have done nothing wrong with bailout money
BoneSoft wrote:
Think about that while we're being told how important it is to ram this "stimulus[^]" bill though before anybody can read the bloated steaming pile of Peloci.
Too late. The stink has gotten so bad that even the New York Times[^] and the Washington Post[^] are pointing out that this plan is anything but a jobs and infrastructure stimulus package. The Boston Globe[^] goes even further in trash-talking it. Watching the Sunday Talk Shows yesterday and Morning Joe this morning, I begin to think that the administration is going to hang the rediculous clauses of the bill around Pelosi's neck (as they should be) and get the Senate to come up with a bill much more like the one Larry Summers said we needed late last year - a classically Keynesian one that focussed on rebuilding the infrastructure and creating jobs.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
BoneSoft wrote:
Think about that while we're being told how important it is to ram this "stimulus[^]" bill though before anybody can read the bloated steaming pile of Peloci.
Too late. The stink has gotten so bad that even the New York Times[^] and the Washington Post[^] are pointing out that this plan is anything but a jobs and infrastructure stimulus package. The Boston Globe[^] goes even further in trash-talking it. Watching the Sunday Talk Shows yesterday and Morning Joe this morning, I begin to think that the administration is going to hang the rediculous clauses of the bill around Pelosi's neck (as they should be) and get the Senate to come up with a bill much more like the one Larry Summers said we needed late last year - a classically Keynesian one that focussed on rebuilding the infrastructure and creating jobs.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
I'd really like to see that happen. I'd like to have a smidgin of my faith restored in government. But even a lot of the "infrastructure" stuff[^] I've seen is crap. I'd feel infinitely more comfortable with Obama if he nipped this Peloci POS in the bud and got something constructive put together. Still, even if that were to happen, it's disturbing that this kind of fiasco can happen and pass the house.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
I'd really like to see that happen. I'd like to have a smidgin of my faith restored in government. But even a lot of the "infrastructure" stuff[^] I've seen is crap. I'd feel infinitely more comfortable with Obama if he nipped this Peloci POS in the bud and got something constructive put together. Still, even if that were to happen, it's disturbing that this kind of fiasco can happen and pass the house.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
BoneSoft wrote:
But even a lot of the "infrastructure" stuff[^] I've seen is crap.
I agree (Get the prostitutes off the streets program??? That's an easy one. Give them a web page and a cell phone.) The only thing that can be said for some of them is that they are about bricks and mortar. At least then, when our kids' kids ask what the hell are they paying for, there will be something to show for it. If I had my druthers we'd spend far more on fixing the infrastructure we already have and little or nothing on building shelters for prostitutes. I suppose the Society for the Advancement of Whores will take issue with that. . . :sigh:
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
BoneSoft wrote:
But even a lot of the "infrastructure" stuff[^] I've seen is crap.
I agree (Get the prostitutes off the streets program??? That's an easy one. Give them a web page and a cell phone.) The only thing that can be said for some of them is that they are about bricks and mortar. At least then, when our kids' kids ask what the hell are they paying for, there will be something to show for it. If I had my druthers we'd spend far more on fixing the infrastructure we already have and little or nothing on building shelters for prostitutes. I suppose the Society for the Advancement of Whores will take issue with that. . . :sigh:
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
Get the prostitutes off the streets program??? That's an easy one. Give them a web page and a cell phone
:laugh: Yeah I noticed that one. My first thought was, isn't that reducing jobs?
Oakman wrote:
The only thing that can be said for some of them is that they are about bricks and mortar.
Yep. But at some point shouldn't somebody ask how many convention center hotels need to be put on my grand kid's dime?
Oakman wrote:
I suppose the Society for the Advancement of Whores will take issue with that.
The DNC? :laugh: (I had to give them something to justify the spontaneous univotes ;) )
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.