Breaking News - Obama's Pay Czar orders pay cuts

ViRedd said:

I'll bet you're tons of fun on date night.

Click to expand...

Resorting to personal attacks because you've been bested, yet again?

Awesome! I didn't see that coming from a mile away.

For the record, I have 2 kids, 2 jobs, and a full class load. I don't have time for "date night". My fiancee and I study together, that's our idea of quality time at the moment.

Yay Socialism!!

Good it's about damn time,,Before Obama everyone was getting there pay cut, Laid off, and having no more boneses,,While the Exects were exempt,,when in all reality the company could have saved many jobs by getting rid of the over payed top guy's that screwed most companaies anyhow.
I guess they think there immune to what's really happining in this fucked up economy,,,Payback is a Bitch

i don't really know what to think of this, except for who is next.

The government isn't supposed to "own" GM in the first place. It's not a function of government in a free society.

Most here have no clue about capitalism, or economics.

I agree the Unions, and the Banks, and their shareholders should have never been bailed out, so why did they do it?

It's inexcusable for the shareholders to be getting rich off the backs of the average tax payer who doesn't even own a 401K. Think of it; hamburger flippers bailing out millionaires.

It's greed, but punishing the most talented (highest paid) people isn't right either, and it will only result in them going off shore to make their millions, and the general public probably doesn't even realize that these pay cuts are only a minuscule part of the TARP money.

TARP was $800 BN if I remember correctly, and then there is TARP 2.

And if we assume these executives make $100 Million per year, and we take 90% of that... 100 million is only 10% of 1 billion, so it's only a fraction of 1%.

Maybe it's a diversion, since the general public has no clue about how much money Goldman Sachs made this year.

Green Cross said:

Most here have no clue about capitalism, or economics.

I agree the Unions, and the Banks, and their shareholders should have never been bailed out, so why did they do it?

It's inexcusable for the shareholders to be getting rich off the backs of the average tax payer who doesn't even own a 401K. Think of it; hamburger flippers bailing out millionaires.

It's greed, but punishing the most talented (highest paid) people isn't right either, and it will only result in them going off shore to make their millions, and the general public probably doesn't even realize that these pay cuts are only a minuscule part of the TARP money.

TARP was $800 BN if I remember correctly, and then there is TARP 2.

And if we assume these executives make $100 Million per year, and we take 90% of that... 100 million is only 10% of 1 billion, so it's only a fraction of 1%.

Maybe it's a diversion, since the general public has no clue about how much money Goldman Sachs made this year.

Click to expand...

Hold the bus! The unions got bailed out? In which alternate dimension did this occur? (This lends an entirely new meaning to "string theory"...As the republican party unravels, alternate realities are created? Hmmm....just something to think about)

TARP 2? What the hell are you talking about? Seriously, google search "TARP 2", and see what comes up. There is NO "TARP 2", the only people going on about any "TARP 2" are at, surprise!, Faux News (and any other outlet unfortunate enough to pick up the disaster of a "news story" that is Faux's "reporting" of "TARP 2").

Now that we've got THAT out of the way, let me address the statement in BOLD.

It's greed, but punishing the most talented (highest paid) people isn't right.

"most talented"? But didn't you just say:

It's inexcusable for the shareholders to be getting rich off the backs of the average tax payer who doesn't even own a 401K.

Okay, so they got rich by exploiting the taxpayer.. the average working person, right? And that's TALENT? A talent for which they deserve to be paid in MILLIONS of dollars that you just agreed they are making at the expense of EVERYONE ELSE AND THE ECONOMY?

THAT'S TALENT?!!!!!!11ELEVEN?!!!

doobnVA said:

Honestly, Vi, you don't want to fuck with me when it comes to either the WaPo, or the Washington Times, or anything else that goes on in DC. I could hop in my car and be at the White House before you could respond to this post.

Click to expand...

i can see russia from my house.

lolololol

As someone who was against the bailouts from the beginning, I am indifferent to this story. Those companies chose to make the deal - now they pay the fiddler. When you dance with the Devil he calls the tune.

And yes, I am fully aware of who was on watch when this whole bailout nonsense started. But as I am not a Republican or a Democrat it is irrelevant to me. I did not care for the bailouts when an R was in the White House and the Ds ran Congress. And I do not approve of it now that the Democrats run the whole shebang.

Now I will object if this action becomes the precedent for limiting all salaries/bonuses. That's where I will draw the line.

fdd2blk said:

i can see russia from my house.

lolololol

Click to expand...

