[$tinkle]

so i was looking over the link you put up toshi, & found this, keeping in mind this is widely understood to be a stimulus pkg (i.e., fund stuff that otherwise is being held back due to recent hard times)

Business $870,000,000​

so, one tenth of one percent is going directly toward business, and the rest toward gov't programs? i can understand you want infrastructure spending, but like any other bloated program, there's a long drawn out process of requesting/submitting RFPs, awarding contracts, slowly trickling out money to make up for what had to be front-loaded by an interested private party, and oversight is hard to come by.

whenever my company bids on a piddly $10M program where we're the only viable candidate, this can still take months from drafting a proposal until the first dollar falls into our bucket. all the while there are mouths to feed, clothe, & insure. not that i would suggest it should be done some other way, it just doesn't seem to match the advertised expediency of the measure.

need i remind anyone here of halliburton?

i'm glad the republicans are finally showing leadership (you lot may see it as pissing & moaning) about this borderline fraudulent pkg, even if it is too little too late. isn't anyone else here commenting that the democrats in the house weren't united in this, and that most republican senators did break ranks?

 

[ohio]

so, one tenth of one percent is going directly toward business

What about the billions going to the banking and auto industries? By my calculations it's more like 50%.

For a free-marketer you sure don't have faith in business to adapt and survive.

 

[$tinkle]

i'm all for letting the banks fail, and for getting labor out of the auto industry (not retroactive, i realize, so it would be foolish to hope for this)

 

[$tinkle]

here's a web site number to track stuff http://www.recovery.gov/

 

[IH8Rice]

so when am i getting my $13??

 

[$tinkle]

i can has?

 

[Defenestrated]

and for getting labor out of the auto industry (not retroactive, i realize, so it would be foolish to hope for this)

Sounds like the dream platform for the "Regressive Party".

Not to mention that in order to accomplish it you would have to limit the freedom to organize/associate.

Right wing totalitarianism.

 

[$tinkle]

Not to mention that in order to accomplish it you would have to limit the freedom to organize/associate.

Right wing totalitarianism.

you know that for the most part i'm a free market capitalist, right?

 

[Defenestrated]

Then just consider unions as a market force, like everything else.

Not that I agree.

 

[Defenestrated]

Might as well pull this out again.

 

[IH8Rice]

i personally think thats a stupid idea

 

[stevew]

Re-title that "What you wish it could do for us."

 

[SkaredShtles]

Ahhh... nice class-envy poster.

 

[Defenestrated]

It really is, I mean look at all the good a meager 4.2% tax on the richest 3 million Americans could do.

 

[SkaredShtles]

It really is, I mean look at all the good a meager 4.2% tax on the richest 3 million Americans could do.

I'm not rich and I still say f**k the people who want to redistribute OTHER peoples' wealth.

 

[ohio]

I'm not rich and I still say f**k the people who want to redistribute OTHER peoples' wealth.

Do you understand the progressive tax?

 

[SkaredShtles]

Do you understand the progressive tax?

Yes - and I say F**K 'em.

 

[Defenestrated]

Nothing says equal opportunity like the gini coefficient of a third world country.

But on topic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="640" height="505"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6gX13wJLe-M&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6gX13wJLe-M&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="505"></embed></object>

 

[IH8Rice]

I'm not rich and I still say f**k the people who want to redistribute OTHER peoples' wealth.

if i was one of the top 1%, i wouldnt want my money going to some poor schlub.
argue you all you want about it and say how wrong i am, why the fvk should i give my coin to somebody else?

my money would be in off shore accounts, before these greedy fvks get it....or, god forbid, id become canadian.

 

[Silver]

if i was one of the top 1%, i wouldnt want my money going to some poor schlub.
argue you all you want about it, why the fvk should i give my coin to somebody else?

Enlightened self-interest.

Giving away or paying a small proportion of your wealth via taxes is preferable to getting shot in the face so that a starving guy can feed your $3000 loafers to his family for dinner.

 

[Defenestrated]

if i was one of the top 1%, i wouldnt want my money going to some poor schlub.

my money would be in off shore accounts, before these greedy fvks get it....

It's funny how much worse it looks when you separate his post.

 

[IH8Rice]

Enlightened self-interest.

Giving away or paying a small proportion of your wealth via taxes is preferable to getting shot in the face so that a starving guy can feed your $3000 loafers to his family for dinner.

jealously of those who make the top 1% is something we will all have to live with my friend...even you.
why penalize them by taxing them twice....why not tax everyone who has a job twice?

