It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

White House slashes pay for Wall Street executives

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Keyhole
To bad we can't pay our elected government officials "based entirely on their performance!"


Our elected officials get very little of their money from us anyway, they get most of it from corporate lobbyists, that's why they ignore us the way they do. I can't believe it as i read some posts on this thread from the 'new' government cheerleaders, defending the bailouts and such. Those same posters could be seen attacking EVERYTHING Bush did, but now running to post in defense of EVERYTHING Obama does. You know who you are, bunch of political tools.




posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by infinite
 


Originally posted by infinite
Capitalism generates more wealth than the ability of the state, i.e Why China is tentatively relaxing the socialist influence over its market. What Marx failed to tell us, was that his economic theories never work.

People became much poorer.

I would agree with that, but don't understand why you are explain this to me. I am pro capitalism, but I believe some regulation is necessary. You must be assuming I am pro-socialist?



Government deciding on pay is communism. Do you honestly want a politician telling you how much your final salary should be? Of course not. Another reason why private sector generates more profit than the public.

As I said before it is for companies that are currently running on our money ONLY. if they don't like the rules then they can simply give us back our money, and let's see how much they get paid.

To anyone:

Would you rather have the entire economy crash and all of us be worse off? I work for a company that was in good health, no debt and $20M cash on hand, but because of the banking meltdown our customers could not borrow money and our business was cut in half and as a result half our people were laid off. All this because of de-regulation of the markets.

How can you say regulations are not necessary? If you disagree, then explain to me where I'm wrong.

[edit on 10/22/2009 by Hal9000]



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


Originally posted by Janky Red
Would like to start by saying your post is not based upon reality. It is sad that you ignore many vital details just so you can say the word communism and Marx. Anyhow
its getting old, it makes you sound as if you are not intelligent enough to string together
more than one piece of information at a time. Heat does not mean fire, but fire is certainly hot -

I don't understand what you mean. Can you point out where you think I'm wrong. Weren't you agreeing with me a page or two ago?



So lets use our tax money to pay these people (who tanked our economy) what ever amount THEY DETERMINE.

" FIGHT THE PTB!" - make them suffer with MASSIVE payouts, bonuses and stipends!!!

Are you being sarcastic? Sorry I'm easily confused.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Avenginggecko
Was this a good move by the administration?


It was a great move by the administration!

These corporations temporarily gave up their status as "private entities" when they accepted TARP funds.

Further, they have proven that they either don't know how to OR will not operate with integrity and honor. AND they have the power to collapse the entire economy of the US and even the world. Therefore, taking this all into consideration, if they will not put restrictions on themselves and their operations, the government has a duty to protect the people of this country by imposing common sense restrictions and regulations on them.

The government is SUPPOSED to protect the people. They regulate the meat and milk that we buy in the store. Albertson's is a private entity, but they cannot sell meat that is not fit for human consumption BECAUSE the government won't allow it. It's for our protection. In this same manner, the government needs to protect the economy of our country.

I believe wholeheartedly in capitalism and the free market, but when corporations take advantage of people to the extent that these companies did and we bail them out, it's time to do something differently. They FAILED. If they had operated more intelligently and didn't wreck the economy, then I would give them the opportunity to operate by their own rules. But they totally lost the freedom and have no one to blame but themselves.

I totally support this move by Obama and I say it's about time.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

That was well put and an interesting perspective.


Here is another that I see as a positive aspect of this. Everyone knows how corporations control Washington right? So because these companies are being told they have to take a pay cut from a politician tells me that maybe that is changing. At least it is an improvement. I would think that people would applause this action, but noooo... this is Obama. He can't do anything right.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 06:41 PM
link   
I couldn't be happier, and I feel this is long overdue. How dare they want to pass out bonus and expect to conduct business without the oversight of whom they borrowed the money to keep their business afloat. How many of us are familiar this situation? I know I am. I was fortunate enough to have my parents pay for college for me, and guess what they wanted to see my grades and they would call to check and make sure I was studying and things were going well. If I were to have gotten poor grades, guess what, I would have to find another way to fund myself. If they didn't want daddy government in their business, they shouldn't have gone looking for a hand out.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by searching4truth
If they didn't want daddy government in their business, they shouldn't have gone looking for a hand out.


The government is not the daddy of those businesses. The government should never have given them any handouts. I am glad they aren't allowing those execs to make off with the money, but they should never have gotten that money to begin with. Those businesses should have been allowed to fail like any other bad business, i'm sick of all this blackmail and threats. They made bad bets, and so did alot of people who bought houses and such, but they aren't being bailed out. They are losing their houses, and their credit is tanked. There is no forgiveness for them, and there shouldn't have been for the businesses who took advantage of them. If our economy is that fragile, and those few entities will make or break it, then we need a new system anyway. Let it die.

