Bank pay control, UNBELIEVABLE

[RetiredGySgt]

16 pages of idiocy. None of you read the story that are supporting it, as you all keep talking about bail out money. The Congress plans to tell EVERYONE what they can pay their employees. Not just banks they gave money too. And they will use a nefarious guide of " will it cause problems to pay that much" as their reason.

AGAIN I repeat, CITE for me the Constitutional Article, clause or Amendment that gives the Congress the power to dictate to private Banks, companies and corporations what they can or can not pay their executives.

It is ILLEGAL. Not only is it unconstitutional it is ILLEGAL. The Federal Government can not order private firms to violate legal contracts just because they think it is to much pay.

 

[WillowTree]

16 pages of idiocy. None of you read the story that are supporting it, as you all keep talking about bail out money. The Congress plans to tell EVERYONE what they can pay their employees. Not just banks they gave money too. And they will use a nefarious guide of " will it cause problems to pay that much" as their reason.

AGAIN I repeat, CITE for me the Constitutional Article, clause or Amendment that gives the Congress the power to dictate to private Banks, companies and corporations what they can or can not pay their executives.

It is ILLEGAL. Not only is it unconstitutional it is ILLEGAL. The Federal Government can not order private firms to violate legal contracts just because they think it is to much pay.

cept for yours truly. I posted twice that this was going to include everybody. Kerry On.

 

[Darkwind]

Sure...they are the government. They can willy nilly ignore contracts can't they? That Rule of Law thing is just a myth.

Oh, I don't know. They are ignoring the contracts of many CEO's when they cut pay by 95%.

Seems the unions should be fair game as well.

The CEOs are the ones making the decisions to accept government money. The unions not so much.

What does that have to do with the unions being protected because of contracts? After all, the CEO's also have contracts. You don't seem to have much problem with their contracts being violated.

They may have taken the bail out money (when they should have lost their jobs by the business going bankrupt) but that does not give the government the right to violate a legal contract.

 

[DavidS]

I heard yesterday that one of these guys is going to have to take a 50% pay cut. From $38 million all the way down to $19 million.

I wonder how he'll manage to get by?

That's not the point, Kojak. The point is we have the government running the bank.

Can't be any worse than the private sector running the bank. Look what caused this recession to begin with!

 

[Oddball]

If there is any naivete it is on the part of the companies and the employees that think the federal government is going to pay their bonuses.

If I took a job with one of these banks, knowing they took bailout money, I'd not be sure of what my bonus would be. But if you think they are that stupid then perhaps you should question their judgment. Not that I expect you will.

Irrelevant.

The lack of an Article 2 enumerated power means that the Executive is operating beyond the range of his lawful bounds.

Were this Shrubbie or McGoofball, I'd be saying the same thing.

The government is breaking no contracts. The banks agreed to certain terms when they took the money...one of which was not paying reckless bonuses. If anyone is breaking the contract it is the banks. But I understand the typical mindset of people who think their own bad actions are always the fault of the government.

As for Willow's continuous whine about Goldman Sachs...they paid back the money months ago.

BUT, we should demand the government reregulate the banking industry period instead of just focusing on this one aspect.

Ame®icano already posted the information which shows your assertion to be bogus here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/1642089-post179.html

Please try to keep up on current events better.

 

[WillowTree]

Compensation Czar Says Pay Cuts Ordered for Good of Companies, Taxpayer








The administration has drawn charges from legal experts that it is overstepping constitutional bounds by retroactively changing the terms of the bailout money and fiddling with contracts














Compensation Czar Says Pay Cuts Ordered for Good of Companies, Taxpayers - Political News - FOXNews.com

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

When the banks took the TARP money a year ago did they know that if they took the money there would be strings attached, that the government was going to control pay? Was that part of the deal initially or is this just all coming about now?

Nope, because Bush believes in unregulated welfare for rich people.

Too bad most sane people don't.

They shouldn't have gotten the money at all, so it's a moot-point for me.

Golly... that is incredibly reasonable...

Thus the principle would apply to every circumstance... where the principle is valid for the 'Rich People' it applies to the po' folk as well.

Yet, the principle seems to be one sided... where the Po' be ENTITLED to bailouts... without string or consequence...

Crazy huh...

Glad to see people on the Left coming around on the whole entitlement 'bailout' farce.

It's immoral isn't it? Taking money from people and expecting no form of accountability or concequence... that's called THEFT and theft is WRRrrrooonnng!

 

[Meister]

I heard yesterday that one of these guys is going to have to take a 50% pay cut. From $38 million all the way down to $19 million.

I wonder how he'll manage to get by?

That's not the point, Kojak. The point is we have the government running the bank.

