Senate counter-offer on bailout

#2
#2
lawgator1 said:
The populist provisions:

1. The government gets an ownership share of the companies it bails out.

2. A cap on executive compensation.


Congress scrambles on rescue bill - Sep. 22, 2008


That second one is going to be the centerpiece of Obama's campaign, mark my words.
Click to expand...

John McCain wants to max pay out at 400,000 to the companies getting bailed out. I don't think that will fly with the right.
 
#3
#3
Executive pay is a problem but it can be addressed later. I wish these bozos (both sides) would focus on the core issue, pass a decent bill then fight about this stuff later.
 
#4
#4
volinbham said:
Executive pay is a problem but it can be addressed later. I wish these bozos (both sides) would focus on the core issue, pass a decent bill then fight about this stuff later.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure I completely agree. While you are correct that the structural problems need to be fixed or addressed in the near-term, the reality is that some message probably needs to be sent to calm Average Joe Investor that he is not 1) losing his realitvely miniscule wealth in a 401k while 2) the government is going to go deeper into debt to bail out Fannie Mae (thus making what is left in his 401k worth even less) while 3) the board members of Fannie Mae walk out the door with hundreds of millions of dollars.

This situation is going to cause every day folks to lose faith in saving and in putting savings into the market and that problem has ot be addressed just as urgently as the structural issues.
 
#5
#5
lawgator1 said:
The populist provisions:

1. The government gets an ownership share of the companies it bails out.

2. A cap on executive compensation.
Click to expand...

both are completely ridiculous. a) it's not a bailout to buy distressed assets at MARKET VALUE (which by the way is definetly WAY below fair market value) from the banks and b) #2 is socialism so I am sure obama will like that.

This would be like me saying to my clients "ok for me to sell your microsoft I expect ownership in your company" WHHAAAAA??????? Frank clearly doesn't understand the situation. Putting that provision in just guarantees no one sells anything to the govt and therefore it doesn't help anything.
 
#6
#6
lawgator1 said:
I'm not sure I completely agree. While you are correct that the structural problems need to be fixed or addressed in the near-term, the reality is that some message probably needs to be sent to calm Average Joe Investor that he is not 1) losing his realitvely miniscule wealth in a 401k while 2) the government is going to go deeper into debt to bail out Fannie Mae (thus making what is left in his 401k worth even less) while 3) the board members of Fannie Mae walk out the door with hundreds of millions of dollars.

This situation is going to cause every day folks to lose faith in saving and in putting savings into the market and that problem has ot be addressed just as urgently as the structural issues.
Click to expand...

There you go telling us what the "average guy" thinks. Will you divest or fail to further invest if there is not an executive pay provision? It certainly won't affect my decisions.

Executive pay is not the most pressing issue. The more Congress dicks with this stuff, the bigger the mess is going to get.
 
#7
#7
volinbham said:
There you go telling us what the "average guy" thinks. Will you divest or fail to further invest if there is not an executive pay provision? It certainly won't affect my decisions.

Executive pay is not the most pressing issue. The more Congress dicks with this stuff, the bigger the mess is going to get.
Click to expand...
executive pay isn't even a remote issue, except for those trying to get votes by implying that CEO are wealthy at the expense of those less fortunate.
 
#8
#8
BigPapaVol said:
executive pay isn't even a remote issue, except for those trying to get votes by implying that CEO are wealthy at the expense of those less fortunate.
Click to expand...

CEO's aren't wealthy at the expense of the less fortunate, but these bailouts are perpetuating moral hazard which is nothing more than privatizing wealth and socializing losses. The US banking system is socialism at it's best after these bailouts.
 
#9
#9
VolByBirth said:
CEO's aren't wealthy at the expense of the less fortunate, but these bailouts are perpetuating moral hazard which is nothing more than privatizing wealth and socializing losses. The US banking system is socialism at it's best after these bailouts.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
#10
#10
VolByBirth said:
CEO's aren't wealthy at the expense of the less fortunate, but these bailouts are perpetuating moral hazard which is nothing more than privatizing wealth and socializing losses. The US banking system is socialism at it's best after these bailouts.
Click to expand...
assuming that the bailouts are permanent and that banks making stupid decisions will again be systemic. Otherwise, individual companies will be allowed to fail. If this entire mess weren't tied to the mortgage market and spread across the entire financial sector, the outcome would have been different.

The bottom line is that the nation is paying up for the nation driving real estate prices beyond affordability. The Fed just took a hard line with lenders and appraisers to fix the problem.
 
