By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - You will earn what Obama wants you to earn.

TheRealMafoo on 22 March 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/us/politics/22regulate.html?_r=1&hp

“The new rules will cover all financial institutions, including those not now covered by any pay rules because they are not receiving federal bailout money. Officials say the rules could also be applied more broadly to publicly traded companies, which already report about some executive pay practices to the Securities and Exchange Commission.”



Looks like Obama now wants to regulate executive pay, even if they didn't get bailout funds.

Even if you ran your company well, you will no longer be allowed to make a large salary.

Why? because Obama doesn't like it. No other reason really. Yes, welcome to the new dictatorship.

 



Around the Network
akuma587 on 22 March 2009

I guess you missed the fact that 9 out of 10 people in this country are furious at how much the Wall Street executives are making when they were the ones who caused this crisis.

I am not saying this is right, but are you criticizing Obama for doing what even a lot of conservatives have been suggesting?



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

MontanaHatchet on 22 March 2009

Alright, whose idea was it to bring back the political flamebait fad? I thought this died back in 2008 but I guess some people love to get attention.

TheRealMafoo, you will continue to be wrong over and over, and it's only a matter of time until someone comes in here and points out just how wrong you are (as always). If you hate Obama and his "dictatorship" so much, why not actually do something productive about it? Move to another country, or even run for public office. But no, you have to make threads complaining about his policies on Vgchartz. What are you hoping to accomplish? Bait some other videogame enthusiasts into another tired political debate?

These sorts of threads definitely make Off Topic more interesting, but not necessarily better.



 

 

SciFiBoy on 22 March 2009



Go Obama, I Choose You, Obama Uses Socialist Economic Policy, KO's Republicans, Good Job Obama



TheRealMafoo on 22 March 2009
MontanaHatchet said:
Alright, whose idea was it to bring back the political flamebait fad? I thought this died back in 2008 but I guess some people love to get attention.

TheRealMafoo, you will continue to be wrong over and over, and it's only a matter of time until someone comes in here and points out just how wrong you are (as always). If you hate Obama and his "dictatorship" so much, why not actually do something productive about it? Move to another country, or even run for public office. But no, you have to make threads complaining about his policies on Vgchartz. What are you hoping to accomplish? Bait some other videogame enthusiasts into another tired political debate?

These sorts of threads definitely make Off Topic more interesting, but not necessarily better.

 

Odd, never saw you post this kind of thing with all the Bush hate threads. You have been on my ass with almost every Obama post. If you don't like them, don't read them.

And Akuma, this article is not just talking about Wall Street. It's talking about Wall Street, ALL BANKS, and possibly other companies.

And can you please link me an article that say's conservatives are for the government limiting executive pay of private companies, regardless of there financial situation?



Around the Network
kabhold on 22 March 2009
TheRealMafoo said:
MontanaHatchet said:
Alright, whose idea was it to bring back the political flamebait fad? I thought this died back in 2008 but I guess some people love to get attention.

TheRealMafoo, you will continue to be wrong over and over, and it's only a matter of time until someone comes in here and points out just how wrong you are (as always). If you hate Obama and his "dictatorship" so much, why not actually do something productive about it? Move to another country, or even run for public office. But no, you have to make threads complaining about his policies on Vgchartz. What are you hoping to accomplish? Bait some other videogame enthusiasts into another tired political debate?

These sorts of threads definitely make Off Topic more interesting, but not necessarily better.

 

Odd, never saw you post this kind of thing with all the Bush hate threads. You have been on my ass with almost every Obama post. If you don't like them, don't read them.

And Akuma, this article is not just talking about Wall Street. It's talking about Wall Street, ALL BANKS, and possibly other companies.

And can you please link me an article that say's conservatives are for the government limiting executive pay of private companies, regardless of there financial situation?

Montana's bold-  That's unfair and unpatriotic...  If you don't like it shut up or get out.  That's backwards thinking.  Disgusting.

RealMafoo bold- Ya I agree.  He's the Democrat's rock star.  People adore this man.  But I understand, If it was Ron Paul I would feel the same way.

