"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/47968
Jamie Dupree's Blog
If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.
Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!
Avg. rating: N/A
What others are saying
Where's the pay cuts for Goldman Sachs?
Bad enough the scapegoated executives at these companies are being used as a dog and pony show to distract us from the fact that no meaningful finance reform has been passed, it's not even being done across the board. Some of the largest beneficiaries of the bailout of AIG (Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan-Chase) are exempt from any of the rules, even though they profited handsomely thanks to the 'generousity' of the middle class taxpayer. I guess when the Treasury Department is run by a network of cronies from Geithner's time in the private sector it's no wonder there's a new double standard. Goldman Sachs is to Obama and the financial crisis as Halliburton was to Cheney and Iraq.
It's Just Bad Policy
So when every single one of these executives moves to another company in the U.S. or oversees where they can get better pay, how will these companies fare that were so important that we had to give them taxpayer money?
It's just dumb policy in addition to being anti-American, if not outright unconstitutional.
The execs are like star athletes. The best are worth a fortune. The worst are massively overpaid. Many are wildly overrated. However, there are very few people that can do what they can do and finding the one that will fit into your team is very hard. However, one thing is certain, if the Yankees were to mandate a massive pay cuts for all top talent, they would never win another penant. This is the exact result that will happen here. There will be no more ups and downs for these companies because there will be no more ups because as soon as anybody proves themselves they will exercise their free agent option and be out the door.
Of course, the liberal "solution" will be to apply the rules to all companies and drive all of our top talent out of the U.S. and then try to apply it worldwide because it just keeps failing. Sort of like gun control. It fails, so we must ban more guns and add more restrictions and then it will finally work.
Progressive mindset
I'm amazed, but Glenn Beck was right. If you listen to this woman, you hear her talking about all three things he pointed out last night. Either way, I think these people are full it. They need to be booted out of Washington with a steel toe.
constitution = Obama Toilet Paper
I hope the real message behind this "Make the evil rich pay" BS comes to light. If ever there was a move from the Obamanation that is SOOO out of line with the US Constitution, well, I haven't seen it yet. Czar, not nominated/approved by Congress = check. Government seizure of property/ie "Pay" from private citizen = check. Wake up America, you might just be making "too much money". pathetic.
Concerning Thomas Jefferson - I told you so.
A while back, before you all were born, I helped design and lead your country. I left for you many pieces of wisdom with the hope you may adopt them as a muse, of sorts, and not forget all that was learned throughout the history of mankind’s advancement in civilization up until the birth of our Nation in seventeen-hundred seventy-six. Here are some you all may have forgotten:
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Never spend your money before you have earned it.
That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves.
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.
To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
and lastly...
We may consider each generation as a distinct nation, with a right, by the will of its majority, to bind themselves, but none to bind the succeeding generation, more than the inhabitants of another country.
Now, please, sit and think, and ask yourself where your parents and grandparents have led our nation. Are you happy? What a travesty that you have taken such a miracle of mankind; the foundation of a truly independent collaboration of states, born of liberty, and have molded it through your greed and gluttony into a mass of sheep led by a cowardly elite bent on serving their own interests. I am truly ashamed of those who followed me. And whilst I’m not one known for proclaiming that I have offered forewarning (I believe you use the term, “I told you so”), I must point out that I appear to have indeed been right in condemning the creation of a partisan system of government. It has most apparently served you all very poorly. I wish you all the best of luck, and hope that you all will never have to relive the bittersweet agony of remolding a people into a right and honorable Republic.
...And what is with this terrible security code? This is worse than the wax seals I had to use when I was in office...
Alan
You speak as if there were no other possible solutions. An absolute that only the government could solve the issue. You will need to defend that to gain any support from me. In my way of thinking business people are smart and know how to take advantage of an opportunity just like the government does. The difference is that the government can use guns to force things we may not want down our throats. One other minor point: Last time I checked, GM was a manufacturing company...
Michael
Of course it was Bush and it's continuing under Obama. They were called into the meeting, some came for help, not expecting what happened when they got there. And since the "or else" worked, the administration is continuing that approach.
Alan, some have NOT been allowed to pay it back. And even when they do, Geithner wants to spend it again!
We'll never see that money back, it's gone.