#11
#11
VolByBirth said:
CEO's aren't wealthy at the expense of the less fortunate, but these bailouts are perpetuating moral hazard which is nothing more than privatizing wealth and socializing losses. The US banking system is socialism at it's best after these bailouts.
Click to expand...

what losses? the only losses so far have been taken by the shareholders and the "common man" whose pension fund and 401K owns them. the gov't will make billions on these so called "bailouts."
 
#12
#12
droski said:
what losses? the only losses so far have been taken by the shareholders and the "common man" whose pension fund and 401K owns them. the gov't will make billions on these so called "bailouts."
Click to expand...
and the likelihood is that few of the losses will ever be realized. Today, it's almost 100% paper writedowns forced by regulators.
 
#13
#13
droski said:
what losses? the only losses so far have been taken by the shareholders and the "common man" whose pension fund and 401K owns them. the gov't will make billions on these so called "bailouts."
Click to expand...

The losses are the billions of dollars injected by the Fed in CY 2008 into the banking industry. Don't forget about the other government agencies burning through their capital like the FDIC and FHA. These are gov't agencies paying to prop up the insolvency of those that already made their money. Therefore, it is socializing losses.
 
#14
#14
VolByBirth said:
CEO's aren't wealthy at the expense of the less fortunate, but these bailouts are perpetuating moral hazard which is nothing more than privatizing wealth and socializing losses. The US banking system is socialism at it's best after these bailouts.
Click to expand...

Ok, well, after Great Depression pt. 2 shows itself, you'll be thinking that, wont you.

Seriously, if this measure isn't passed, it will be another great depression. If you oppose this, you should be beaten over the head with a metal bat.
 
#15
#15
VolByBirth said:
The losses are the billions of dollars injected by the Fed in CY 2008 into the banking industry. Don't forget about the other government agencies burning through their capital like the FDIC and FHA. These are gov't agencies paying to prop up the insolvency of those that already made their money. Therefore, it is socializing losses.
Click to expand...

how are these losses? injecting liquidity doesn't mean losses. those are loans.
 
#16
#16
nickknx865 said:
Ok, well, after Great Depression pt. 2 shows itself, you'll be thinking that, wont you.

Seriously, if this measure isn't passed, it will be another great depression. If you oppose this, you should be beaten over the head with a metal bat.
Click to expand...

you must not have paid attention in your American History. It was government overreaction to the crash on Wall Street that pulled the US into the Great Depression.

Complaining about executive compensation is good fodder for campaign commercials, nothing more.
 
#17
#17
lawgator1 said:
The populist provisions:

1. The government gets an ownership share of the companies it bails out.

2. A cap on executive compensation.


Congress scrambles on rescue bill - Sep. 22, 2008


That second one is going to be the centerpiece of Obama's campaign, mark my words.
Click to expand...


so if they want to cap ceo's pay, will they cap professional ball player's pay, what about actor's pay. i guess the socialists are winning. everyone line up and get your labotomy.
 
#18
#18
yeah, George Clooney doesn't need 20 million per picture and Barbara Streisand damn sure isn't worth 2500 bucks per ticket.
 
#21
#21
nickknx865 said:
Ok, well, after Great Depression pt. 2 shows itself, you'll be thinking that, wont you.

Seriously, if this measure isn't passed, it will be another great depression. If you oppose this, you should be beaten over the head with a metal bat.
Click to expand...

A war bailed us out of the Great Depression, not legislation.

It took 12-13 years before we were out of the Great Depression. And there was a lot of legislation passed in those years.
 
#22
#22
UTLCA said:
A war bailed us out of the Great Depression, not legislation.

It took 12-13 years before we were out of the Great Depression. And there was a lot of legislation passed in those years.
Click to expand...
Including stealing 90 cents for every dollar that the top earners earned!

FDR and the legacy he left behind have done substantially more to hurt this country than to help it.
 
#24
#24
joevol320 said:
so if they want to cap ceo's pay, will they cap professional ball player's pay, what about actor's pay. i guess the socialists are winning. everyone line up and get your labotomy.
Click to expand...

It was my understanding that capping executive pay would only be directed at companies who recieve the governement help.

Since when did the taxpayer pay professional ball players and actors?
 
#25
#25
rjd970 said:
It was my understanding that capping executive pay would only be directed at companies who recieve the governement help.

Since when did the taxpayer pay professional ball players and actors?
Click to expand...

plant that seed and it will grow out of control.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top