It's funny how much worse it looks when you separate his post.

haha that is funny actually

 

[Defenestrated]

I couldn't resist. :biggrin:

 

[IH8Rice]

I couldn't resist. :biggrin:

i see you conveniently left out that part about becoming canadian...dont blame ya

 

[CRoss]

Damn, I knew if I only had a bridge across that creek my small business would do much better.

 

[Defenestrated]

So if I call Biden's office he would talk to me?

Fire up the soundboards!

 

[3D.]

I’m not a fan of the Keynesian method, but if your going to use it properly you need to accomplish two very important things.

1. Make certain the majority of the money is evenly dispersed (as best as possible) to the people, so that your spending becomes my earning and vise versa.

2. Direct portions of the “pump priming” to key industries that can not only create job opportunities right now, but also posses the ability to create jobs in the future.

Considering that the “people” of this country have received peanut shells in comparison to the banking systems caviar and steak three meals a day, we blew it on the first one. The essence of the Keynesian method and probably it’s most important rule is to never hoard the money. Giving such large chunks to the major banks which do not redistribute profit very well, is self damning and despicable.

Secondly, allowing them to spend such little on alternative energies and technologies was a major mistake. Our new industry for moving us along needed to be in this field. Talking about buying new fleets of high gas mileage vehicles for the government workers, retro fitting some panels in here and there, and attempting to “modernize” the auto makers is a laughable. 10% of U.S. land is capable of produce our total energy consumption with a surplus to sell to our neighboring countries. Mix in some geothermal plants and the business could be global. Building wind and panel farms alone of this size could give millions of people jobs for many years to come in thousands of different types of businesses. This all could be accomplished with just a small fraction of what we’ve already given to the corruption on wall street over the past two years alone.

This bill is kind of hard to talk about in a serious manner. The concept is delusional and for me, discussing the fluff that lies there in seems pointless. Grading each line item on it’s validity while the real fundamental problem is that all non-asset backed monetary systems will always eventually collapse regardless of how much credit you pump into them, seems to be almost off point.

What we are now doing with this borrowed money is no different than everyone taking out another line of credit for kitchen remodels nation wide, it has no real future or means of sustainability and without the injections of trillions from foreign countries (again) will not be able to pay for itself. This bill and the lack of executive order reversals makes it clear that other than having some great sounding words, ear candy, and the ability to throw chump change at well intentioned ideas for intellectuals to appease over, this administration is picking up where the Bush’s left off. At this point I have to ask, are we making decisions that will help us to avoid the bottom, or are we making them to get us to the bottom faster.

I won’t doubt the method to much though, the Keynesian approach has proven itself to work for it is what we have always used during the start up of wars, however, there usually isn't a group of major banks lined up first for massive bailouts totaling more than double the cost of the stimulis itself. I think if you’re going to follow the father of modern economics in his methods, you shouldn’t break his rules.

We currently have no base to stimulate and I think this stimulas package has the equivocal value to that of the McDonalds billboard sign… F-

 

[ohio]

Yes - and I say F**K 'em.

So you know that we've had a progressive tax since we first instituted a permanent income tax? And you believe the last 95 years to be a failure?

 

[Defenestrated]

The disproportionately wealthy pay a disproportionate amount of taxes, they aren't going to starve.

 

[SkaredShtles]

So you know that we've had a progressive tax since we first instituted a permanent income tax? And you believe the last 95 years to be a failure?

IMO income taxes were a bad idea right from the get-go.

And after calculating my own this year I'm even MORE convinced they have a room full of monkeys with typewriters to get the Tax Code written.

 

[3D.]

With a substantial stake in insuring swaps (gambling on the success of someone else’s stock) and therefore drowning in its demise, our government lets ben tell it like it’s an industry (swaps) that we can’t live without.

ben: telling irate lawmakers that he was also angry, but that the failure to act could have triggered an economic disaster.

So there goes another 30 billion of our money for some bad gambling and extravagant multi million dollar employee parties.

Way to reform corruption on wall street there Tim Geitner… but why would he put the crack down on his old neighborhood street, he wouldn’t, and that’s why the banks get the goods and the people get the tab.