They all consist of multiple divisions, some profitable, some were not. If we had allowed them to file bankruptcy, they could have sold the profitable parts and maybe held onto the non profitable. They wouldn't have disappeared completely. Every day there is a list of bank failure still. So what did we save? A few big ones were saved while hundreds of smaller are going under. Cause even after the big ones were saved, they still ain't lending. Even to the smaller banks. We could have let the big guys go and given the money to the smaller ones and come out ahead.
booger eater
Sorry Mattisben, noboady eats me without permission.:-)
@ jlporternsx
These are not manufacturing companies that rcv'd TARP funds, these are financial institutions! If they go under, not only are no new loans approved (thus shutting down other banks who operate on daily loans, not to mention small businesses, mortgage both commercial and private, HELOC, car, cc, etc...)but existing loans would have been called due (no need to explain the ramifications of that ...)
This issues isn't such a simple "let them fail" answer ... anyone who gives that answer hasn't taken the time to think to step two of their plan. What would have happened if every bank failed? (which TARP successfully prevented!)
Corrections
lets set the record straight 1) TARP was given out in OCT - under Bush's watch (or lack thereof depending on your POV)
2) Some banks are allowed to repay their TARP funds (google it bank employee)
3) "they weren't given a choice" - if yall remember, we faced a systematic shutdown ... if the money hadn't been injected immediately, _____ insert whatever fear mongering catchphrase you wish - but the argument remains the same: time was of the essence to prevent a financial meltdown
Government control over pay
We should have let the companies who allowed themselves to be sucked in to fail. Stockholders would have rightly lost large amounts of $'s. The stock holders of the companies who survived would have taken the necessary steps to insure that their management did not let this threaten their investments. CEO's and other senior executives of failed companies would have taken massive income cuts plus loss of long term investments and would have been hard pressed to ever become a significant company executive again. We would have definitely been in for hard times but hard lessons are learned in hard times. The results would have been no government expansion into private industry, no need for or support for the leverage the government. The entire situation would have self heal over time. This is a major screw up and rightly should have been resolved through the school of hard knocks.
@Joyce
How did these CEOs get into that room in the first place, Joyce? They walked in there willingly. Door closed? Turn the knob! These CEOs are highly paid, and supposedly highly skilled. They are tasked by their employer to make the best decisions for the company and shareholders and should not succumb to the demands of a 'bully-pulpit'. 'Take it [money], or else'? We'll never find out what the 'else' scenario would have been like. But us and our children and their kids will find out what 'take the money' is. Higher inflation, lower dollar value, slower economic growth. We're going into debt like there's no tomorrow. I do remind you that it was the during the Bush Administration that these 'welfare check writing' meetings were held. Do I like what the government is doing with executive compensation? NO!
Take the pay cuts
First off, Brother, you asked for it...
When you had your hand out, did you not know there was someone with money in one hand, and handcuffs in the other?
None of the CEO's that took the money would be welcome in Galt's Gulch. (John, correct me if I am wrong.) They are a pathetic waste of intellectual capital, and have no claim on it.
You wanted the government to help you, now enjoy the swim with that millstone around your neck.
BTW, for those that ask, John Galt is Prometheus who escaped.
Pay Cuts because it is TAXPAYER money?
I saw a bumpersticker that said "I think therefore I'm a Liberal" well think about it this way, Logically. The issue is that they are taking Taxpayer Money, right. That SOME of their pay comes from taxpayers, right? Well, Every member of Congress gets ALL of their pay from taxpayer money, so, LOGICALLY they must LEAD BY EXAMPLE and take a pay cut (as well as cutting pay of EVERYONE on government payroll) If, and only if, they do this FIRST, would they have ANY STANDING to dictate salaries in the private sector. Then, they can only do so in the proportion that the private firm is receiving funds. Example, Congress takes 20% cut, private firm's executive salary is 50% funded by taxpayer money, then they could only demand 10% cut (50% of the same cut they take for themselves).
are you referring to something called the konstitution???????
we don't use that here......where the hell you been??????
No Michael
People in the room at the time have stated that the door was closed, the corporate people were told take it or else! No, they were not forced at the point of a metal gun just the bully pulpit gun that the administration is now leveling against the insurance companies and Fox.
So in the smart aleck spirit you convey, "are you having second third fourth (spell it right) thoughts...".
And here we go....
Now we have a precedent of government regulating compensation of those in the private sector. Now that this has started, it aint ever gonna stop. We will very sorry we let this genie out of the bottle.
It won't stop
Prophecy My guess is that we are about to see a mass exodus of CEO's and high-ranking officials in these companies. Not ONLY that, but we will see fewer and fewer quality individuals seeking employment in industries (auto, banking, etc) that the government has decided to take over...because that is precisely what this administration has done. As such, these industries will have a harder time recovering from this economic crisis and provide Obama a rational that "they obviously can't care for themselves, so we, the government, must do so".
