House votes to clamp limits on bonuses

[ChasDen]

I know people are upset with the financial situation this country is in but slowly but surely the feds are finding ways to get deeper and deeper into the private sector.

From the article here (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090731/ap_on_go_co/us_bailout_bonuses),

"This is not the government taking over the corporate sector," Rep. Melvin Watt, D-N.C, said of the House action. "It is a statement by the American people that it is time for us to straighten up the ship."

The White House and Senate Democrats haven't endorsed the measure, leaving its prospects uncertain. The Senate Banking Committee planned to take up the proposal in the fall as part of a broader bill overhauling financial regulations.

"Obviously it has some important things that we think need to become law, and we'll take a look at the full bill," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Friday.

Since the new legislation would apply to companies not receiving bailout money, the effect will be to force "financial institutions who did not contribute to the crisis to pay for the mistakes of others," said Rep. Michael Castle, R-Del.

Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, said a better solution would be to terminate the $700 billion bank bailout program established last year.

I agree with Jeb

Chas

[silentjon]

I think we are on a slippery slope. :(

[ucla695]

I think we are on a slippery slope. :(

:tpd: :bh

[zonedar]

I think its more like sliding down a razor blade.

[Sauer Grapes]

I agree with Chuck, who agrees with Jeb.

[Starscream]

http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Tyranny-Conservative-Mark-Levin/dp/1416562850/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1249151738&sr=8-1
This book explains much of what has happened since the days of FDR and how it will continue to go downhill.

[The Poet]

When Washington Mutual fell into Chapter 11 and was taken over by Chase, the CEO of WaMu, Alan H. Fishman, received a $7.5 million sign-on bonus and was offered an additional $11.6 million cash severance (which he, perhaps wisely, declined). This was after he had spent exactly 17 days in his position.

Do you really think some oversight is a bad idea? Really?

[Starscream]

When Washington Mutual fell into Chapter 11 and was taken over by Chase, the CEO of WaMu, Alan H. Fishman, received a $7.5 million sign-on bonus and was offered an additional $11.6 million cash severance (which he, perhaps wisely, declined). This was after he had spent exactly 17 days in his position.

Do you really think some oversight is a bad idea? Really?

The money is offered to attract the best of the best. If we don't pay well, then the good ones go somewhere else.


A lot of the bonuses that are handed out go to sections of these businesses that are profitable, even if the corporation as a whole is in the red. The media doesn't tell this side of the story.

[The Poet]

What part of Chapter 11 is ambiguous, Andy? Hell, I'd be willing to run a corporation into the ground for 1/2 as much, and would even try to do it in less time! The best of the best seem pretty lousy to most of the population in this country, in case you haven't noticed.

Just :2, brother.

[Starscream]

There are a lot of crooked deals that go on in this country. Capitalism isn't perfect, but the media plays us for fools.
Example: Merril Lynch owns NPC International (a Pizza Hut franchise). Many managers (store, area, regional, and VPs) make profit bonuses because their stores are profitable. Millions of dollars in profit bonuses are handed out to these people for making profit at the store level, area level, regional, and franchise wide. The media does not tell us what these bonuses are for, they just say that Merril Lynch handed out billions in bonuses even though the corporation as a whole is in the red.
Yes, there are many unwarranted bonuses (like the one you mentioned previously), but they are the exception to the rule, but the media and big government advocates want us to think that these things are widespread.
Capitalism isn't perfect, but it's a lot better than a system of stagnation caused by way too much government control.

[macms]

Capitalism isn't perfect, but it's a lot better than a system of stagnation caused by way too much government control.

QFT

[The Poet]

Call me a fool (you would not be the first), but I really do not believe Congress is interested in going after the Christmas bonus of a Pizza Hut manager. It is the egregious excesses of the privileged 1% that has p!$$ed them off, and the nation as a whole. Why should my tax dollars (or yours, for that matter) "invested" in bailout funds go to finance some bastid's yatch? It happens, and you know it.

Again, just my :2, which is about my net worth also. :ss

[Starscream]

Call me a fool (you would not be the first), but I really do not believe Congress is interested in going after the Christmas bonus of a Pizza Hut manager. It is the egregious excesses of the privileged 1% that has p!$$ed them off, and the nation as a whole. Why should my tax dollars (or yours, for that matter) "invested" in bailout funds go to finance some bastid's yatch? It happens, and you know it.
Again, just my :2, which is about my net worth also. :ss

That's the governments fault, not the corporations. They should not have handed out that money in the first place. Bush and Obama both are at fault here by handing out our money to all of these corporations. Bailouts didn't work in the Great Depression, and they haven't now. Bush and Obama should have set up restrictions instead of handing out a blank check to companies to do as they wish. And now the gov't blames their mistakes on greed.

[Starscream]

QFT

QFT?

[The Poet]

Maybe I should be blamed for bringing up bailout money, so my bad. That seems to me to be a separate issue from the one under discussion, and is not germaine. Regardless from where the money comes, nobody should make a killing when most everyone else is killing themselves just trying to stay afloat - without a stinkin' yacht.