Ahh, what 30 billion could do for our real problems

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/article5840962.ece

 

[$tinkle]

well that was fast: after one month, we're no longer on the precipice of economic doom:

Confronting misgivings, even in his own party, President Barack Obama mounted a stout defense of his blueprint to overhaul the economy Thursday, declaring the national crisis is "not as bad as we think" and his plans will speed recovery.

Challenged to provide encouragement as the nation's "confidence builder in chief," Obama said Americans shouldn't be whipsawed by bursts of either bad or good news and he was "highly optimistic" about the long term.

The president's proposals for major health care, energy and education changes in the midst of economic hard times faced skepticism from both Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill, as senators questioned his budget outlook and the deficits it envisions in the middle of the next decade.

But Obama, speaking to top executives of the Business Roundtable, expressed an optimistic vision and called for patience.

source

i s'pose by "being whipsawed" he does not mean members of congress who passed legislation w/o full review?

i wonder if keith olbermensche will have a special segment on this. it's nicely set up for a "gotcha" segment

 

[jimmydean]

I got a performance bonus today. I am stimulating the economy by buying crap of craig's list.

 

[ire]

I got a performance bonus today. I am stimulating the economy by buying crap of craig's list.

I'll help you stimulate the economy if you send some of that cash my way :biggrin:

 

[jimmydean]

I'll help you stimulate the economy if you send some of that cash my way :biggrin:

Sorry, I bought an LTZ400 to ride with my daughter this weekend (stupid rain)

 

[3D.]

This what I’m talking about, it’s corruption in most blatant form

Insurance giant AIG to pay $165 million in bonuses

WASHINGTON – American International Group is giving its executives tens of millions of dollars in new bonuses even though it received a taxpayer bailout of more than $170 billion dollars.

AIG is paying out the executive bonuses to meet a Sunday deadline, but the troubled insurance giant has agreed to administration requests to restrain future payments.

The Treasury Department determined that the government did not have the legal authority to block the current payments by the company. AIG declared earlier this month that it had suffered a loss of $61.7 billion for the fourth quarter of last year, the largest corporate loss in history.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has asked that the company scale back future bonus payments where legally possible, an administration official said Saturday.

This official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said that Geithner had called AIG Chairman Edward Liddy on Wednesday to demand that Liddy renegotiate AIG's current bonus structure.

Geithner termed the current bonus structure unacceptable in view of the billions of dollars of taxpayer support the company is receiving, this official said.

In a letter to Geithner dated Saturday, Liddy informed Treasury that outside lawyers had informed the company that AIG had contractual obligations to make the bonus payments and could face lawsuits if it did not do so.

Liddy said in his letter that "quite frankly, AIG's hands are tied" although he said that in light of the company's current situation he found it "distasteful and difficult" to recommend going forward with the payments.

Liddy said the company had entered into the bonus agreements in early 2008 before AIG got into severe financial straits and was forced to obtain a government bailout last fall.

The large bulk of the payments at issue cover AIG Financial Products, the unit of the company that sold credit default swaps, the risky contracts that caused massive losses for the insurer.

A white paper prepared by the company says that AIG is contractually obligated to pay a total of about $165 million of previously awarded "retention pay" to employees in this unit by Sunday, March 15. The document says that another $55 million in retention pay has already been distributed to about 400 AIG Financial Products employees.

The company says in the paper it will work to reduce the amounts paid for 2009 and believes it can trim those payments by at least 30 percent.

Bonus programs at financial companies have come under harsh scrutiny after the government began loaning them billions of dollars to keep the institutions afloat. AIG is the largest recipient of government support in the current financial crisis.

AIG also pledged to Geithner that it would also restructure $9.6 million in bonuses scheduled to go a group that covers the top 50 executives. Liddy and six other executives have agreed to forgo bonuses.

The group of top executives getting bonuses will receive half of the $9.6 million now, with the average payment around $112,000.

This group will get another 25 percent on July 14 and the final 25 percent on September 15. But these payments will be contingent on the AIG board determining that the company is meeting the goals the government has set for dealing with the company's financial troubles.

The Obama administration has vowed to put in place reforms in the $700 billion financial rescue program in an effort to deal with growing public anger over how the program was operated during the Bush administration.

That anger has focused in part on payouts of millions of dollars in bonuses by financial firms getting taxpayer support.

In his letter, Liddy told Geithner, "We believe there will be considerably greater flexibility to reduce contractual payments in respect of 2009 and AIG intends to use its best efforts to do so."