Can't be any worse than the private sector running the bank. Look what caused this recession to begin with!

Yeah...it was the government. The government wanted the lending practices eased so the people that can't afford homes buy them. Look where that got us. Let's keep with reality.....

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

16 pages of idiocy. None of you read the story that are supporting it, as you all keep talking about bail out money. The Congress plans to tell EVERYONE what they can pay their employees. Not just banks they gave money too. And they will use a nefarious guide of " will it cause problems to pay that much" as their reason.

AGAIN I repeat, CITE for me the Constitutional Article, clause or Amendment that gives the Congress the power to dictate to private Banks, companies and corporations what they can or can not pay their executives.

It is ILLEGAL. Not only is it unconstitutional it is ILLEGAL. The Federal Government can not order private firms to violate legal contracts just because they think it is to much pay.

You're right of course... and such can be expected in SPADES where people concede their responsibilities to the state for their healthcare... as they have conceded their responsibilities to the state for their financial viability; having failed to bear their responsibility to reject immoral, unsound, unsustainable federal policy which could only lead to precisely the failures which they inevitably realized...

Nothing particularly complex here...

 

[Ravi]

Irrelevant.

The lack of an Article 2 enumerated power means that the Executive is operating beyond the range of his lawful bounds.

Were this Shrubbie or McGoofball, I'd be saying the same thing.

The government is breaking no contracts. The banks agreed to certain terms when they took the money...one of which was not paying reckless bonuses. If anyone is breaking the contract it is the banks. But I understand the typical mindset of people who think their own bad actions are always the fault of the government.

As for Willow's continuous whine about Goldman Sachs...they paid back the money months ago.

BUT, we should demand the government reregulate the banking industry period instead of just focusing on this one aspect.

Ame®icano already posted the information which shows your assertion to be bogus here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/1642089-post179.html

Please try to keep up on current events better.

How about you show that the bonuses in question fall into those categories?

 

[Oddball]

The bonuses were structured into those contracts.....DUUUH.

 

[bodecea]

16 pages of idiocy. None of you read the story that are supporting it, as you all keep talking about bail out money. The Congress plans to tell EVERYONE what they can pay their employees. Not just banks they gave money too. And they will use a nefarious guide of " will it cause problems to pay that much" as their reason.

AGAIN I repeat, CITE for me the Constitutional Article, clause or Amendment that gives the Congress the power to dictate to private Banks, companies and corporations what they can or can not pay their executives.

It is ILLEGAL. Not only is it unconstitutional it is ILLEGAL. The Federal Government can not order private firms to violate legal contracts just because they think it is to much pay.

I read the article. That bolded part is simply not true. Thanks for playing.

 

[Ravi]

The bonuses were structured into those contracts.....DUUUH.

You've no idea who's bonuses they are examining.

 

[Sinatra]

This will be yet another backlash moment agains this group of Dems.

They are overreaching time and time again.

Perhaps due to Barney Frank's insistence on a reach-around form of politics???

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Compensation Czar Says Pay Cuts Ordered for Good of Companies, Taxpayer








The administration has drawn charges from legal experts that it is overstepping constitutional bounds by retroactively changing the terms of the bailout money and fiddling with contracts














Compensation Czar Says Pay Cuts Ordered for Good of Companies, Taxpayers - Political News - FOXNews.com

Nothing new here either...

This is exactly what they did to the Auto-Dealerships... which they will no doubt use as precedence...

Again, no one really stood up when the Hussein regime scuttled thousands of perfectly legal, long standing; some which had remained in good standing for a CENTURY!; contracts where the contratees... were in most cased perfroming in excess of 100% of the performance criteria... of the Auto-Dealerships.

So why would it be a surprise to anyone that such behavior would continue?

Such is the nature of the Marxist... Now where one buys a goat, one should not be surprised when after they take delivery of that goat; that anything which comes in front of that goat will be consumed... and that what remains of those things will be CRAP...

IT'S WHAT THEY DO!

The next thing we'll be hearing are the SHOCKS AND AWES... of those who can't understand how the US economy was destroyed... despite the fact that every where Marxist find power, the economy over which they see, is DESTROYED.

Best grab a clue kids... before it's too late.

The last fiscal year realized deficit spending which represented 10% of the US economy...

A rate which hasn't been realized since roughly 1942... and you old farts and home schoolers will recognize that date as being the period in which the US was engaged in funding the planets war against Fascist tyranny... FYI... deficit spending topped out at 13% just prior to the end of that war...

Anyone see a world war happening around ya?

Now... and here's where it gets ugly...

What happens if such comes to pass... How do we respond to that? Spend 23% in deficit?