You should at least be able to see Mexico from your house, and a good deal of the Pacific Islands and Asia, too.

Johnnyorganic said:

As someone who was against the bailouts from the beginning, I am indifferent to this story. Those companies chose to make the deal - now they pay the fiddler. When you dance with the Devil he calls the tune.

And yes, I am fully aware of who was on watch when this whole bailout nonsense started. But as I am not a Republican or a Democrat it is irrelevant to me. I did not care for the bailouts when an R was in the White House and the Ds ran Congress. And I do not approve of it now that the Democrats run the whole shebang.

Now I will object if this action becomes the precedent for limiting all salaries/bonuses. That's where I will draw the line.

Click to expand...

I think everyone in their right mind would draw the line there. Fortunately, the government can't control the salaries/bonuses of any institutions aside from those it "bailed out" and are under government control. Since the wealthy industry influence is still largely in control of the government, it's not likely that a sweeping "maximum federal wage" for executives would be instituted, as that would be detrimental to the financial interests of those who hold the wealth produced by industry.

Green Cross said:

Can you believe this sh^T? A pay czar - who probably has never run a business - is cutting top paid executives salaries by some 90%! These poor souls are already experiencing communism in America. You're next

Click to expand...

Not happy about all the czars and the execs. getting payed huh?

Were you bitching 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 years ago about the czars?
I hope you were, because under W there were MORE czars than there are now.

About the execs. being "poor souls". that shit is just outright laughable, Are you serious man?

I wish I was the "poor soul" receiving Millions in salary for running my company into the ground (remember all the bailouts?). I have 0 sympathy for them...If run my business into the ground I pay the consequences, not the taxpayers.

Who isn't guilty of, at some point, being on the government dole? Student loans are now monopolized by the Government. Catch em in the servitude to Government trap before they're even in the workforce, eh? The statists will control all pay, if they get there leftist way....

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html

• APRIL 4, 2009

"Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He's been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with "adverse" consequences if its chairman persists. That's politics talking, not economics.


Think about it: If Rick Wagoner can be fired and compact cars can be mandated, why can't a bank with a vault full of TARP money be told where to lend? And since politics drives this administration, why can't special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? Our prosperity has never been based on the political allocation of credit -- until now."

Pretty soon they will realize they can just cut every single persons pay and have it funneled directly into the treasury to pay for more largesse! YAY!

NoDrama said:

Pretty soon they will realize they can just cut every single persons pay and have it funneled directly into the treasury to pay for more largesse! YAY!

Click to expand...

While voting themselves pay raises...

I like the pay cut....Damn greedy bastard...Don't reward failure

ChChoda said:

Who isn't guilty of, at some point, being on the government dole? Student loans are now monopolized by the Government. Catch em in the servitude to Government trap before they're even in the workforce, eh? The statists will control all pay, if they get there leftist way....

Click to expand...

Student loans are NOT monopolized by the government. Not even close. Do you know why more people are turning to Stafford Loans now over private loans? Because they can't fucking get a PRIVATE loan, because the banks aren't lending any money!! Not to mention that the government subsidized loans are NEED BASED, rather than credit-score based, and you don't have to pay on them while you're in school unless you CHOOSE to.

In other words, the government loans are BETTER for students than private loans, and easier to qualify for. They have a low, fixed interest rate and there are programs in place that offer partial loan "forgiveness", essentially erasing portions of your debt in exchange for public service. Private lenders offer NOTHING besides the money you need, with a higher interest rate and very few options for deferment, and NO forgiveness options. Which sounds better to you?

londonfog said:

I like the pay cut....Damn greedy bastard...Don't reward failure

Click to expand...

No kidding. I think the pay cut isn't enough, personally. These clowns will still end up with millions of dollars in bonuses this year.

It kills me how people say "but these are the most talented people!" Talented at what? At running a company into the ground and then relying on TAXPAYER money to bail them out? They're lucky they still have JOBS, and they should be thankful they are going to earn WELL OVER the salary of the average citizen who bailed their asses out this year.

You don't reward failure. Bringing the entire financial sector and subsequently, the entire WORLD to its knees because of your own greed is a HUGE FAIL.

But yeah, let's pay these jackasses millions of dollars. Give me a break!

The only meritorious reward for a failing corporation should be bankruptcy dissolution.
Bailing out a failed corporation is entirely wrong and boneheaded. Never should have happened.
However the Govt. assisted Corps have to dance to the tune of the Feds now.

This sets a tragic precedent for the vestiges of our once free market system.
So sad.