As for the topic... at a glance I hate it.  But I need to read more for a legitimate response.  I'll be back.

 



pastro243 on 22 March 2009

You dont seem to like Obama. Well, the world had to tolerate Bush for all those years, its your turn now. Besides, how does it affect you that AIG executive have lower salaries, they fuck up the economy and get saved by your goverment and still they get bonuses.



- Our album on spotify https://open.spotify.com/album/56mEbEgyBYGzcDyZ1eMQ1v?si=hYKgir5YRSCrzywgGmV4oQ

- Our videoclip 

- My manga: https://www.webtoons.com/en/challenge/blanca-the-world/list?title_no=313068

akuma587 on 22 March 2009

Man, Mafoo is a professional at ignoring the facts. Nowhere in this article does it say that the administration has adopted these rules yet. And it says it is still being debated what they will actually be. So you are misrepresenting the entire scope of the debate. You can't criticize someone for doing something before they have actually done it.

Not to mention you are ignoring the fact that the only reason some of the "healthy" banks are alright is BECAUSE the government prevented a black hole from forming in the financial market. Do you really think all those banks would be "healthy" if Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had collapsed, or AIG had collapsed, or Citigroup had collapsed, or Bank of America had collapsed? These banks business models have their assets tied at the hip. If one goes down, it can bring everyone down with it.

Related poll on salary caps:

http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2009/02/09/daily59.html?ana=from_rss

Almost two-thirds of the responders to last week’s Business Pulse survey said executive salaries at companies receiving large amounts of federal bailout money should be capped at $500,000.

“Salaries should be capped when taxpayers foot the bill,” said 71 percent. “Let the free market determine compensation,” said 18 percent. “Let’s focus on the bigger issue of getting the country out of recession,” said 10 percent.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

kabhold on 22 March 2009
akuma587 said:

Man, Mafoo is a professional at ignoring the facts. Nowhere in this article does it say that the administration has adopted these rules yet. And it says it is still being debated what they will actually be. So you are misrepresenting the entire scope of the debate. You can't criticize someone for doing something before they have actually done it. (1)

Not to mention you are ignoring the fact that the only reason some of the "healthy" banks are alright is BECAUSE the government prevented a black hole from forming in the financial market. Do you really think all those banks would be "healthy" if Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had collapsed, or AIG had collapsed, or Citigroup had collapsed, or Bank of America had collapsed? These banks business models have their assets tied at the hip. If one goes down, it can bring everyone down with it.

Related poll on salary caps:

http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2009/02/09/daily59.html?ana=from_rss

Almost two-thirds of the responders to last week’s Business Pulse survey said executive salaries at companies receiving large amounts of federal bailout money should be capped at $500,000.

“Salaries should be capped when taxpayers foot the bill,” said 71 percent. “Let the free market determine compensation,” said 18 percent. “Let’s focus on the bigger issue of getting the country out of recession,” said 10 percent. (2)

1. Oh, I strongly disagree.

2. There is a difference between that and this:

The new rules will cover all financial institutions, including those not now covered by any pay rules because they are not receiving federal bailout money. Officials say the rules could also be applied more broadly to publicly traded companies, which already report about some executive pay practices to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

I agree if there is tax payer money involved, but not all companies

 



TheRealMafoo on 22 March 2009
pastro243 said:
You dont seem to like Obama. Well, the world had to tolerate Bush for all those years, its your turn now. Besides, how does it affect you that AIG executive have lower salaries, they fuck up the economy and get saved by your goverment and still they get bonuses.

 

The world had to tolerate Bush hate threads for 8 years, it's your turn now.

As for the AIG bonuses, AIG had not choice. They were contractually obligated to reward those contracts (thanks to Dodd).

If I was president, I would not have bailed them out in the first place. I would have made them file bankruptcy, and the courts could have then regulated the hell out of them.

That's why bankruptcy exists, so government can bail out companies who can't make it on there own,  but in turn government gets to regulate how you run, so things like this don't happen. Just giving a corrupt company billions is a bad idea.