Obama sees executive pay rules as next financial reform: report

[Stephanie]

another reason to vote the Progressive (commie) out.
links in article at site

SNIP:
Obama on Leno: These banks are profit-seekers, which is precisely why we need to regulate them
posted at 5:21 pm on October 25, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Our president made his fifth visit to the “Tonight” show with Jay Leno on Wednesday evening, and for me, one of the most painful moments of the interview came when the president yet again paraded his woefully inept and downright disquieting economic sensibilities by once more heaping blame on Everybody’s Favorite Financial Crisis Scapegoat, big finance. Stay with me, ’cause I’m running through this one line-by-line:


They’ve learned that I keep my promise to make sure that they pay back every dime with interest, which they have. We passed Wall Street reform, which they fought tooth and nail. But, what it did was is it made sure that they can’t make some of these same reckless bets.
One of the biggest drivers of the financial crisis was the federal government creating artificial, politically-driven incentives that moved these financial institutions to even make these “reckless bets.” Finance isn’t blameless, but how is more government involvement and control a desirable idea?

They’ve got to keep more capital so that if they make a bad bet, taxpayers don’t pick up the tab.
Yes, Mr. President — because of all people, you’re in a wonderful position to make sure taxpayers don’t pick up the tab of poor decision-making. (Ahem, stimulus, bailouts, green energy boondoggles, trillion-dollar yearly deficits, cough cough).

We put in place this consumer advocate that will work with families all across the country on things like mortgages, credit cards, payday loan operations, so that people have more information and they don’t get tricked into bad financial deals.

“I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” Please, save us.

all of it here
Obama on Leno: These banks are profit-seekers, which is precisely why we need to regulate them « Hot Air

 

[ScienceRocks]

When the government comes more offten then not means it's time to run.

 

[Sallow]

Finally.

It makes absolutely no sense at all that the executive to employee pay ratio is something like 400:1.

All people responsible for profits should have a more equitable share in them.

 

[Moonglow]

My Papa that was born in 1896, would lecture me when he was an old man about bankers, "The bankers would kill a man just to get his property". If you think bankers have changed in the last 100 years, you are mistaken.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The issue is tjat some of these highly paid execs make their money off the risky investments by others. However the investor can lose yet the execs pay remains the same. Sharing the risk doesnt seem all that unreasonable to me.

If people want to give their money to investment firms that's their choice.

I buy my own stocks, bonds, mutual funds and ETFs on line and no so called broker gets a cut.

 

[Sallow]

Da Komrad!

The world owes you a living. Never forget that.

Why should there be a different set of justice for the rich?

Why should Ken Lay and Bernie Madoff go to Club Fed and the kid who stuck up a liqour store go to big boy prison?

Why do you guy think deterence works for every other crime but corporate crime.

"Poor baby. We need to give you a bailout, which you'll pay back by squeezing your customers, and you get to keep your bonus and stock options."

Just don't see how that discourages them from doing it again...

You want to live in some utopia where others are FORCED to give you what you think you need or are worth and have the Government FORCE them to give it to you..you are one scary person

The government "FORCED" labor to break up demonstrations over and over again throughout this country's history when they tried to deal with pay equity. The government FORCED American citizens to pay for the mistakes of the rich several times during the course of history in this country.

And now some folks are unhappy about government "FORCE"?

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

If the exec overseeing the risk pool has no dog in the fight where is the accountability. They can advise irtesponsibly.

A correlation between risk and performance is good. The execs still get their million dollar bonuses while eliminating jobs?

Needs looking into.

 

[Katzndogz]

This is why this royal regime is forcing the nation into failure. The more the government tinkers to fix everything for everybody, the worse it will get.

 

[Papageorgio]

My Papa that was born in 1896, would lecture me when he was an old man about bankers, "The bankers would kill a man just to get his property". If you think bankers have changed in the last 100 years, you are mistaken.

And everyone that owns his own business is a greedy bastard. So...?

 

[JoeB131]

Da Komrad!

The world owes you a living. Never forget that.

Why should there be a different set of justice for the rich?

Why should Ken Lay and Bernie Madoff go to Club Fed and the kid who stuck up a liqour store go to big boy prison?

Why do you guy think deterence works for every other crime but corporate crime.

"Poor baby. We need to give you a bailout, which you'll pay back by squeezing your customers, and you get to keep your bonus and stock options."

Just don't see how that discourages them from doing it again...

You want to live in some utopia where others are FORCED to give you what you think you need or are worth and have the Government FORCE them to give it to you..you are one scary person

Actually, it isn't a "utopia".... It's called the "rest of the world."

I work for a British company. Our CEO only makes six figure. Same when I worked for a Japanese company a decade ago. Only in the US do we have this insanity that CEO's need to make 8 figures for running their companies into the ground, and they still get their bonuses and golden parachutes.