Where will it stop, eh?
It won't stop. The quest of the Statist hasn't stopped since it began and I don't assume it will stop. In fact, even when there is victory for liberty, the Statists continue their schemes. They always have and they always will. When companies without leaders continue to fail the Statists will just blame the greedy smart people who don't want to work for free. The only plausible incentive other than monetary incentive is force. But, I don't think people should be too worried that the Statists will succeed. They'll come to power again, and then be defeated again by liberty. It just sucks that we'll have to suffer again before the people realize they have been enslaved yet again. Anyone who reads history knows that history does actually repeat itself. Of course, that's no reason to stop the fight against the advance of the Statists. It's better to fight as long as possible than give in to defeat.
Brian/Jimmy D
Waah! Cry baby, poopy pants, booger eater, sissy! Now, there's a conversation on your level.
What a lame reporter.
It’s kinda sick to look at his nose and know what her crack is like (which is more than I’d like to know). Cbs could have just had somebody from the WH interview her and there wouldn’t have been a substantive difference.
He played right along with her sidestep of how they planned to enforce this, and how far they would go applying it to the private sector.
He didn’t ask why these strings weren’t in the tarp law they passed, and by what authority they could be retroactively added. There was no mention of some of these institutions being forced to take the money, or government hindrance of them paying it back.
He didn’t ask when the federal government was going to lead by example. Everything ‘Liz prattled off could be applied to the government, but isn’t.
Responsibility? They took that money to give the banks from us, and another $800 billion on top of that almost exclusively to save the jobs of government employees in failing states, yet unemployment is half again what they said it would be. We private taxpayers are the ones who will have to tighten our belts to pay it back, not those arrogant Aholes who produce nothing and live so well off our taxes.
They aren’t the ones to lecture anybody on responsibility, especially when Liz’s boss is waiting ‘til after the election next month to decide whether to send more troops to Afghanistan (remember the howls from the dp when they had to vote on the Iraq campaign before that election?). The troops will just have to hang in there, there’s an election for the dp to win, and there’s no higher priority for them than that.
TARP Reality
I work for one of the banks that was forced to take TARP funds, even though the bank was doing well. Government regulates banks. Government decides public needs government investment in banks to increase confidence. Banks are forced to take money, and can't repay for 3 years or until the government says they can. Government realizes the public perception problem, and starts trying to control banks and salaries further. Several banks try to repay, and government refuses. (Google it) Now banks are trapped by TARP so that the government can continue to control them.
I can't wait till they control my healthcare and retirement. They're doing such a bang up job now.
TARP $
If I were one of these CEO's I'd be going John Galt about now! I wish I could anyway... this country is definatly heading the way of "Atlas Shrugged"
Sound Familiar?
Working according to ability, compensated according to need.
While this isn't the start (as that was some time ago), this IS one of the most overt actions toward facism.
@Forsyth Mom
I keep hearing folks say that they were FORCED to take TARP money. If they were forced to take welfare then there must have been guards with guns pointed at their heads in the room when the welfare checks were being written. No one forced these bankers to fly to Washington to meet with the Treasury officials back in the Fall when this 'crisis' was looming either. They might have been ordered to do so, but not FORCED. Some of these CEOs could have walked out of the room, told the American people about what went on, and flew home. But no Forsyth Mom, they TOOK the money (welfare) from us TAXPAYERS. Are some having second (third, forth, ...) thoughts about it now and using this silly FORCED argument as an excuse when they felt the heat from taxpayers? You betca!
To Brian Fantana: wrong is wrong
Question, did the gov't told the recipient of the bailout that they will be involve in their day to day business practice? If the gov't did, than I don't have a problem with gov't dictating the pay cut but I seem to remember the gov't stating they did not want to be involve in the business practice of the bailout companies. This is wrong and should not be applauded. I was very much against all the bailouts (Bush or Obama) and Stimulus so I have no love for the companies that foolishly took the money but I do find the meddling of the gov't in their business affair wrong and unconstitutional. We are now doing what third world countries have been doing for years which had limited many businesses ventures in those countries.
Whenever a wrong is being done, we need to speak out regardless of how the wrong was derived.
@Destin
Actually Destin you make a very good point, but you are making the wrong party the power party. When government and business get in bed together it is government that holds the power in the relationship, not business. This is the point that the Micheal Moores of the world miss, when business and government join in these unholy alliances, it is no longer capitalism and when it fails, it is not a failure of the free market, it’s the failure of government interference in the free market.
