House GOP to vote NO on stimulus package

[Zoom-boing]

I don't know. At least he admits we have a problem. If the GOP thought they could have gotten away with it, they would still be pretending that nothing is wrong. They like the status quo.

Lets face it, the rich people the GOP serve sort of like what is going on. They aren't unemployed. They are still working. They're buying homes & stocks cheap. They're consolidating power. Didn't we break up their monopolies in the past?

And every day more people get laid off, the easier it is to lower wages.

I think this current economy is all about lowering wages. Apparently the GOP didn't like how well the middle class did in the 90's.
So what is Obama's plan C?

First you tell me what Bush's plan B was. Because the only thing he knew to do was more tax breaks.

You know what makes me mad? We could have taken the $750 billion dollars and just purchased all the bad loans instead of giving the money to the banks. Then the banks wouldn't have anything to cry about.

PS. Plan C? End the Federal Reserve and forgive the national debt. Of course we will pay China back, but the Federal Reserve/Private Bankers can fuck off. They already have enough of our money. They think they own us? I would love to sieze all their assets and throw them in jail.

Lets see their spoiled kids achieve without the silver spoons.

You hate Bush, you hate anyone who has money, everything that is wrong now is Bush's fault, blah, blah, blah. You repeat the same thing over and over . . . playing the blame game solves nothing. Didn't you learn the lesson the bailout taught? Yes, Bush was a moron for not putting any stipulations on how it should be spent, for not having a method of accountability, but . . . . BOTH Dems and Repubs voted for this assinine thing. McCain AND Obama voted a resounding 'YES' for it. What does that tell you?? BOTH parties screw John Q. Public. You don't seem to get this, in your unfettered adoration of Obama. Please take him off the pedestal, sealy. I am wondering, though, if you will cry this loudly about Obama when his plan fails.

Why haven't you answered Bern's question?

WHY will it [the stimulus package] work? What is in this bill that you believe is going to provide an immediate needed boost to our economy and sustain it into the future?

 

[sealybobo]

Let's wait and see if Obama does get back with those who opposed the bill simply because they were republicans. He may have more up his sleeve than meets the eye.

I would love to have a Dem president who knows how to play hardball with a bunch of repubs who haven't realized yet that they lost this election and lost power in the house and senate.

This is the same shit they attacked FDR with. The New Deal did work.

You keep saying stupid inane shit like this. Of course they realize it. That dosen't mean they have to cave to stupid ideas does it? No, it dosen't.

Why not? The Dems did for 8 years.

 

[DiveCon]

I just wish they would stop playing politics. The GOP are more worried about the 2010 election than they are the fucked up economy.

You're right they probably were worried about re-election and not pissing off their constiuency. Isn't that what our elected officials are suppossed to do? Don't we elect them to do what we want them to do? I think maybe what we're seeing are some Americans finally waking up. Remember the first bail out? Remember how almost everyone thought it was a done deal? Maybe what congress didn't count on was their phones ringing off the hooks with disgusted Americans. I can't really complain that the right's motivation was getting re-elected as a result of listening to their constiuents. Perhaps you should be asking why the left didn't listen to their constituents.

I don't think it is Republican voters who are leading the way in the GOP buddy. I thnk it's the corporate media and John Boehner/McCain liars that tell people like you lies and get your broke ass to vote against your own best interests.


Are you a corporation or a bank? Then you're an idiot.

uh, who owns those corporations and banks you dumb fuck?

 

[editec]

No you have to invest it into productive projects that actually have some benefit to society.

Such as? Bridges and roads aren't really gonna make that much of a difference.

You might be right, especially if not enough is spent to inspire confidence that the deflationary cycle is over.

The government mostly doesn't hire anyone...it pays for profit companies to do work like building bridges and roads.

Direct hiring, hire by proxy, it's still the same.

Well I was responding to YOUR words, wasn't I

No, they are not the same thing at all. One is creating a government employee and the other is channeling money through for profit corporations.

There's a big difference.

Just because I buy my milk at the store just means I've hired the guy to milk the cow and another one to bring it to the market. Either way, the government still makes it's money through taxes, and you can't tax more money than you pay.

I'm sorry, but I don't think I understand the above.