 

[JoeB131]

[

You seem to think bankrupting a company is a crime unto itself. It's not. You seem to have a hard time understanding this very simple concept. If CEOs committed fraud or stole or broke the law, then they should be prosecuted. But business decisions causing companies to lose money and lay off workers is not a crime. At least not here in America. Maybe it is in Cuba or N Korea. Perhaps you'd feel more comfortable there, komrade.

Why isn't it?

Frankly, do you think that a really creative prosecutor couldn't find a crime to charge these assholes with? Of course they could, and they should. Don't even need to pass new ones.

But, shit, man. We ain't gonna prosecute. We're gonna give the poor baby his bonus. And a Bailout. And put him on the Cover of Forbes and let the POS tell the world how brilliant he is.

Shit, we might even run one of these douchebags for President.... YOu know, like the Douchebag you are supporting.

The Ironic thing is, the only "Socialism" I see here is guys like you insisting the rest of us pay for bailouts. Corporatism isn't Capitialism, it's Cronyism.

 

[Inthemiddle]

We're falling in economic freedom and this idiot wants to tie it down more? This president has already harmed this nation quite enough.

Shut up. Just stop talking. You're a blatant liar, you've been called out on why your OP is an outright deception, and yet you continue on. Idiots like you are the reason why so many Americans are opposed to Romney. Because if Obama's opposition is this much a pile of shit, they assume that Romney is too, and decide to stick with Obama. So shut up, stop talking. Go barbeque. Bring the grill inside the house, light the charcoal, and breath deeply.

 

[SniperFire]

If Obama gets re-elected there will of course be no new sweeping reforms of any kind, as the Republicans will double-down to minimize the damage he does.

It will be four more years of suck, debt and despair - especially for our young people.

 

[Stephanie]

That Obama is even talking about this should be enough to scare the hell of you

This should be of no CONCERN for a President of the United States

VOTE THIS THUG DICTATOR wannabe OUT PEOPLE

 

[Inthemiddle]

That Obama is even talking about this should be enough to scare the hell of you

This should be of no CONCERN for a President of the United States

VOTE THIS THUG DICTATOR wannabe OUT PEOPLE

What are you talking about? You think the President should have no concern for the prosperity of the country? What scares the hell out of me is that someone can be as stupid as you and still somehow make enough money to afford a computer. There's only one way that's possible, and it tends to spread alot of diseases.

 

[tresbigdog]

Well its none of Barrys business how the private sector pays its executives. I LMAO to think he thinks its something he or Govt has a say in. Moron.

Perhaps he should get rid of a couple of hundred thousand useless Fed Govt workers. That he can control.

Think how much of our hardearned tax dollars that would save.

its the governments business when the same government has to bail out these industries.

And Obama has cut federal jobs, public sector jobs are down, while private sector jobs are up

 

[Stephanie]

Well its none of Barrys business how the private sector pays its executives. I LMAO to think he thinks its something he or Govt has a say in. Moron.

Perhaps he should get rid of a couple of hundred thousand useless Fed Govt workers. That he can control.

Think how much of our hardearned tax dollars that would save.

its the governments business when the same government has to bail out these industries.

And Obama has cut federal jobs, public sector jobs are down, while private sector jobs are up

omg, scary

 

[zeke]

Well its none of Barrys business how the private sector pays its executives. I LMAO to think he thinks its something he or Govt has a say in. Moron.

Perhaps he should get rid of a couple of hundred thousand useless Fed Govt workers. That he can control.

Think how much of our hardearned tax dollars that would save.

its the governments business when the same government has to bail out these industries.

And Obama has cut federal jobs, public sector jobs are down, while private sector jobs are up

omg, scary

There is not a lot of depth to your thought process is there steph?

It used to be that when failing companies went to bankers (or in this case the guvmont cause no bankers could handle the scale of the financial problem) that bankers would insist on the upper management being let go. Or at the least, the bankers would put their own people either on the board or in the executive suite.

But not this time. Except for GM which was forced to let go some executives. Pretty much all the bank executives kept their jobs. And their big pay checks and even their big bonuses.

I mention this because I want you to rest easy that the big bank executive that you worship so much are in no danger of haveing their pay cut.

This is just a little distraction to keep those like me that think the bank executives got off free and easy, a distraction to think that maybe the executive will be forced to pay for their mistakes.

But it won't happen. The rich protect their own very will. And I am sure they thank you for your concern. Sucker.

 

[Rozman]

Since when is it the President's job to determine how much money someone should make.
This he is worried about but when the call comes in from overseas to rescue an ambassador
he lets the call go to voice mail.?

 

[Sallow]

Since when is it the President's job to determine how much money someone should make.
This he is worried about but when the call comes in from overseas to rescue an ambassador
he lets the call go to voice mail.?

Since when is it a President's job to intercede on labor negotiations?

Or, for that matter, the State?