Current Events

TOPICS:

10/19/08

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57

 ... 487

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

Varuka_Salt

Varuka_Salt

I'm lost
October 2006

OCT 18, 2008 10:05 PM

Are you fucking kidding me?
I know we have couple Wall Street insiders around here, so could one of the please explain to me how it is even possible to pay people more than the entire worth of the company?

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 18, 2008 10:14 PM

They are like French Aristocrats before the French revolution.

And there needs to be a similar resolution.

Coyotemike

Coyotemike

USA
May 2006

OCT 18, 2008 10:16 PM

For fuck's sake . . .

So, instead of Golden Parachutes, they're just going to take the money as bonuses?

leopold

leopold

Oakland, CA
January 2005

OCT 18, 2008 10:23 PM

hey think of this way at this rate, soon we wont be able to fund the war in Irag, or social security.

LimoWreck

LimoWreck

I'm lost
October 2007

OCT 18, 2008 10:27 PM

I think this really drives the point home.


At one point last week the Morgan Stanley $10.7bn pay pot for the year to date was greater than the entire stock market value of the business. In effect, staff, on receiving their remuneration, could club together and buy the bank.

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 18, 2008 11:20 PM

FearTheReaper said:
They are like French Aristocrats before the French revolution.

And there needs to be a similar resolution.



it would have been simpler to have not passed the bailout bill in the first place and let them eat the loss.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 18, 2008 11:21 PM

petepolly said:

FearTheReaper said:
They are like French Aristocrats before the French revolution.

And there needs to be a similar resolution.



it would have been simpler to have not passed the bailout bill in the first place and let them eat the loss.



Your knowledge and understanding of the situation is stunning. You should write a book.

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 18, 2008 11:42 PM

FlipsideReport said:
I think this really drives the point home.


At one point last week the Morgan Stanley $10.7bn pay pot for the year to date was greater than the entire stock market value of the business. In effect, staff, on receiving their remuneration, could club together and buy the bank.




I have a psychic impression, no wait for it,,,

I have a vision that you and most of the people who post here were in favor of the bailout,

That you all still think Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are idiots for opposing it,

That you all think I am a troll, for opposing it even though i posted a letter signed by hundreds of academic economists of wide variance in political views who said it was a mistake,

That you paid no attention at all when I posted references to the fact that the people who voted for the bailout had received on average more than 1.5 times the campaign contributions (from wall street or financial firms) of those who did not,

That shit like this is really a surprise to anyone who was paying attention to this plan, , ,

This was mugging of the taxpayers, nothing more. I am sure the guys collecting the million buck plus "discretionary" bonuses think of you guys with a smirk of thanks, as they ass rape the taxpayers.

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 18, 2008 11:49 PM

FearTheReaper said:

petepolly said:

FearTheReaper said:
They are like French Aristocrats before the French revolution.

And there needs to be a similar resolution.



it would have been simpler to have not passed the bailout bill in the first place and let them eat the loss.



Your knowledge and understanding of the situation is stunning. You should write a book.



I got bigger fish to fry.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 18, 2008 11:51 PM

petepolly said:

FearTheReaper said:

petepolly said:

FearTheReaper said:
They are like French Aristocrats before the French revolution.

And there needs to be a similar resolution.



it would have been simpler to have not passed the bailout bill in the first place and let them eat the loss.



Your knowledge and understanding of the situation is stunning. You should write a book.



I got bigger fish to fry.



I want to take a shower with you.

GrayRains

GrayRains

Twin Lake, MI
January 2008

OCT 19, 2008 12:00 AM

FearTheReaper said:

petepolly said:

FearTheReaper said:

petepolly said:

FearTheReaper said:
They are like French Aristocrats before the French revolution.

And there needs to be a similar resolution.



it would have been simpler to have not passed the bailout bill in the first place and let them eat the loss.



Your knowledge and understanding of the situation is stunning. You should write a book.



I got bigger fish to fry.



I want to take a shower with you.



Now there is a mental image I could have lived without...

wenis

wenis

San Francisco, CA
July 2006

OCT 19, 2008 12:03 AM

is this really surprising at all? really?

goatboy23

goatboy23

Vatican City
November 2003

OCT 19, 2008 12:34 AM

FearTheReaper said:
They are like French Aristocrats before the French revolution.

And there needs to be a similar resolution.



zoom image

RudieCantFail

RudieCantFail

Baton Rouge, LA
January 2006

OCT 19, 2008 12:35 AM

wenis said:
is this really surprising at all? really?



Not to anyone with at least a casual knowledge of history.

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 19, 2008 12:37 AM

FearTheReaper said:

petepolly said:

FearTheReaper said:

petepolly said:

FearTheReaper said:
They are like French Aristocrats before the French revolution.