Smart people are hoarding their money because they see that we are decimating our infrastructure.

Yes true...and because in a deflationary cycle (like we're in now) hoarded money continues to accrue purchasing power.

When we have no manufacturing economy and our intellectual economy is leaving with it, there are fewer "economies" to borrow from.

No argument from me on those point, FX. Why do you think I type my fingers into bleeding messes complaining on this board about the deindustrialization of the American economy?

You only need to spend so much to live. The rest are luxuries. Long term rich people don't spend money like poor people. They save. The richest people drive Accords, not Bentleys.

No argument there. Don't actually understand why you think that's germane to what we dicussing, though.

On this we can agree. That theory worked because of the mass manufacturing base we used to have. It's dwindled to near nothing.

Saints preserve me...somebody agrees with me about that point.

Our economy (and probably all the industrial economies on earth) are now so out of kilter precisely because too few people who too much money, and the consumers therefore do not have enough to SPEND MONEY.

It's way more complex than that, of course, but there's the root cause of our current crises in a nutshell.

The federal tax system only taxes what people earn, not what they have. You tax profits and earnings, but once money is yours, it's yours. No one can make you spend it.

True

Years and years and years of rewarding the supply side (the rich) while demanding that the demand side (the working class) pay most of the bills.

Well, now the rich have the vast majority of the money and how well is the economy going?

So what are you suggesting? Raiding rich people's bank accounts and taking their money?

No, I am not. In fact a lot of that money they have evaporated in the bubbles. Why do you think we're in a DEFLATIONARY cycle right now?

People FEEL poorer since their homes aren't worht as much, their stocks are worth as much, and in some cases their BONDS aren't worth jackshit thanks to the facts that the real estate market and stock makret have taken a nose dive.


That is why I didn't write that we ought to raid rich people's bank accounts and take their money.

Now the wealthy have enjoyed huge tax breaks for the last 8 years, and that is part of why we got into trouble (as I attempted to explain elsewhere) but increasing taxes now would be a terrible idea.

At this stage of the game, I might be persuaded to give wealthy even MORE tax breaks, to be honest.

You see I am not blinded by some goofy economic system that I think works in all economic circumstances.

NO economic solution is ALWAYS right, any more than always turning right will keep you out of an accident.

Economics is what happens when mankind deal with his world.

The world changes, ergo his economic policies must change to reflect that new reality.

 

[sealybobo]

I don't know. At least he admits we have a problem. If the GOP thought they could have gotten away with it, they would still be pretending that nothing is wrong. They like the status quo.

Lets face it, the rich people the GOP serve sort of like what is going on. They aren't unemployed. They are still working. They're buying homes & stocks cheap. They're consolidating power. Didn't we break up their monopolies in the past?

And every day more people get laid off, the easier it is to lower wages.

I think this current economy is all about lowering wages. Apparently the GOP didn't like how well the middle class did in the 90's.
So what is Obama's plan C?

First you tell me what Bush's plan B was. Because the only thing he knew to do was more tax breaks.

You know what makes me mad? We could have taken the $750 billion dollars and just purchased all the bad loans instead of giving the money to the banks. Then the banks wouldn't have anything to cry about.

PS. Plan C? End the Federal Reserve and forgive the national debt. Of course we will pay China back, but the Federal Reserve/Private Bankers can fuck off. They already have enough of our money. They think they own us? I would love to sieze all their assets and throw them in jail.

Lets see their spoiled kids achieve without the silver spoons.

You hate Bush, you hate anyone who has money, everything that is wrong now is Bush's fault, blah, blah, blah. You repeat the same thing over and over . . . playing the blame game solves nothing. Didn't you learn the lesson the bailout taught? Yes, Bush was a moron for not putting any stipulations on how it should be spent, for not having a method of accountability, but . . . . BOTH Dems and Repubs voted for this assinine thing. McCain AND Obama voted a resounding 'YES' for it. What does that tell you?? BOTH parties screw John Q. Public. You don't seem to get this, in your unfettered adoration of Obama. Please take him off the pedestal, sealy. I am wondering, though, if you will cry this loudly about Obama when his plan fails.

Why haven't you answered Bern's question?