This is why you see most conservative posting that these companies should never have received the bailout money in the first place. And further, if the government had not interfered in the mortgage industry to begin with, the collapse never would have happened.
But that aside, the collapse did happen, the bailouts were given out, but as many people are pointing out, now the government has decided to change the terms of the contract after the contract has been signed.
Compensation problem in america???
take charge
Very quickly - She said when you're in charge you are responsible, you take the pains.
Isn't the President in charge? Isn't the President responsible for his czars, that he appointed, and their decisions. Why isn't he held to the same standards as the corporate executives?
Wait a minute, that would be logical. Forgive me, please.
All responses are similar
haha, crybaby conservatives give me the same response. Wah wahw wah, yuour comment on a random blog offended me. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
Bail Outs/Pay Cuts
Brian - if YOU would read and do a bit of research, you'd discover that , YES, there are banks that were FORCED by the Treasury Dept to take TARP money. Several financial instituions did NOT want to take the funds, however, the WH and Treasury Dept felt that it was not *FAIR* that some banks were not taking funds. Therefore all banks at a certain size were forced to take TARP funding.
Some banks/institutions rapidly discovered that being in bed with the OBama administration was not at all pleasant. They saw the handwriting on the wall and immediately made plans to pay back these funds - others could not do so.
So these guys are forced to take pay cuts, and while I agree that some compensation packages have been in the past outrageous, who among us want the Feds telling us what, where and how we can be paid?
Just as an aside: there are multiple states that grant tax credits for movie and film productions. Does that mean the State of Michigan or Georgia can tell Hollywood/Hollyweird how much Angela and Demi can make on a picture? Does that mean the Feds can set compensation packages? How about ballplayers since the stadiums are often built with local tax monies. What about music artist/rappers who have productions filmed or recorded in public areas?
Kind of puts a different spin on it don't it?
compensation problem?? WTF
When Baba Wawa abdicates her journalistic throne so that a newbie can share the wealth, the left will start putting their money where their mouth is. Same goes for Melvin Moronivich (harry smith) the day he "gives back' by RETIRING A RICH MAN. MSM celebrities are nothing but a bunch of rich hypocrites. Why do they choose to destroy the system that enabled them to be rich? Useful idiots. Fifth column.
How much are these people paid?
What are they willing to do about this "compensation problem"? Quit and let me anchor the morning news for a year or so @ $1,000,000 a year? Doubt it. Hypocrites. That includes the sixty minutes miserable whiner liberal grouch Andy Rooney. Yeah, Andy, life in America sucks ya pathetic gob of spit of a millionaire. Dogs are smarter. They know better than to bite the hand that feeds them. They must be getting something out of it. But what? Job security? I dunno.
I have a pain between my ears.
Pay Cuts
Harry: "Is the government going to ask for their TARP money back?"
Hey, Harry... some of these TARP recipients WANTED to give the money back, but Obama said they COULDN'T. Why didn't you ask about that, huh? We saw exactly this thing coming when the feds refused the refund.
This pay cut thing is only going to result in a mass exodus of qualified people from these top positions. Of course the feds will then put their own people in, thus strengthening their control over the private sector.
Ten years ago I wouldn't have believed this possible. But, after reading Levin's book, learning about FDR & Johnson, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaide,.... it all makes sense. The only difference is that they've been so emboldened by O's election they are no longer hiding what they're doing.
-
Destin
If you knew anything, you'd know that companies like Goldman Sachs are tied very closely to the power brokers in Washington and they will ALWAYS look after their own.
All stockholders have the right to make their voices heard and together you should be able to get the board to do something about the pay arrangements so quit looking to Washington to do it for you. It's illegal for them to do it. Course that won't stop them...
Constitutional Authority?
Is anyone even discussing by what authority the Pay Czar is able to do this? OMFG, what next?
Paycuts and 13th ammendment
Wouldn't retroactive pay cuts, such as that imposed on Ken Lewis at BOA, violate the 13th amendment? If an executive agrees to work for a year for x number of dollars and after the fact his compensation is reduced, or in Lewis's case eliminated, doesn't that amount to involuntary servitude? How can the government prove that the salary that it "authorizes" would have been accepted at the beginning of the employment year? Would an executive like Lewis have said," Sure I'll work for nothing even though I know I can get $2 million for a year of my labor."
