Posted on 03/23/2009 4:21:54 AM PDT by Scanian
I am not so sure they are getting, “a clue”. The hostility of the public is getting too near the rich Democrats is a more likely explanation. Barney Frank et al. are so dirty they have nothing to lose by stirring up the mob. In fact it may be a useful distraction from their misconduct. There is nothing like a good round of, “burn the witch”!
Once again, the Congress of the United States has proven themselves to be economic buffoons, hell bent on pushing the country into the darkness of socialism and advancing the anointed one’s agenda of failure.
I just heard a blowhard gasbag, on Fox News, say that when the US had a tax rate of 90% and the unions had 35% of the workforce under their thumb that we had the fastest growing economy in the world. He was also championing the regulation of executive pay at publicly traded companies in the US.
Sheesh! They aren’t even bothering to be sneaky, anymore...
It’s time to take back the country.
I have been saying this for yesrs, I honestly believe the only way we can save our beautiful country is to replace ALL 535 with part time representatives the way our Founding Fathers wanted it to be. They wanted congress to be like jury duty. Serve for a shot time them return home.
We now have people serving who care more about their own pockets than the country.
Conservatives need to come up with a "conservative" solution to the PROBLEM of "theft of shareholder profits" that has been taking place for the last decade or so, and which seems to this "older person" to be related to dilution of stockholder control accompanying a surge in stock market participation by the general population. This is another one of those populist issues where either Conservatives come up with a solution or continue to lose elections and be reduced to powerless posting on FR. I support the capitalist system, but not an unregulated capitalist system. If Conservatives don't touch it, the Dems will not only gain votes from dealing with the issue but will also manage to generate executive contributions to their Party as they develop the legislation.
This guy sugar coats it. I don’t think I can print the vocabulary I’d use to describe our congressional “representatives”. Except, maybe, on a liberal blog.
bookmarked.
It’s amazing how the public can be manipulated so easily. They’re like puppets on strings. I know their is a lot of anger out here, but it’s being manipulated to target the wrong people.
I just wish a handful of rich Wall Street bankers would surreptitiously visit the White House and tell them their lawyers are preparing Bill of Attainder challenges right now and if Obama doesn’t cut the crap, there will be NO campaign contributions forthcoming in 2010.
They ought to visit key Republicans and tell them the same thing. The only thing that will scare politicians is to tell them you’re going to cut off campaign cash.
nothing new under the sun:
“It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.”
- Pudd’nhead Wilson’s New Calendar (Mark Twain)
“The House vote to use the tax code to retroactively punish bonus babies was an act of sheer madness”
Pelosi’s gang is replaying the Jacobin period of the French Revolution: class warfare, unleashing mobs, calling for heads.
Lucky for us, the Jacobins later faced the guilotteen as well. I’ll cheer when Nancy’s head is lopped off.
Thanks for the link. Don’t know much about LITP, will now learn. :)
What two things do Lincoln, Jackson, Kennedy and Reagan have in common? No. 1: Lncoln refused the attempts of the Federal Reserve Bank (private company) to take over our monetary system and Jackson, Kennedy and Reagan all attempted to rescind the law which was passed by Congress in 1913 by Woodrow Wilson (for campaign $). No. 2: all of the above were either assasinated or attempted assasinations. The Fed Bank is the puppet master - they’ve chosen our Presidents and decided policy because THEY have all the $$$!
Unbelievable, you actually support the Wall Street scum who most certainly played a huge role in destroying our economy...how about we investigate and jail some of these guys. Conservatives should not support the banker bandits because they are unworthy.
The Wall Street “scum” doesn’t deserve all the blame. How about the politicians who made the lending laws so lax that a person making $50K a year could go in and get a mortgage for a $500K house or buy a couple of $60K cars?
And how about those people who defaulted on credit cards, car loans, student loans and mortgages because they had to have it today regardless of whether or not they would ever be able to pay for it?
Wall Street is a convenient scapegoat and much easier than driving out the “scum” who sit in Congress and the Senate and the “scum” who look at themselves in the mirror every day.
Sorry, I’m not into populist, class envy BS and refuse to be manipulated by those who use that BS to get people riled up so they will accept an anti-capitalist agenda.
If people broke laws, I’m all for ringing them up. They deserve the full measure of punishment.
“I support the capitalist system, but not an unregulated capitalist system.”