WHY will it [the stimulus package] work? What is in this bill that you believe is going to provide an immediate needed boost to our economy and sustain it into the future?

You thinking Bush was an idiot proves you don't get it.

And I don't hate rich people. I hate rich people with power that abused it. PNAC for example. Oil execs.

Here is who you defend you fucking idiot.

$18.4 billion in 2008 bonus payouts at a time when taxpayers' money was shoring up a financial system in crisis.

UPDATE 2-Obama scolds Wall Street executives over bonuses | Markets | Markets News | Reuters

And here is your take on it, straight from the man himself.

Obama Rips CEO Bonuses. Soon, He Will Decide What You Can Earn

 

[sealybobo]

No you have to invest it into productive projects that actually have some benefit to society.

You might be right, especially if not enough is spent to inspire confidence that the deflationary cycle is over.

Well I was responding to YOUR words, wasn't I

No, they are not the same thing at all. One is creating a government employee and the other is channeling money through for profit corporations.

There's a big difference.

I'm sorry, but I don't think I understand the above.

Yes true...and because in a deflationary cycle (like we're in now) hoarded money continues to accrue purchasing power.

No argument from me on those point, FX. Why do you think I type my fingers into bleeding messes complaining on this board about the deindustrialization of the American economy?

No argument there. Don't actually understand why you think that's germane to what we dicussing, though.
aints preserve me...somebody agrees with me about that point.


True

So what are you suggesting? Raiding rich people's bank accounts and taking their money?

No, I am not. In fact a lot of that money they have evaporated in the bubbles. Why do you think we're in a DEFLATIONARY cycle right now?

People FEEL poorer since their homes aren't worht as much, their stocks are worth as much, and in some cases their BONDS aren't worth jackshit thanks to the facts that the real estate market and stock makret have taken a nose dive.


That is why I didn't write that we ought to raid rich people's bank accounts and take their money.

Now the wealthy have enjoyed huge tax breaks for the last 8 years, and that is part of why we got into trouble (as I attempted to explain elsewhere) but increasing taxes now would be a terrible idea.

At this stage of the game, I might be persuaded to give wealthy even MORE tax breaks, to be honest.

You see I am not blinded by some goofy economic system that I think works in all economic circumstances.

NO economic solution is ALWAYS right, any more than always turning right will keep you out of an accident.

Economics is what happens when mankind deal with his world.

The world changes, ergo his economic policies must change to reflect that new reality.

You should give rich people tax breaks, when they buy and when they hire.

I was saying this for 8 years. The GOP just gave rich people the tax breaks and promised it would trickle down.

Just like Bush/Paulson handed Paulson $350 billion and now that money is GONE!!! And unaccounted for.

 

[Zoom-boing]

I don't know. At least he admits we have a problem. If the GOP thought they could have gotten away with it, they would still be pretending that nothing is wrong. They like the status quo.

Lets face it, the rich people the GOP serve sort of like what is going on. They aren't unemployed. They are still working. They're buying homes & stocks cheap. They're consolidating power. Didn't we break up their monopolies in the past?

And every day more people get laid off, the easier it is to lower wages.

I think this current economy is all about lowering wages. Apparently the GOP didn't like how well the middle class did in the 90's.
So what is Obama's plan C?

First you tell me what Bush's plan B was. Because the only thing he knew to do was more tax breaks.

You know what makes me mad? We could have taken the $750 billion dollars and just purchased all the bad loans instead of giving the money to the banks. Then the banks wouldn't have anything to cry about.

PS. Plan C? End the Federal Reserve and forgive the national debt. Of course we will pay China back, but the Federal Reserve/Private Bankers can fuck off. They already have enough of our money. They think they own us? I would love to sieze all their assets and throw them in jail.

Lets see their spoiled kids achieve without the silver spoons.

You hate Bush, you hate anyone who has money, everything that is wrong now is Bush's fault, blah, blah, blah. You repeat the same thing over and over . . . playing the blame game solves nothing. Didn't you learn the lesson the bailout taught? Yes, Bush was a moron for not putting any stipulations on how it should be spent, for not having a method of accountability, but . . . . BOTH Dems and Repubs voted for this assinine thing. McCain AND Obama voted a resounding 'YES' for it. What does that tell you?? BOTH parties screw John Q. Public. You don't seem to get this, in your unfettered adoration of Obama. Please take him off the pedestal, sealy. I am wondering, though, if you will cry this loudly about Obama when his plan fails.