Now either these clowns are overt, literal subversives; or they're the most incompetent imbeciles on the face of the earth.

An illiterate tribal cheif from the plains of Africa couldn't screw it up this bad... and HE CAN'T EVEN FREAKIN' READ...

So it's fairly unikely then, that its ignorance...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Goldman Sachs ALLEGEDLY paid back the money we gave them. You simply do not know if that is true.

.

I hear we allegedly landed on the moon, too.

GS and GE have paid back the money...and are not issuing loans backed by the government any longer. Other companies have not paid back the money and continue to issue loans backed by the government.

It really isn't rocket science.

So I take it that - somehow - you have PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE of this events - you have seen photocopies of the cancelled checks - or are you just gullible and naive.

.

Contumacious, you are sounding just goofy. Add something worthwhile, or shut up.

 

[Oddball]

The bonuses were structured into those contracts.....DUUUH.

You've no idea who's bonuses they are examining.

You didn't even read through #179, did you?

Once again, your willful naivete routine isn't flying.

 

[Sinatra]

Compensation Czar Says Pay Cuts Ordered for Good of Companies, Taxpayer








The administration has drawn charges from legal experts that it is overstepping constitutional bounds by retroactively changing the terms of the bailout money and fiddling with contracts














Compensation Czar Says Pay Cuts Ordered for Good of Companies, Taxpayers - Political News - FOXNews.com

Nothing new here either...

This is exactly what they did to the Auto-Dealerships... which they will no doubt use as precedence...

Again, no one really stood up when the Hussein regime scuttled thousands of perfectly legal, long standing; some which had remained in good standing for a CENTURY!; contracts where the contratees... were in most cased perfroming in excess of 100% of the performance criteria... of the Auto-Dealerships.

So why would it be a surprise to anyone that such behavior would continue?

Such is the nature of the Marxist... No where one buys a goat, one should not be surprised when after they take delivery of that goat; that anything which comes in front of that goat will be consumed... and that what remains of those things will be CRAP...

IT'S WHAT THEY DO!

The next thing we'll be hearing are the SHOCKS AND AWES... of those who can't understand how the US economy was destroyed... despite the fact that every where Marxist find power, the economy over which they saw, is DESTROYED.

Best grab a clue kids... before it's too late.

The last fiscal year realized deficit spending which represented 10% of the US economy...

A rate which hasn't been realized since roughly 1942... and you old farts and home schoolers will recognize that date as being the period in which the US was engaged in funding the planets war against Fascist tyranny... FYI... deficit spending topped out at 13% just prior to the end of that war...

Anyone see a world war happening around ya?

Now... and here's where it gets ugly...

What happens if such comes to pass... How do we respond to that? Spend 23% in deficit?

Now either these clowns are overt, literal subversives; or they're the most incompetent imbeciles on the face of the earth.

An illiterate tribal cheif from the plains of Africa couldn't screw it up this bad... and HE CAN'T EVEN FREAKIN' READ...

So it's fairly unikely then, that its ignorance...

One of the better postings in here.

Well said.

 

[Meister]

I hear we allegedly landed on the moon, too.

GS and GE have paid back the money...and are not issuing loans backed by the government any longer. Other companies have not paid back the money and continue to issue loans backed by the government.

It really isn't rocket science.

So I take it that - somehow - you have PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE of this events - you have seen photocopies of the cancelled checks - or are you just gullible and naive.

.

Contumacious, you are sounding just goofy. Add something worthwhile, or shut up.

If those are the guidelines, you should have been shut up from the beginning.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

The government is breaking no contracts. The banks agreed to certain terms when they took the money...one of which was not paying reckless bonuses. If anyone is breaking the contract it is the banks. But I understand the typical mindset of people who think their own bad actions are always the fault of the government.

As for Willow's continuous whine about Goldman Sachs...they paid back the money months ago.

BUT, we should demand the government reregulate the banking industry period instead of just focusing on this one aspect.

Ame®icano already posted the information which shows your assertion to be bogus here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/1642089-post179.html

Please try to keep up on current events better.

How about you show that the bonuses in question fall into those categories?

Interesting...

You want to project that you're in possession of some inside skinny... which refutes his position...

Which you could have demonstrated, by simply posting the information to which you're referring...

YET... Ya didn't...

Which sadly... for you... establishes your argument as one which appeals to the ignorance you strike through your failure to cite that which you imply is truth.

If there is something distinct about those whom you claim are being isolated... state the distinction.

If there is some principle which is distinct in what those would-be individuals are being compensated, versus what any other employee under contract is being paid... STATE THAT DISTINCTION...

And as always... Your failure to do so, will constitute a concession on your part, that your fallacious point amounts to mindless drivel.