Need I repeat? :2

[uptown_isy]

Once the government decides how much money one can make in the banking industry, where will it stop? It's a slippery slope, for sure, and it just opens the way for the government to regulate the pay in other industries, as well. Personally, I don't own a yacht....but I have no problems with those that do. If I could afford one, I'd have one. Just my opinion.

[G G]

The socialization of America is moving along.

[The Poet]

Personally, I don't own a yacht....but I have no problems with those that do. If I could afford one, I'd have one. Just my opinion.

So would I, and I'd invite you and Andy for a cruise. As for government regulation - well, they tried to let the finance industry regulate itself, and you can see where that got them, and all the rest of us. It did not work. If they don't like the idea, then tough $#!+, since they asked for it.

Avarice is one of the Seven Deadly Sins, not a proper business model.

[G G]

I aint gonna let this get me into an argument, so I am gonna say one more thing and then not come back to it. But the banking situation would not be in the shape it's in if the regulations for loans wouldn't have been lowered by the Clinton administration, and not to try to make this into Clinton's fault, but they did lower the regs, but there was ample time after that to corrrect it by others and it wasn't corrected. So I don't think the blame can be laid on the finance industry. My two cents. I'm done.

[The Poet]

Yeah, me too Greg. That's the one good thing about having nothing - I've got nothing to lose, so I really have no dog in this fight anyway.

Love to all, brothers. :ss

[G G]

:tu

[Starscream]

Once the government decides how much money one can make in the banking industry, where will it stop? It's a slippery slope, for sure, and it just opens the way for the government to regulate the pay in other industries, as well. Personally, I don't own a yacht....but I have no problems with those that do. If I could afford one, I'd have one. Just my opinion.
:tpd:
So would I, and I'd invite you and Andy for a cruise. As for government regulation - well, they tried to let the finance industry regulate itself, and you can see where that got them, and all the rest of us. It did not work. If they don't like the idea, then tough $#!+, since they asked for it.

Avarice is one of the Seven Deadly Sins, not a proper business model.

Self-regulation wasn't the problem in the finance industry. It was the loans and mortgages that the banks were forced to give (b/c Clinton, Frank, and Dodd thought that people who had no or bad credit needed to have the ability to take out humongous loans w/o the ability to pay them back) that put the finance industry where it is today. That's why Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac were the first to go (they were forced to buy up all of these loans that...
well that's another issue in and of itself).


I will take you up on that cruise offer when you get your boat! Sounds like a good place to herf!:tu:D

[Starscream]

I aint gonna let this get me into an argument, so I am gonna say one more thing and then not come back to it. But the banking situation would not be in the shape it's in if the regulations for loans wouldn't have been lowered by the Clinton administration, and not to try to make this into Clinton's fault, but they did lower the regs, but there was ample time after that to corrrect it by others and it wasn't corrected. So I don't think the blame can be laid on the finance industry. My two cents. I'm done.
:tpd: That's what I was talking about in my previous post.
Yeah, me too Greg. That's the one good thing about having nothing - I've got nothing to lose, so I really have no dog in this fight anyway.

Love to all, brothers. :ss

No love lost here. I've had fun debating the issue.:tu

[The Poet]

:tu

[ChasDen]

Whats wrong with just letting the private sector fail???

Since the beginning of this country is been the back bone of its success. Those that work hard, succeed and those that don't, don't. While I have no hard facts to back up the following statement, I would be willing to bet anyone would be hard pressed to show me one government ran program that runs more efficiently than the private sector. There are examples of industry that boomed at one point and no longer exists. Why must government get involved to "Fix" it? Let them fail, something else will take its place. Keeping the new age bail outs separate from this, this is a step in the direction where government will have the ability to tell privately held business how it can compensate its employees :confused:. No matter if its a pizza hut employee or a fortune 500 company executive to me, its government poking its fingers in the private sector. At some point this country just needs to decide if it wants socialism or not and go one way or the other.

Chas

[macms]

QFT?

QFT = Quoted For Truth ;)

[Starscream]

QFT = Quoted For Truth ;)

:tu

[Genetic Defect]

:dance:

[Sauer Grapes]

I aint gonna let this get me into an argument, so I am gonna say one more thing and then not come back to it. But the banking situation would not be in the shape it's in if the regulations for loans wouldn't have been lowered by the Clinton administration, and not to try to make this into Clinton's fault, but they did lower the regs, but there was ample time after that to corrrect it by others and it wasn't corrected. So I don't think the blame can be laid on the finance industry. My two cents. I'm done.

Actually, most of those I know in the banking industry not only blame Clinton, but Bush as well. Clinton got everything started, Bush lowered the regs even further.

Just goes to further your point that more government regs is not the answer.

[rizzle]

Change we can believe in. Yee freaking haw.

I don't think we're in Kansas anymore Dorothy.

[WyoBob]

I think the House should clamp limits on "bozo's". You know, as in, themselves.;)

WyoBob

[Da Klugs]

One thing you never have to fear is that "Change" regarding our policy of no political threads is never gonna happen here. :D

Regards,
The oppressed 5%
:D