Why haven't you answered Bern's question?

WHY will it [the stimulus package] work? What is in this bill that you believe is going to provide an immediate needed boost to our economy and sustain it into the future?

You thinking Bush was an idiot proves you don't get it.

And I don't hate rich people. I hate rich people with power that abused it. PNAC for example. Oil execs.

Here is who you defend you fucking idiot.

$18.4 billion in 2008 bonus payouts at a time when taxpayers' money was shoring up a financial system in crisis.

UPDATE 2-Obama scolds Wall Street executives over bonuses | Markets | Markets News | Reuters

And here is your take on it, straight from the man himself.

Obama Rips CEO Bonuses. Soon, He Will Decide What You Can Earn

You missed the point.

How to you assume that I'm defending anyone, especially crooks?

You hate rich people that abused power? So do I. I think anyone who abuses power should be tossed out on their ass.

Do you believe that the government should tell CEO's of businesses what they can and cannot earn? Why?

You still haven't answered Bern's question.

 

[Munin]

The correction has to happen at some point. There is absolutely no way around that. I'd prefer not to make it worse then it has to be, but the government seems intent on doing just that by bailing out failed businesses and robbing the taxpayers of hundreds of billions of dollars.

Also, inflation is the increase in the supply of money, rising prices are simply a consequence.

The correction happens earlier if the government acts and if the government doesn't do it the correction will happen at a point when more of your economy is even more seriously damaged. And to restore that economy will take less time if you don't have huge unemployment, a lot of money that has "disappeared", a small number of companies left that can make goods and services.

Yes I know that inflation is the increase of money, but it makes people poor because they will loose more money on buying products that would be cheaper in a normal economic situation.

The correction is not being allowed to happen because the government keeps tampering with the market. By bailing out insolvent businesses the government does not allow the reallocation of resources that has to happen in the correction. By taking hundreds of billions of dollars from the private sector the government is not allowing them to stimulate the economy, and the private sector is where wealth and jobs are really created.

What are you talking about? Nobody is taking money from the private sector, the government is spending money on private companies. The government is making sure that the private sector is employed so it can create wealth and jobs.

The correction will happen anyway, it is the speed to recover from it that is the problem. Circulation of money = the economy, that is the main reason why the government must spend: to get a circulation of money that can be like an "engine" for the rest of the private sector. If you have no more circulation of money or the speed at which money circulates lowers significantly then you have a problem that has nothing to do with the correction. A private sector that does not spend is the problem here, therefor the government must spend money to replace the spending that the private sector has stopped with.

The government is not taking money from them, it is employing the private sector by spending government money to let them do something. This will create stability that will allow those companies (who get paid by the government) to invest on the long term, hire more people.

 

[sealybobo]

You hate Bush, you hate anyone who has money, everything that is wrong now is Bush's fault, blah, blah, blah. You repeat the same thing over and over . . . playing the blame game solves nothing. Didn't you learn the lesson the bailout taught? Yes, Bush was a moron for not putting any stipulations on how it should be spent, for not having a method of accountability, but . . . . BOTH Dems and Repubs voted for this assinine thing. McCain AND Obama voted a resounding 'YES' for it. What does that tell you?? BOTH parties screw John Q. Public. You don't seem to get this, in your unfettered adoration of Obama. Please take him off the pedestal, sealy. I am wondering, though, if you will cry this loudly about Obama when his plan fails.

Why haven't you answered Bern's question?

You thinking Bush was an idiot proves you don't get it.

And I don't hate rich people. I hate rich people with power that abused it. PNAC for example. Oil execs.

Here is who you defend you fucking idiot.

$18.4 billion in 2008 bonus payouts at a time when taxpayers' money was shoring up a financial system in crisis.

UPDATE 2-Obama scolds Wall Street executives over bonuses | Markets | Markets News | Reuters

And here is your take on it, straight from the man himself.

Obama Rips CEO Bonuses. Soon, He Will Decide What You Can Earn

You missed the point.

How to you assume that I'm defending anyone, especially crooks?

