Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
(View past Libertarian pings here)
Posted on 12/11/2009 10:49:16 AM PST by MaestroLC
When you sleep with wh0res and get herpes or aids... don’t complain!
LLS
Hope and Change is now Command and Control!
“And by the way, the leadership of these companies were following the rules the Congress of the United States of America set up. Barney Frank and company were pleased as punch to implement them.”
I’m not so sure. Making loans to questionable people is one thing, but much of our trouble is from financial instruments sold against those loans. I don’t think Barney thought up that one.
Stale or not, it's a fact.
You also didn't address the fact that they revealed the salary cap bit AFTER handing out the cash.
Oh, and remember Geithner has suggested that the government should be able to control compensation in EVERY corporation, whether they have received taxpayer money or not. The government has fired at least one executive.
This is just plain, old-fashioned, basic Fascism. The word gets abused frequently, but this time it's the real deal.
No, Barney didn’t. But what he did do was force lending institutions to take on loans that the borrowers couldn’t service. Were those loan institutions going to hang on to that paper and watch their institutions be destroyed? No. Nobody in their right mind would.
The lending institutions found a way to bundle that paper, and move it off their books. What they didn’t manage to bundle and pass off harmed them significantly, despite their efforts.
IMO, the Left and their sympathizers set up a system destined to fail. That was the goal all along. The Capitalist system is being blamed for this.
Who is really to blame?
Look, this situation should never have been set up. Any kid that knows simple math could have seen this coming. Two parties watched the trains headed toward one another and did nothing.
Then instead of allowing large corporations to declare bankruptcy and move on, the government stepped in to bail them out and take control. Then they jumped in to rescue mortgages for people who weren’t able to service their old mortgages and won’t be able to service the new ones either. Capitalism will take another hit in three to five years, perhaps even sooner.
And when it does, the left will be right there to trash Capitalism even more, despite the reality that THEY defeated Capitalist tenets to produce precisely what they wanted to.
And our so-called Republican leaders, are still looking on without a clue.
We’re watching the systematic destruction of Capitalism as a legitimate honored economic system.
When you trash the players that were merely finding ways to work within the system the Left set up, you’re helping them to do it.
That’s my opinion. I’m not trying to rip you here. I’m trying to explain what I see going on. Take care.
Where are the lawsuits?
When these companies started failing, and the US government gave them taxpayer money (against my will, probably many other taxpayers), we opened the door to socialism. These salary caps are not the beginning.
They are the beginning of salary caps. That’s all my comments were intended to infer.
I don’t disagree with your additional comments, but I don’t think they were necessary.
Just not going to get all up in arms about companies that begged for and took my money, without my say, when they were collapsing (but wouldn’t give me money if I were collapsing), having more freedoms taken from them.
You play with fire... you lay down dogs...
If I was an employee at said bank that could be valid, however, in that scenario, neither of us are going to the government to insist that it help us with our potentially poor financial decisions.
Government-dictated salary caps are pure, undiluted Fascism.
If these were private companies you could make that argument, however, as soon as the government bought even a single stock in these companies, they ceased to be private. They are now de facto government agencies and as such the government can impose whatever salaries it so desires. The complaint here should be that the government was allowed to bail out these useless companies to begin with, not that they are managing salaries for their employees.
I still stand by my premise that these companies are welfare queens, and deserve the respect that title conveys.
I’m not going to defend these concerns getting your money. We agree on that point.
To me it’s rather short sighted to allow the trashing of the Capitalist system, for if the left is successful, the darkness of deep universal socialism will reign supreme here.
Our wrath should be leveled at our federal government that still hasn’t put an end to the practices that caused all this in the first place.
Oh really now...
In a new report, Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP), reveals that then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and key federal regulators forced the nation’s nine largest financial institutions to take billions in taxpayer bailout dollars in October 2008, threatening that if the banks refused, the government would take their stock shares anyway.
Napolitano told viewers on FNC’s April 1 “Studio B” that he had a conversation with a head of $250-billion bank that explained the federal government, under the threat of an audit, forced him to accept TARP funds. “It would cost them millions in employee time to give the government the documents it wanted, it would cost terrible publicity. The terrible publicity and that would mean a loss of business,” Napolitano continued. “He begged his board of directors to let him tell the Feds to go take a hike. The board caved. He was forced – the board was forced to issue a class of stock just for the federal government. The federal government owns 2 percent of this huge bank. As a result of that minority ownership, they now want to control salaries. They want to see his books and they want to tell him who he can do business with.”
FNC's Napolitano Claims Bush Administration Committed 'Extortion' Against Banks
American Banker's Association President Edward Yingling tried to persuade Paulson that most U.S. banks have no subprime-mortgage related troubles: “Almost 95% of banks in this country remain well-capitalized. Since that time, many banks have been contacted by regulators, and urged, sometimes forcefully, to participate in the [Capital Purchase Program].”
yeap. but when people fall all over themselves to vote for the party that does this, well...
Making executives pay in stock is what drove them to artificially inflate their stock values (after the government capped deductable pay at $1million).
No point in learning from past mistakes though.
Not capping the pay in union shops though.
IMO both parties fell all over themselves a lot this last year.
We’re seeing a third party being born, as much as I have tried to merely address it as ‘a cause’ or some such.
Those who have tried to warn against it becoming a political party, have essentially raised the topic for debate, IMO a very unwise thing to do. Now folks are discussing the merits of something that until recently wasn’t even on the table.
I can sure understand why it is though. The Tea Partiers didn’t have representation. I’m surprised it took this long.
By emergency rule promulgated without notice and comment, Secretary Geithner created the position of “Special Master for Compensation” or Pay Czar, and named Kenneth Feinberg to this position. In late October, Mr. Feinberg cut compensation for executives at seven large financial firms.
In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Michael McConnell, the Richard and Frances Mallery Professor of Law and Director of the Stanford Constitutional Law Center, argues that Mr. Feinberg’s actions are unconstitutional because powers of the type entrusted to Mr. Feinberg may only be exercised by an officer of the United States, appointed in a manner consistent with the requirements of Article II, section 2, clause 2 of the Constitution. This provision stipulates that all “Officers of the United States” shall be appointed by the President “by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate,” with the exception that “the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
This forum will discuss the arguments put forth in Professor McConnell’s op-ed regarding the Pay Czar and the Appointments Clause. We have excerpted the key paragraphs of the ep-ed in the first post below.
The Pay Czar & the Appointments Clause – a Forum
November 19, 2009 http://www.fed-soc.org/debates/dbtid.36/default.asp
You are exactly right; all these companies should have DIED. All of their execs should be unemployed. And if I were hiring corporate talent, I wouldn’t give the guy who ran GM or Goldman Sachs into the ground a first interview, unless I’m hiring for 3rd shift assistant men’s room attendant. Why should I let them run my company? He’s a LOSER. Why do I want him doing the same to my company?
Even with the caps they are getting far more than what they deserve. It’s socialism; reward the failures, but not by too much.
It must be nice being so smart that yo9u knopw how much each of us should make.//sarc
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.