CEO Pay
The CEO's of these corporations should walk out on the same day. These companies would then collapse. Our mighty government could not handle such destruction.
If CEO's are going to lose pay let's go back and make Congress a volunteer service again. NO PAY for any Congressional member. That would be true service to this country.
Pay Cuts.
A couple of notes:
1) This is horrible precedent. This will spread throughout publicly traded companies. Guaranteed.
2) It IS karmic payback for this folks. As a shareholder I have constantly fought these pay packages as being detrimental to the companies involved. Money paid to these moochers is could have been used to improve products, services or even increase dividends. So, I have little sympathy for them.
Prophecy
My guess is that we are about to see a mass exodus of CEO's and high-ranking officials in these companies. Not ONLY that, but we will see fewer and fewer quality individuals seeking employment in industries (auto, banking, etc) that the government has decided to take over...because that is precisely what this administration has done. As such, these industries will have a harder time recovering from this economic crisis and provide Obama a rational that "they obviously can't care for themselves, so we, the government, must do so".
Where will it stop, eh?
Bailouts
I am 100% opposed to any and all forms of government bailouts including but not limited to: TARP, CRA, First-Time Home Buyer Credit, Cash for Clunkers, and any and all forms of welfare. Should these companies have asked for handouts from the government? Probably not, but the fact of the matter is they, just like most Americans these days, are not going to turn down free money. The government gives away tax-payer money left and right and has been doing so for quite some time. Why is it now all of a sudden that they feel the need to make sure the recipients spend it wisely? It’s because individuals who receive handouts are likely to vote for the party that gave it to them, and corporations have no vote. From here on out I believe we should apply these standards to anyone who receives public funds. Hold welfare recipients accountable for how they spend their money. Make sure first-time home buyers spend the $8,000 in an “acceptable” manner. If we were to actually begin enforcing regulations on how tax-payer money is to spend then perhaps far fewer people will have their hands out. However, notice I said from here on out. I have a huge problem with government giving away public funds with no strings attached, and then going in after the fact and trying to enforce regulations on who can be paid what. This is not the American way.
Why do conservatives hate America?
Why do liberals hate it? Seriously. I'm still waiting for a lib to point out where in the constitution it says that it can screw with employee compensation or even bail out businesses.
Remember, the pres is surrounding himself with people who in the past have tried to destroy America and currently admire someone who killed 70 million people.
Who really hates America here?
Are you kidding me?
The CEO's are screwed? What color is the sky in your world anyway? Wall Street is back to business as usual after trillions in direct & in-direct bailouts and backstops, not to mention the suspension of legitimate accounting standards and their fraudulant status as "commercial bank holding companies" (call up Goldman Sachs and ask about making a deposit or getting a loan and see what kind of response you get) which allows them nearly-free access to Big Ben's printing press with FDIC guarantees. Meanwhile, local banks (you know, the ones who actually make loans to entreprenuers and small businesses) continue to fold left and right. Spend 5 minutes outside the talk radio world and you might come to a different conclusion over where the real power in this country lies. These compensation demands are nothing more than political theater. The REAL economy of this nation lies in ruin while Wall Street daytrades their way to record bonuses, one year removed from their fleecing of the American taxpayer to stave off certain bankruptcy.
A lesson to be learned
The bailout recipients were deemed "Too Big to Fail". What that means to me is that the government and the "Too Big to Fail" financial institutions were so in bed together that their failure would result in a failure of the government. Huge corporations, particularly financial institutions, have been getting their marching orders from the government since the time of FDR. That is the price of becoming "Too Big to Fail". Well, like Dr. Faustus, these companies have made the deal with Mephistopheles and its tough titty as far as I'm concerned. The lesson to be learned- don't become "Too Big to Fail".
It's the gov't's fault
Seriously. 2 years from now when unemployment is at 12 or 14%, it will be the gov't's fault. What idiot is going to work at these companies now when they know full and well that their pay is tied not to their performance or the market but to the political wimps... I mean whims of the government?
It's the tax question in reverse. Instead of asking how much of a millionaire's money should go to taxes, it's asking how much should a millionaire be allowed to make.
In the end, these guys will be left paying the highest taxes while working for what an upper-middle class family makes. That's no incentive to strive to be a leader in your business OR to even strive to lead your business to success.
As much as I don't like apple or microsoft, where would we be today (technology wise) if not for the "greed" of Gates and Jobs?
@ Brian Fantana (responding to your points)
I will respond to your points. Henry Paulson with the blessing of Bush (who is not a fiscal conservative) at the request of Obama forced these entities to take the bailout funds. These companies had no choice.