You hate rich people that abused power? So do I. I think anyone who abuses power should be tossed out on their ass.

Do you believe that the government should tell CEO's of businesses what they can and cannot earn? Why?

You still haven't answered Bern's question.

If they are financial institutions that are being bailed out, yes. If they are oil companies that use our federal lands, yes. If they are auto ceo's asking for billions? Yep!

If they work for Home Depot, no. Knock your socks off. Give yourselves as much as you want.

AIG or Lehman Brother CEO's? Fuck no!

The BOD are all CEO's for other corporations. It's a joke too if you realize how it works, but it was all good until the bankers, defense contractors & oil men or "robber baron's" decided to push too far. Now you're asking us to take pay cuts?

Let me ask you, "do you think a ceo giving himself a million dollar raise should be asking his workers to take a pay cut?"

 

[editec]

Sealy opines:

You should give rich people tax breaks, when they buy and when they hire.

ACtually I think that's part of the economic stimulus package.

I was saying this for 8 years. The GOP just gave rich people the tax breaks and promised it would trickle down.

Yup

Just like Bush/Paulson handed Paulson $350 billion and now that money is GONE!!! And unaccounted for.

As Zoomie quite correctly pointed out that is a BIPARTISAN screwup.

And I for one cannot understand how nobody noticed that this would happen before they gave the banks that money, either.

Do remember that when I heard that we were bailing out these bankrupted banks I was calling for them to be nationalized, instead.

After all, their net worth was less than ZERO, so if we were taking on their toxic debts, we might as well take everything.

Instead we handed the dumbest bankers free money.

 

[del]

Let's wait and see if Obama does get back with those who opposed the bill simply because they were republicans. He may have more up his sleeve than meets the eye.

I would love to have a Dem president who knows how to play hardball with a bunch of repubs who haven't realized yet that they lost this election and lost power in the house and senate.

This is the same shit they attacked FDR with. The New Deal did work.

You keep saying stupid inane shit like this. Of course they realize it. That dosen't mean they have to cave to stupid ideas does it? No, it dosen't.

Why not? The Dems did for 8 years.

and that's worked out sooooo well, hasn't it, bozo?

 

[sealybobo]

Sealy opines:

You should give rich people tax breaks, when they buy and when they hire.

ACtually I think that's part of the economic stimulus package.

I was saying this for 8 years. The GOP just gave rich people the tax breaks and promised it would trickle down.

Yup

Just like Bush/Paulson handed Paulson $350 billion and now that money is GONE!!! And unaccounted for.

As Zoomie quite correctly pointed out that is a BIPARTISAN screwup.

And I for one cannot understand how nobody noticed that this would happen before they gave the banks that money, either.

Do remember that when I heard that we were bailing out these bankrupted banks I was calling for them to be nationalized, instead.

After all, their net worth was less than ZERO, so if we were taking on their toxic debts, we might as well take everything.

Instead we handed the dumbest bankers free money.

LOL. Hey, was it you that I said, "there's more gold to be found out there"? How funny a co-worker just sent me this headline, "Sewage yields more gold than top mines"

TOKYO (Reuters) - Resource-poor Japan just discovered a new source of mineral wealth -- sewage.

Yes we should have nationalized the banks.

PS. Remember when we found this from Bush's original bailout proposal?

A critical - and radical - component of the bailout package proposed by the Bush administration has thus far failed to garner the serious attention of anyone in the press. Section 8

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

 

[DiveCon]

You keep saying stupid inane shit like this. Of course they realize it. That dosen't mean they have to cave to stupid ideas does it? No, it dosen't.

Why not? The Dems did for 8 years.

and that's worked out sooooo well, hasn't it, bozo?

but thats typical for a partisan hack, like bobo

 

[sealybobo]

Why not? The Dems did for 8 years.

and that's worked out sooooo well, hasn't it, bozo?

but thats typical for a partisan hack, like bobo

Here's what we should do Dive. Undo all this:

Reagan promptly cut income taxes on the very rich from 70% down to 27%. Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983 (they’re still in that neighborhood, the lowest in the industrialized world).