But again, i am glad those execs aren't putting the bailout money in their accounts, but i have a feeling that they've already been consulted, and the administration worked out a compromise with them, in order to fool us. I can't believe anybody says those execs have "talent", what a f-ing joke. And that they'll run to other businesses who will pay them what they're "worth", so they can run those companies into the ground too.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


I agree that they never should have received the money to begin with, that's capitalism, do well and conduct business, fail and lock your doors. However, since the government didn't personally consult me (or any other taxpayer) at this point I'll take the take salary caps and any attempt for repayment.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   
IM 50/50 on this. I am happy to see, obama put restricitons on corporate greed! Especially since they got OUR money for thier bad business in the bailouts. That angered me SO damn much,a nd others im sure. Some of them got in trouble, for refurbishing their homes with our money fo christ sakes! greed greed greed.
On the other hand, it isnt governemnts business, saying waht a private firm can and cannot make in salary. This is what captilasim is about, in another sense...as opposed to communism, where poeple got a fixed income, JUST enought to pay rent, get food, ecte ect, but still have only a little leftover. This makes me think, if obama can do this to executives, what might he be planing for us common workers! We arnt aloowed to make over $700 a week or something?
Just something taht crossed my mind. I wouldnt be suprised, if 2 things happen now. Those who dont care about thier jobs, are going to leave now, thier on wallstreet. OR, sice these poeple make x amount of money, to buy useless thijngs and keep the economy going, investing in sticks..maybe they wont be able to do it no more, with such a salary cut.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by searching4truth
However, since the government didn't personally consult me (or any other taxpayer) at this point I'll take the take salary caps and any attempt for repayment.


They didn't need to consult us, we ALL made our unified voices heard and we were all telling them "hell no!", they completely ignored us. Like i said, i have a strong feeling that this has all been ironed out behind closed doors and those execs will get their money another way, and Obama gets to look like he's putting his foot down on our behalf. I think we're being played, again.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by Avenginggecko
 


Does anyone else see a problem with that? THE GOVERMENT IS CUTTING A PRIVATE FIRMS PAY....

A BAILOUT THAT THE people never wanted in the first place.


I have zero problem with it. as soon as they had to be bailed out by the goverment they lost the right do as they please.

Bank of America owes the Gov $30 billion. Instead of paying it back they decide to give $30 million to their executives and key employees? Do you see what is wrong with this picture?

Pay back the money and until then the government owns you.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Yup, no joke, thats is how it works!!! You accept money form he FED, yuo have bascially signed an invisble contract* I thought everyone knew this? Apparetnly not, or those comapnys were that dman greedy! thinking they would be umbrellad under bush's prtection.
God, some of those bansk make yuo sick, dont they? Thier snotty, upper calss im better tha you, yuo common worker attitude* Theirs a bank of america near me, off downtown. Going back to 1995, i started hearing horror storys about that place...they talk down to yuo in thier, unless yuo got money, go in with sneakers and a sweatshirt on, they will have security quietly escort you out. Things like that. nd to think, they got a bailout...guess it goes to show, man will murder his brother, for motionless green paper.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 





The government is not the daddy of those businesses. The government should never have given them any handouts. I am glad they aren't allowing those execs to make off with the money, but they should never have gotten that money to begin with. Those businesses should have been allowed to fail like any other bad business,


Right on!

Obama, Pelosi, Reid took over those businesses GM, etc. to 1) increase government ownership and 2) protect the union jobs which would have gone away if Obama had allowed the companies to fail.

Obama had no moral right to do what he did under the US system. Obama is very anti American, however.

Whenever you hear a president blame business, blame Bush, blame or impune, you know he is being a populist for political reasons, distracting peoples attentions from the real issues. In this case joblessness and the poor economy. Obama could improve both if he wanted but that isn't his agenda.

He could help businesses tomorrow by creating a better business environment through tax policy but he doesn't. He'd rather punish business and blame business for the problem all the while acting the HERO.

In this case Obama is the villain. He's obfuscating!

Jobless figures go up to 2,700,000 so far and rising. Obama , Pelosi, Reid blame executive salaries. What baloney!



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by plumranch
 

Gee, didn't you leave out that he was a Kenyan masquerading as an American with a terrorist wife and wants to put us in front of death panels for euthanasia?

Please tell us what you really think.


If you think that the problem was the bailouts, many of us would agree, but I can tell you first hand that if Bush/Obama hadn't acted as they did, we would be in a world of hurt right now.

I asked before, so I'll ask again. Would you prefer that the world economy crashed? That is the only other option besides the bailouts.

For me, I think the problem is that government does not regulate enough. These companies are so big now they affect all the other aspects of the economy. We need smaller businesses that run independently. Then there is no need for government intervention. This would also be part of the solution for health care.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000
If you think that the problem was the bailouts, many of us would agree, but I can tell you first hand that if Bush/Obama hadn't acted as they did, we would be in a world of hurt right now.

I asked before, so I'll ask again. Would you prefer that the world economy crashed? That is the only other option besides the bailouts.