Why is that? If you have money invested in a publicly traded firm, you have a stake in the company. If you have enough invested, you have a majority stake. Most people don’t. If you can put together enough stockholders to represent a majority of the voting stock, you can control the agenda of the annual meetings and the makeup of the Board of Directors. Each Board has a number of committees, and one is usually a compensation committee. Control the Board, control the committees.
If your return is lower than you expect, you have two alternatives: sell you stock or gain the support of a majority of the voting stock to make changes.
The system that is capitalism works very well, unregulated. The only oversight needed, in my view, is to assure no bars to participation.
So, I’m left, again, at the same question. Why do you think capitalism needs to be ‘regulated’?
These type of 'regulatory' comments are appearing in the media:
"The financial crisis even prompted the Republican Greenspan, a staunch believer in free markets, to propose that the government consider tougher regulations, including requiring financial companies that package mortgages into securities to keep a portion as a check on quality.
He said that other regulatory changes should be considered, too, in such areas as fraud.
http://www2.journalnow.com/content/2008/oct/24/a-flaw-in-the-model-faulted/
The 1950's "professional" stock market is gone. Sorry. I think new regulation is needed because, "the "[investment] vehicles" changed, the speeds changed, and the dangers have increased. More people started getting killed by [investment] vehicles" AND there is a third alternative for stockholders/voters that you did not mention but which was the primary focus of my posting.
Pensions are going away, Social Security doesn't seem to have a future, and today's non-professional investor sees participation in the market as something they MUST DO to have a chance at a decent retirement. They can't leave the market. Yet abuse of executive compensation is perceived as so widespread that they don't see themselves as having the option of acting as you suggest with regard to regulating salaries of individual companies they have directly or indirectly invested in. IMHO - your textbook alternative to dealing with "executive compensation" is unrealistic for the vast majority of investors. Now you present the following options:
"If your return is lower than you expect, you have two alternatives: sell you stock or gain the support of a majority of the voting stock to make changes."
But there is a third option you do not list. An option which, despite however you may have viewed my posted opinion on regulation, was the focus on my initial post. They can cast their House, Senate, and Presidential votes for someone who will "fix" their real or perceived "excessive executive compensation" problem.
Now, you can agree or disagree. If you disagree, which apparently you do, then I would paraphrase your words and suggest alternatives for those who hold your position:
'If you reject regulation, you have THREE alternatives: 1)accept what the Dems are eventually going to impose, 2)gain the support of a majority of the American VOTERS (note: not investors) and defeat any attempts to regulate, or 3) gain the support of a majority of the American VOTERS for a Conservative proposal to deal with the concern in a manner most advantageous to, or least destructive to, Conservative principles.'
It’s not about class envy...you blame those who changed the lending laws and other laws as being the real culprit. Why did they change the laws? Banks lobbied for such changes so they could lend irresponsibly and make tons of money. They put the economy at risk and crashed it in the end. As for blaming the American people-nonsense-we get to pay for those overpaid morons mistakes...this isn’t about mortgages (even the bad ones) or credit card defaults (some banks now charge over 30 % interest since they had the usery laws overturned), it’s about credit default swaps which was an insurance policy which was supposed to cover the lenders and investors who made very bad loans and other investments. These idiots leveraged themselves badly and did not have adequate reserves to ‘pay off’ when the loans or other investments failed. These swaps linked banks-including foreign banks-so we were all connected to these risky investments...they crashed the economy...did the government under both GOP and Dem leadership write the laws that allowed them to do so-absolutely...but Wall Street still did it...their actions have caused the economic misery felt by millions of Americans...we need to regulate them and jail both the Wall Street thugs who acted in a fraudulent, reckless way and the government thugs who helped them in return for campaign contributions...it’s not and either/ or situation...both are culpable. Wall street more than the government. I truly believe Gramm when he pushed through the banking reforms thought he was acting in the best interest of this country and capitalism...he underestimated the greed and criminality found on Wall Street.
Great post...regulation is coming. It must given the circumstances. The question is will the GOP and conservatives have a voice in this regulation? The market must be safeguarded.
Capitalism needs to be regulated because the Wall Street insiders abuse every loop hole int he current laws or lack there of...I heard Jim Cramer on tape confess to spreading rumors about companies in order to drive stock prices down and make a killing using short selling techniques...the average investor can not invest in such a dishonest market. It has to change. Human nature is such that left unregulated, the masters of the universe will bankrupt us again and again. They will put perfectly good businesses out of business. Martha went to jail for lying about a stock transaction...why is Kramer and others like him allowed to fraudulently manipulate the market? It can not stand.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.