The result was devastating. Our government was suddenly so badly awash in red ink that Reagan doubled the tax paid only by people earning less than $40,000/year (FICA), and then began borrowing from the huge surplus this new tax was accumulating in the Social Security Trust Fund. Even with that, Reagan had to borrow more money in his 8 years than the sum total of all presidents from George Washington to Jimmy Carter combined.

In addition to badly throwing the nation into debt, Reagan’s tax cut blew out the ceiling on the accumulation of wealth, leading to a new Gilded Age and the rise of a generation of super-wealthy that hadn’t been seen since the Robber Baron era of the 1890s or the Roaring 20s.

ThomHartmann.com - Roll Back the Reagan Tax Cuts
And, most tragically, Reagan’s tax cuts caused America to stop investing in infrastructure. As a nation, we’ve been coasting since the early 1980s, living on borrowed money while we burn through (in some cases literally) the hospitals, roads, bridges, steam tunnels, and other infrastructure we built in the Golden Age of the Middle Class between the 1940s and the 1980s.
We even stopped investing in the intellectual infrastructure of this nation: college education. A degree that a student in the 1970s could have paid for by working as a waitress at a Howard Johnson’s restaurant (what my wife did in the late 60s - I did so working as a near-minimum-wage DJ) now means incurring massive and life-altering debt for all but the very wealthy. Reagan, who as governor ended free tuition at the University of California, put into place the foundations for the explosion in college tuition we see today.
The Associated Press reported on August 4, 2007, that the president of Nike, Mark Parker, “raked in $3.6 million [in compensation] in ‘07.” That’s $13,846 per weekday, $69,230 a week. And yet it would still keep him just below the top 70% tax rate if this were the pre-Reagan era. We had a social consensus that somebody earning around $3 million a year was fine, but above that was really more than anybody needs to live in America.
When Reagan dropped the top income tax rate from over 70% down to under 30%, all hell broke loose. With the legal and social restraint to unlimited selfishness removed, “the good of the nation” was replaced by “greed is good” as the primary paradigm.
In the years since then, mind-boggling wealth has risen among fewer than 20,000 people in America (the top 0.01 percent of wage-earners), but their influence has been tremendous. They finance “conservative” think tanks (think Joseph Coors and the Heritage Foundation), change public opinion (Walton heirs funding a covert effort to change the “estate tax” to the “death tax”), lobby congress and the president (who calls the “haves and the have-more’s” his “base”), and work to strip down public institutions.
The middle class is being replaced by the working poor. American infrastructure built with tax revenues during the 1934-1981 is now crumbling and disintegrating. Hospitals and highways and power and water systems have been corporatized. People are dying.
And Bush, following closely in Reagan’s footsteps, is making things worse. As Senator Bernie Sanders pointed out at recent hearings for the confirmation of Bush’s new nominee for the Office of Management and Budget:
Since Bush has been president:
• over 5 million people have slipped into poverty;
• nearly 7 million Americans have lost their health insurance;
• median household income has gone down by nearly $1,300;
• three million manufacturing jobs have been lost;
• three million American workers have lost their pensions;
• home foreclosures are now the highest on record;
• the personal savings rate is below zero - which hasn’t happened since the great depression;
• the real earnings of college graduates have gone down by about 5% in the last few years;
• entry level wages for male and female high school graduates have fallen by over 3%;
• wages and salaries are now at the lowest share of GDP since 1929.
The debate about whether or not to roll Bush’s tax cuts back to Clinton’s modest mid-30% rates is absurd. It’s time to roll back the horribly failed experiment of the Reagan tax cuts. And use that money to pay down Reagan’s debt and rebuild this nation.

 

[Zoom-boing]

You thinking Bush was an idiot proves you don't get it.

And I don't hate rich people. I hate rich people with power that abused it. PNAC for example. Oil execs.

Here is who you defend you fucking idiot.

$18.4 billion in 2008 bonus payouts at a time when taxpayers' money was shoring up a financial system in crisis.

UPDATE 2-Obama scolds Wall Street executives over bonuses | Markets | Markets News | Reuters

And here is your take on it, straight from the man himself.

Obama Rips CEO Bonuses. Soon, He Will Decide What You Can Earn

You missed the point.

How to you assume that I'm defending anyone, especially crooks?