Oh wow, good job toe-ing the bank line, lol. SOOOO scary. I guess we all need those FEW horribly run corporations in order to survive on earth. No way that decently run banks could fill the void. What a joke. I know, i know, we would have all starved to death, and life as we know it would come to a grinding halt. Somehow, we need their shell game numbers just as much as we need food, water, and oxygen. And if we allow those few percentage of VERY rich men to lose their money, they will make sure we all lose our lives.


Like i said, if the world economy is that fragile, it DEFINITELY should be allowed to crash. Those of us who manage to survive, will hopefully rebuild society and what's left of the human race to withstand a few rich men going broke due to gambling.



[edit on 23-10-2009 by 27jd]



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 





I asked before, so I'll ask again. Would you prefer that the world economy crashed? That is the only other option besides the bailouts.


I want the world markets to prosper, thrive, same for the US economy. I'm just saying that you hear a lot of rhetoric from this bunch in DC and a lot of excuses and blaming business and the past but very little action.

There is sooo much more that can be done and nothing is happening. WHY?



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 

Maybe you don't care if it crashes, because you have nothing invested in it. Some of us have careers that took years to build and some make good money and have to provide for families. If you don't, then someday you might and I'm sure you will think different. Meanwhile, I'm glad Obama was elected and not you.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000
Maybe you don't care if it crashes, because you have nothing invested in it.


I have plenty invested in it, but like i said, if it's that fragile, it's gonna tank sooner or later anyway. Like ripping off a bandaid, better to do it fast, than slowly peel it off. It's all a numbers game played by the very few super wealthy scumbags, and we're being played along with it. I don't buy into your doomsday threats, sorry.



Some of us have careers that took years to build and some make good money and have to provide for families. If you don't, then someday you might and I'm sure you will think different.


I work for one of the largest health insurance companies, probably THE largest. I have for over 5 years now. Those on the far left want to see my job destroyed, my company engages in the same lobbyist greasing of the government, and is right in the middle of the healthcare mess, and frankly it's hard for me to even work for them after seeing this behavior and greed. I care about what's best for ALL of us, not just MY job. If things go tits up, i'll start over.



Meanwhile, I'm glad Obama was elected and not you.


I'm sure you are, because you are nothing but a partisan tool. Have fun with that. You do know, that Obama was just taking Bush's baton. Bush started the bailouts, so you should praise him too, but i doubt you will.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 

Well now, I pictured you as some hard ass right wing survivalist type. Maybe it is way you talk. I'm sorry for assuming that, but they are usually the ones that want all of civilization to come crashing down. I was going to say that you might be satisfied with living off the land, eating bugs and what not, but some of us have come accustomed to a higher standard of living and actually enjoy living. I think it would be a shame to see everything that everyone has worked for for generations just go up in smoke. I have never understood this morbid wish for the end of all things.

Nice talking to ya.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000
Well now, I pictured you as some hard ass right wing survivalist type.


Well, there are parts of me that are. I'm an agnostic, I disagree with organized religion, and i support people's right to live however they want, and marry whomever they want, as long as they don't hurt other people, etc. But i am also a gun enthusiast, and i do spend ALOT of my free time in the wilderness, rock crawling, prospecting for gold, and just enjoying not being in the city. I know how to survive in the wilderness, but i also enjoy showers and nice restaurants and such. Hyper-partisan drones like yourself know NOTHING else, but to do their best to lump everybody in one camp or the other. You're brainwashed, plain and simple. I bet, if i were to go back and look at your posts when Bush was in office, they would be bashing EVERYTHING his admin. did. Now, you rush to defend EVERYTHING Obama's admin. does. Hell, it's probably be a safe bet to assume you were even against the bailouts when Bush was pushing them. I criticize both "parties" equally, since they're the same anyway. They just put on a show for you and your ilk, i bet you think professional wrestling is real too.



I think it would be a shame to see everything that everyone has worked for for generations just go up in smoke. I have never understood this morbid wish for the end of all things.


It's not a morbid wish for the "end of all things". It's a wish for the end of this nation being controlled by a few mega-corporations, and a few VERY greedy men at the top who just get richer, at the expense of all those who actually work to make this country what it is. If they can take away everything that everyone has worked for, because they made bad bets, then the system is NOT worth repairing. We need a reset. Try not being so damned selfish, and blind. If they can take it away, it's NOT yours.



Nice talking to ya.


Wish i could say the same, but i honestly have ZERO respect for partisan drones, who eat, breathe, and poop strictly according to party lines. To me, you're at the same level of absurdity as the "hard ass right wing survivalist types". I'm really not trying to be a a-hole, but i'm just sick to death of seeing the minds of otherwise intelligent human beings controlled so easily. It reduces my hopes that one day our civilization will be a bit more fair and humane. But you call that "wishing for the end of all things".





[edit on 23-10-2009 by 27jd]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join