But he also told Geithner that he felt it could be harmful to the company if the government continued to press for reductions in executive compensation.

"We cannot attract and retain the best and brightest talent to lead and staff the AIG businesses, which are now being operated principally on behalf of the American taxpayers — if employees believe their compensation is subject to continued and arbitrary adjustment by the U.S. Treasury," Liddy said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090315/ap_on_bi_ge/aig_bonuses

 

[IH8Rice]

AIG is contractually obligated to pay a total of about $165 million of previously awarded "retention pay"

im sure if they didnt get their payment, the people would raise hell since it is under their contract to get that money....even though its just absolutely ridonculous.

 

[Defenestrated]

The question is, if the company failed then why are the executives getting bonuses in the first place? Contractual or not that is no way to reward good leadership haha...

Do they really need them, really, I bet they do ok...

 

[3D.]

im sure if they didnt get their payment, the people would raise hell since it is under their contract to get that money

you mean the big banks would raise hell… if you remember when congress was trying to get them to reveal what banks were getting the billions in pay out money (few weeks back) and they simply told congress and america that they couldn’t reveal this info, for fear that no one would do business with these recipients. BS

It seems like there just been a huge cash orgy and the tabs on us…

International law professor Richard Cummings, writing for Lew Rockwell.com, says, "Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has resisted calls from Congress that he release the names of the banks that were recipients of the bailout money the Fed gave to AIG to prevent it from collapsing. AIG insured its counterparties against losses from mortgage-backed derivatives. The Fed poured $85 billion into AIG, which paid out $37.3 billion of that money to counterparties that had purchased a certain type of derivative-based protection from AIG, called multi-sector credit default swaps.

"The counterparties have never been disclosed but the Wall Street Journal reported that they included Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, UBS and Deutsche Bank. AIG and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York have unwound many of these contracts. To do this, they offered to buy the CDOs (collateralized debt obligations) that were originally insured by those agreements. The counterparties sold these assets at a discount, but were compensated in full in return for allowing AIG to extricate itself from the obligations. The counterparties also got to keep the $37.3 billion in collateral, according to the Wall Street Journal.

"While Bear Stearns was collapsing, Goldman Sachs boasted that it had insulated itself by buying insurance against the mortgage-backed derivatives. As it turns out, it was, in fact, rescued by the Fed when it bailed out AIG. In 2007, Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman Sachs' CEO, received $70 million in compensation, including bonuses, $27 million in cash... At the time the New York Fed came to AIG's assistance, Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner was its head. Blankfein is still drawing down millions in compensation. The rationale for his compensation is the alleged profitability of Goldman Sachs, which raked in over $9 billion in 2006. It should also be noted that the bailout stopped Goldman stock from plummeting, thereby protecting not only Blankfein's fortune, but that of Hank Paulson, the former chairman of Goldman Sachs, who was Secretary of the Treasury under George W. Bush.

"This is perhaps the greatest financial scandal in American history but most Americans are totally ignorant of it. On top of this, the AIG bailout enabled John Thain to pay out billions in bonuses while he headed Merrill Lynch, just prior to its sale to Bank of America, a recipient of billions of bailout money, this while the unemployment rate is headed towards ten percent and the market collapse has caused losses in the trillions. Were the names of the banks made officially public, there would be cries of outrage so loud as to be deafening, making any further bailouts dubious for political reasons. And while Bernanke has said that he would not permit the big banks to fail, the looting of America by some of the richest and most powerful people, such as Blankfein and Thain, goes on, with no end in sight. Pandit the bandit now says Citigroup is profitable, enabling its stock to rise above a dollar, generating a temporary euphoria in the market. The cheers going up on CNBC can be heard all the way to Warren Buffett's coffers. And American tax payers are not only bailing out the American banks, they are also bailing out Europe."

Toni Reinhold of Reuters answers "Who got AIG's bailout billions?" "The Wall Street Journal reported... that some of the banks paid by AIG since the insurer started getting taxpayer funds were: Goldman Sachs Group Inc, Deutsche Bank AG, Merrill Lynch, Societe Generale, Calyon, Barclays Plc, Rabobank, Danske, HSBC, Royal Bank of Scotland, Banco Santander, Morgan Stanley, Wachovia, Bank of America, and Lloyds Banking Group."

 

[Defenestrated]

More evidence that capitalism is all too often, for lack of a better phrase, ethically retarded. Is it possible for these people to do the right thing?