You hate rich people that abused power? So do I. I think anyone who abuses power should be tossed out on their ass.

Do you believe that the government should tell CEO's of businesses what they can and cannot earn? Why?

You still haven't answered Bern's question.

If they are financial institutions that are being bailed out, yes. If they are oil companies that use our federal lands, yes. If they are auto ceo's asking for billions? Yep!

I don't think the government should tell CEOs what they can and cannot earn, setting their salaries so to speak. I think the company should run itself and sets its own salaries. However, when it comes to bailout money given to them there needs to be a better system than just handing over a check.

Should stipulations be put on the bailout money? Yes. Must the money be used for lending vs. pay/bonuses? Yes. Should a method of accountablilty be in place? Yes.

Let me ask you, "do you think a ceo giving himself a million dollar raise should be asking his workers to take a pay cut?"

No, I don't. At the same time I do not think the government should be telling any business how much the CEO can make. It just seems to me that if the government gets its foot in the door by setting salaries, what's to stop them from 'setting' more and more?

The CEO's get a salary plus bonus, yes? If the company is prospering bonuses should reflect that; if the company is failing, bonuses should reflect that. If the CEOs take massive bonuses when the company is failing, the company will fail. So be it, such is the nature of business.

The CEO's that took the bailout money and turned around and gave it out as bonuses are crooks and should be booted. What I'd like is for the CEO's to grow a pair and be ethically responsible. Aren't there any honest people out there anymore?

BTW, please stop calling me a fucking moron just because my viewpoint differs from yours.

 

[Bern80]

I just wish they would stop playing politics. The GOP are more worried about the 2010 election than they are the fucked up economy.

You're right they probably were worried about re-election and not pissing off their constiuency. Isn't that what our elected officials are suppossed to do? Don't we elect them to do what we want them to do? I think maybe what we're seeing are some Americans finally waking up. Remember the first bail out? Remember how almost everyone thought it was a done deal? Maybe what congress didn't count on was their phones ringing off the hooks with disgusted Americans. I can't really complain that the right's motivation was getting re-elected as a result of listening to their constiuents. Perhaps you should be asking why the left didn't listen to their constituents.

I don't think it is Republican voters who are leading the way in the GOP buddy. I thnk it's the corporate media and John Boehner/McCain liars that tell people like you lies and get your broke ass to vote against your own best interests.


Are you a corporation or a bank? Then you're an idiot.

The debate as to which one of us is lacking a brain would be long and unfruitful. This whole you believe what you're told argument is rather weak. I'm sure you have pundits you agree with as well. That of course (sarcasm here) means all you are is a sponge used to regurgiate what they've told you to.

It was reported through various media and is on the record that many constituants did in fact contact their representives in oppossition to the first bail out. Explain how it is my best interests to support Obama's bill. For the FOURTH time sealy, what SPECIFICALLY is in this bill that you believe is my best interest and will turn around our economy?

Your question about whether I am a corporation or bank makes no sense either. After all if it is good for me shouldn't it ultimately be good for them too?

 

[sealybobo]

You're right they probably were worried about re-election and not pissing off their constiuency. Isn't that what our elected officials are suppossed to do? Don't we elect them to do what we want them to do? I think maybe what we're seeing are some Americans finally waking up. Remember the first bail out? Remember how almost everyone thought it was a done deal? Maybe what congress didn't count on was their phones ringing off the hooks with disgusted Americans. I can't really complain that the right's motivation was getting re-elected as a result of listening to their constiuents. Perhaps you should be asking why the left didn't listen to their constituents.

I don't think it is Republican voters who are leading the way in the GOP buddy. I thnk it's the corporate media and John Boehner/McCain liars that tell people like you lies and get your broke ass to vote against your own best interests.


Are you a corporation or a bank? Then you're an idiot.

The debate as to which one of us is lacking a brain would be long and unfruitful. This whole you believe what you're told argument is rather weak. I'm sure you have pundits you agree with as well. That of course (sarcasm here) means all you are is a sponge used to regurgiate what they've told you to.

It was reported through various media and is on the record that many constituants did in fact contact their representives in oppossition to the first bail out. Explain how it is my best interests to support Obama's bill. For the FOURTH time sealy, what SPECIFICALLY is in this bill that you believe is my best interest and will turn around our economy?