2) Conservatives and Libertarians don't hate America. They only hate the fact that leftist, progressives, whatever they're called this week are moving America away from the principles on which it was founded. individual liberty, small central government, and low taxes. These three ideals are an antithesis to what leftists, progressives, liberals, whatever they're called this week, believe.
The smug arrogance of this woman almost made me put my fist through my computer monitor.
Brian/Jimmy
Your schizoid tendencies are showing. "And I dont want to hear the crybaby conservatives whine that 'Obama forced them to.'" then later..."Finally, if they did not take the money that was offered, then they would all have been fired and unemployed right now." Now you are arguing with yourself. Get back on the meds!!!
liberal = hypocrite
Brian Fantana is an idiot
Conservatives hate America? If we hated America then we'd keep our mouths shut and sit back and watch as you Liberals destroy it. The reason we comment and protest is exactly because we DO care. As a typical liberal you have no idea what the facts are and open your mouth just to prove your ignorance. When the banks and other institutions accepted the bailout money there were no such restrictions on executive pay. Congress changed the conditions of the bailout AFTER they accepted it. If you borrowed money from a bank and signed your name to the documents then the bank changed the conditions of the loan so that they could cap your salary that would be illegal. But not if it's the Congress. They can change the law at whim. Which is why the banks are in such a damn hurry to pay back the loans. The govt lied to them and is now trying to take them over. Get your facts straight, idiot.
@Brian Fantana
There are to many factors to bitch about this. If the mortgage companies hadn't been forced to make sub-primes by CRA, etc. If the financial companies hadn't bought the securities backed by those loans, etc. If they hadn't taken the bailout, etc. It is a long list and YOU just don't care about the truth anyway, so why go into it. Just look at your idiotic question. "Why do conservatives hate America?" You KNOW that has no basis in truth but you come up with it anyway.
Some tried to give back
If I'm not mistaken, some of the companies DID try to give back or not take the money, but they were strong-armed by the administration.
Brilliant Strategy
Four Steps to Socialism
Step 1 - Force banks to take handouts Step 2 - Slash executive pay at those banks Step 3 - Sit back and watch executives leave Step 4 - Sit back and watch banks try to hire executives for almost no cash Step 5 - when the banks fail to hire quality executives and start to go under again, nationalize the banks
PresBO's Pay Cuts for CEOs...
Liz Warren says CEO's have to 'take the pain' along with taking the tarp money... Okay, how about NOT giving them the TARP money and let them 'take the pain' of going bankrupt?
If government stays out of its intervention with private enterprise, these CEO guys would have to 'take the pain' from their loss of profits and bankruptcy or at least being replaced by their shareholders.
Free markets work if we allow them to really be free to fail. Yes Liz, let them feel the pain... but not at the expense of taxpayers. Government should never have provided these 'bail-out' funds to start with. Let them fail, and let the market absorb their residual assets and fill the needs of their clients.
Its Time
Who is John Galt?
Pay Cuts
Neal Amazing he's trying to rein in pay for wall street, but meanwhile back at the ranch, Michelle has a covey of handmaidens on about a million dollar per year payroll to take care of her every need. Simply amazing that the liberals and media (sorry for being redundant) don't recognize this power grab.
These guys (CEO's) are screwed.
The CEO's are screwed. Paulson made these guys take bailout money and now Obama comes along and wants to limit their salaries.
There are two things here: 1) Anytime and every time that the government hands out money there are always strings attached.
2) Many CEO's will probably either go to a more business friendly climate, (with Obama in charge, it isn't the USA), or they will really go Galt and retire. The up and comer CEOs will probably just go to a more business friendly jurisdiction.
Get Out
Pay it back ASAP, even if you have to start liquidating assets. This is only the beginning of the Marxist meddling. The Bolsheviks want to run those companies like their own personal fiefdoms. It may not be long before they say you are not permitted to pay the funds back, and must accept permanent control over internal and external business operations from Washington bureaucrats.
Karma
Well, if they did not want pay cuts, then they did not have to accept government money. And I dont want to hear the crybaby conservatives whine that "Obama forced them to." Well, first he didnt force anyone to and second, if these idiots knew how to run their businesses properly then they wouldnt be in this position. Finally, if they did not take the money that was offered, then they would all have been fired and unemployed right now. Why do conservatives hate America?
BailOut Recipients
Nothing but an emotional plea to those who have no understanding how Wall St. works.
Search Boortz.com
