Obama intends to veto the bonus tax bill

[editec]

I'm torn. I'm outraged that the idiotic Congress let this happen, but at the same time, taxing these people specifically is setting a bad precedent for future screw-ups.

Sadly, I think the public is going to have to choke on this one and learn its lesson. To everyone who supported these bailouts: here are your results. You've allowed corruption to continue by electing the corrupt. Congratulations. Have you learned your lesson yet?

One presumes you're asking this question of anyone who voted for either a Republican or a Democrat, yes?

The answer is no, they haven't. Basically even if they have, those will still be their only two viable choices next election cycle.

Probably not, but I'm sure you'll keep looking for someone to blame instead of holding the mirror in front of your face and blaming who's really at fault.

What a load of blather.

The voters are responsible the venal bankers?

You have to be smarter than this post indicates.

 

[jillian]

It was an idiotic bill you say? So you are in favor of us, the taxpayer, paying the bonuses of AIG executives?

WTH is wrong with this country????

it was wrong to enrich haliburton, too.

and?

you know the bill is just for show, right? it was going to be struck down in the courts anyway....

so, either you know that and just want to jump up and down and stamp your feet, or you're just one of the:

 

[editec]

I'm glad this bill won't make it.

It was a bad idea.

 

[xsited1]

It was an idiotic bill you say? So you are in favor of us, the taxpayer, paying the bonuses of AIG executives?

WTH is wrong with this country????

...

you know the bill is just for show, right? it was going to be struck down in the courts anyway....

...

The bill was just for show??? This is a serious matter. Our lawmakers shouldn't act like children. I guess that's why their approval rating is so extremely low.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Why would any company or individual for that matter want to work with the government if ex-post facto laws, and retroactive decrees threaten to change the rules on the capricious whims of the mob?

Think about that when you read about Geithner's plan for toxic assets.

 

[jillian]

The bill was just for show??? This is a serious matter. Our lawmakers shouldn't act like children. I guess that's why their approval rating is so extremely low.

Yes... and you're right, of course. But reality is that congressmen run for re-election. To do that, they need to raise money. To raise money, they need to look like they're doing stuff, even if, in reality, they aren't doing stuff. Most problems, real problems, can't be easily solved or if solved at all, are solved incrementally. No one can stand up in front of a room full of people they're raising money from and talk about how they didn't make anything worse (if in fact they didn't make anything worse). So politicians do things for show... they grandstand. They pass AWB's that are absurd in their definitions and don't do anything anyway.... They pass laws against smoking in bars b/c then people say "yay them".

And that's reality. Does it bite? Yes.

Is it going to change?

No.

So congress passes this bill that the angry mob wants. Obama vetoes it like the rational big brother....

or... obama signs it and the courts overturn it.

I figure Obama would rather be the voice of reason on the issue and when the dust settles wall street and the centrists get reassured ....

and he's lost nothing from the left which isn't going anywhere, anyway.

 

[RightofCenter]

Ok, then tell me, what was this whole (create a tax bill and strike it down with the Presidential pen) facade intended to distract the public from, since its obviously been a smoke screen?

That seems pretty obvious to me: that being that the Government of the US is so inept and so fractured that Congress and the Senate will stoop to any theatrics to distract the public from its errors.

Meanwhile, AIG has shipped billions of US dollars overseas to foreign companies in 40 ft containers full of cash.

 

[Jon]

The voters are responsible the venal bankers?

No, voters are responsible for irresponsible politicians who allow things like this to happen.

 

[Jon]

Weren't they considered performance based bonuses also???? If so how can one justify that any AIG exec. desserved a bonus based on performance.

no, they were not performance based

Yes they were. The bill prohibited "bonuses," so AIG renamed them to "performance based compensation."

 

[jillian]

Ok, then tell me, what was this whole (create a tax bill and strike it down with the Presidential pen) facade intended to distract the public from, since its obviously been a smoke screen?

That seems pretty obvious to me: that being that the Government of the US is so inept and so fractured that Congress and the Senate will stoop to any theatrics to distract the public from its errors.

Meanwhile, AIG has shipped billions of US dollars overseas to foreign companies in 40 ft containers full of cash.

see... your posts are nothing more than howling at the moon.

i already told you, that i think you're one of the

Can't really discuss anything with anyone who even sounds like their keystrokes are ticked off...

where were you when they passed the "patriot act"?

yeah, didn't think so...

just faux outrage...

*yawn*

 

[RightofCenter]

oh, so its ok for you to mock posters if they post things you dont agree with? I think you are probably working for Congress as a "resident liberal poster"

snort. typical "add nothing, but God help you if you attempt to point out that my party is a failure" poster. You have added nothing to the topic so move on.

Nice try to distract from the OP, but your boys in office are falling on their face and you can't distract from that. Thats the point here, ERRORS are being made and the taxypayer is paying for it. DEEPLY.

That, and I trust NO ONE that quotes Springsteen, Letterman, and posts comics to prove their point.

 

[Jon]

where were you when they passed the "patriot act"?

yeah, didn't think so...

just faux outrage...

*yawn*

That happened years ago. He registered this month. How the fuck do you know his reaction to the PATRIOT Act? You don't. Stop making illogical arguments.

Also, the "but Bush did it too!" argument only proves that this administration and Congress are nothing but "more of the same." Congratulations.

 

[RightofCenter]

Her whole argumentative tone is so predictable. Halliburton, Patriot Act, its all an attempt to go backwards and show us that is where she is living: in the past. It's probably why she can't comprehend times have changed and there is a new president and a whole new set of nightmares.

 

[Skeptik]

Weren't they considered performance based bonuses also???? If so how can one justify that any AIG exec. desserved a bonus based on performance.

no, they were not performance based

Yes they were. The bill prohibited "bonuses," so AIG renamed them to "performance based compensation."

Ah, yes, performance based.

I wonder how much their bonuses might have been had they not run the company into the ground?

Now, if the same performance based compensation were to be applied to professional sports, this could be the result:

 

[jillian]

where were you when they passed the "patriot act"?

yeah, didn't think so...

just faux outrage...

*yawn*

That happened years ago. He registered this month. How the fuck do you know his reaction to the PATRIOT Act? You don't. Stop making illogical arguments.

Also, the "but Bush did it too!" argument only proves that this administration and Congress are nothing but "more of the same." Congratulations.

Actually, I was talking about politics in general... and talked about the AWB being stupid, too.

Sorry, your friend (he or she or whateever) is a boring stereotype.

 

[Jon]

Actually, I was talking about politics in general... and talked about the AWB being stupid, too.

Sorry, your friend (he or she or whateever) is a boring stereotype.

As are you.

 

[Toro]

Now, if the same performance based compensation were to be applied to professional sports, this could be the result:

Actually, that cartoon IS how professional athletes are compensated...

 

[DiveCon]

Weren't they considered performance based bonuses also???? If so how can one justify that any AIG exec. desserved a bonus based on performance.

no, they were not performance based

Yes they were. The bill prohibited "bonuses," so AIG renamed them to "performance based compensation."

no, they werent, these were based on their contracts
they were retention bonuses
not performance based at all

 

[DiveCon]

no, they were not performance based

Yes they were. The bill prohibited "bonuses," so AIG renamed them to "performance based compensation."

Ah, yes, performance based.

I wonder how much their bonuses might have been had they not run the company into the ground?

Now, if the same performance based compensation were to be applied to professional sports, this could be the result:

you got it
and that comic is classic

 

[DiveCon]

Now, if the same performance based compensation were to be applied to professional sports, this could be the result:

Actually, that cartoon IS how professional athletes are compensated...

thats why its so much more funny