Your question about whether I am a corporation or bank makes no sense either. After all if it is good for me shouldn't it ultimately be good for them too?

Obama's plan is part of the solution. Trust me, much more to come my friend.

After the Republican Great Depression, FDR put this nation back to work, in part by raising taxes on income above $3 to $4 million a year (in today’s dollars) to 91 percent, and corporate taxes to over 50% of profits. The revenue from those income taxes built dams, roads, bridges, sewers, water systems, schools, hospitals, train stations, railways, an interstate highway system, and airports. It educated a generation returning from World War II. It acted as a cap on the rare but occasional obsessively greedy person taking so much out of the economy that it impoverished the rest of us.

And, most tragically, Reagan’s tax cuts caused America to stop investing in infrastructure. As a nation, we’ve been coasting since the early 1980s, living on borrowed money while we burn through (in some cases literally) the hospitals, roads, bridges, steam tunnels, and other infrastructure we built in the Golden Age of the Middle Class between the 1940s and the 1980s.

We even stopped investing in the intellectual infrastructure of this nation: college education. A degree that a student in the 1970s could have paid for by working as a waitress at a Howard Johnson’s restaurant (what my wife did in the late 60s - I did so working as a near-minimum-wage DJ) now means incurring massive and life-altering debt for all but the very wealthy. Reagan, who as governor ended free tuition at the University of California, put into place the foundations for the explosion in college tuition we see today.

 

[Angel Heart]

I don't think it is Republican voters who are leading the way in the GOP buddy.

I know first hand that we are. If they wish to get involved we welcome them in. You how ever are not active in the Republican party and doing no more than comment from a hateful view of the Republican party. I think if you could completely do away with the Republican party you would. Myself, I like having the Dems around. It keeps us balanced. Too far right or too far left doesn't work. And you... Well you're too far left to even see what balance really looks like.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Obama's plan is part of the solution. Trust me, much more to come my friend.

sealy uses a McCainism.

After the Republican Great Depression, FDR put this nation back to work, in part by raising taxes on income above $3 to $4 million a year (in today’s dollars) to 91 percent, and corporate taxes to over 50% of profits. The revenue from those income taxes built dams, roads, bridges, sewers, water systems, schools, hospitals, train stations, railways, an interstate highway system, and airports. It educated a generation returning from World War II. It acted as a cap on the rare but occasional obsessively greedy person taking so much out of the economy that it impoverished the rest of us.

And, most tragically, Reagan’s tax cuts caused America to stop investing in infrastructure. As a nation, we’ve been coasting since the early 1980s, living on borrowed money while we burn through (in some cases literally) the hospitals, roads, bridges, steam tunnels, and other infrastructure we built in the Golden Age of the Middle Class between the 1940s and the 1980s.

We even stopped investing in the intellectual infrastructure of this nation: college education. A degree that a student in the 1970s could have paid for by working as a waitress at a Howard Johnson’s restaurant (what my wife did in the late 60s - I did so working as a near-minimum-wage DJ) now means incurring massive and life-altering debt for all but the very wealthy. Reagan, who as governor ended free tuition at the University of California, put into place the foundations for the explosion in college tuition we see today.

Bullshit. My daughter is in college. She will have some loans to payoff when she is done but nothing along the lines of massive and life-altering. But you see, we planned for this and saved, she worked hard in high school and got scholarship money, there is grant money in there, she's also doing a work-study. Its within reach of anyone who wants to work for it. There are many ways to afford it as well. For example, attending a two year college for the gen ed stuff then attending a four year for the rest cuts costs considerably. BTW, we're a family of five living on about $40,000/yr. Is that what you call wealthy? Were there sacrifices along the way? You betcha. Worth it? Every, single dime.

 

[Zoom-boing]

I don't think it is Republican voters who are leading the way in the GOP buddy.

I know first hand that we are. If they wish to get involved we welcome them in. You how ever are not active in the Republican party and doing no more than comment from a hateful view of the Republican party. I think if you could completely do away with the Republican party you would. Myself, I like having the Dems around. It keeps us balanced. Too far right or too far left doesn't work. And you... Well you're too far left to even see what balance really looks like.