And there needs to be a similar resolution.



it would have been simpler to have not passed the bailout bill in the first place and let them eat the loss.



Your knowledge and understanding of the situation is stunning. You should write a book.



I got bigger fish to fry.



I want to take a shower with you.



Like I said, I got bigger fish to fry.

Jace

Jace

San Francisco, CA
February 2004

OCT 19, 2008 01:00 AM

Raise your hand if you're surprised.

Maybe when wallstreet asks the government for money to fund its own private army people will start getting worried.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 19, 2008 01:35 AM

petepolly said:
it would have been simpler to have not passed the bailout bill in the first place and let them eat the loss.



Rates for one-month commercial paper fell to a three-week low after central banks joined forces to pump cash into money markets and government backed loans.

Average yields offered on the highest-rated commercial paper placed by dealers and due in 30 days fell 0.48 percentage point today to 3.45 percent, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Rates fell 0.83 percentage point this week to the lowest since Sept. 26 from a nine-month high of 4.28 percent.

``The infusion of capital by the government into the banking system should improve balance sheet health greatly and gradually, make unsecured lenders more comfortable,'' Barclays Plc analysts Piyush Goyal and Kurush Mistry said yesterday in a report.


link

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 19, 2008 02:12 AM

FearTheReaper said:

petepolly said:
it would have been simpler to have not passed the bailout bill in the first place and let them eat the loss.



Rates for one-month commercial paper fell to a three-week low after central banks joined forces to pump cash into money markets and government backed loans.

Average yields offered on the highest-rated commercial paper placed by dealers and due in 30 days fell 0.48 percentage point today to 3.45 percent, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Rates fell 0.83 percentage point this week to the lowest since Sept. 26 from a nine-month high of 4.28 percent.

``The infusion of capital by the government into the banking system should improve balance sheet health greatly and gradually, make unsecured lenders more comfortable,'' Barclays Plc analysts Piyush Goyal and Kurush Mistry said yesterday in a report.


link



1 they did not need the bailout bill to do that, the fed can loan money to banks w/o the bailout bill.

2 the bailout bill is aimed at the US government buying bad properties from idiots who should lose their money, as loaning poor people money on those terms was a moronic risk. That makes it stupid.

3. Them paying out "discretionary" bonuses just proves it was a rip off of the taxpayer.



FellOnEarth

FellOnEarth

Temecula, CA
April 2006

OCT 19, 2008 02:36 AM

I think there may have been brief mention of how to deal with this issue in the "Everyone Loves Green Crude" thread.

LimoWreck

LimoWreck

I'm lost
October 2007

OCT 19, 2008 05:09 PM

petepolly said:

FlipsideReport said:
I think this really drives the point home.


At one point last week the Morgan Stanley $10.7bn pay pot for the year to date was greater than the entire stock market value of the business. In effect, staff, on receiving their remuneration, could club together and buy the bank.




I have a psychic impression, no wait for it,,,

I have a vision that you and most of the people who post here were in favor of the bailout,

That you all still think Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are idiots for opposing it,

That you all think I am a troll, for opposing it even though i posted a letter signed by hundreds of academic economists of wide variance in political views who said it was a mistake,

That you paid no attention at all when I posted references to the fact that the people who voted for the bailout had received on average more than 1.5 times the campaign contributions (from wall street or financial firms) of those who did not,

That shit like this is really a surprise to anyone who was paying attention to this plan, , ,

This was mugging of the taxpayers, nothing more. I am sure the guys collecting the million buck plus "discretionary" bonuses think of you guys with a smirk of thanks, as they ass rape the taxpayers.



And I have a psychic impression that you like to sit and google your answers to whatever topic is at hand, do a hatchet job to fit your own opinions, and then slap it on here in a pathetic and laughable attempt to make us think that you're some kind of authority on all these subjects.

Guess what, Panda. It ain't working. So please don't condenscend to "know" what I, or any of these other posters, are in favor of based solely on our contributions, unless we're explicit in what we're for. Cuz, if you're so accurate on your "assumptions", then my above paragraph is just as valid.

And for the record, I'm not happy about the bailout, but we couldn't just sit on our hands and do nothing. Will it work? I can hope, just like everyone else. I doubt it'll be answer to all our problems. Not by a long shot, especially with some of the less than stellar points in the version of the bill that was passed. I don't think there's a single person in here who's happy that this version was passed. But you have to start somewhere.

Varuka_Salt

Varuka_Salt

I'm lost
October 2006

OCT 19, 2008 05:20 PM

Right again stuffing for brains, we all agree completely that the bailout was a wonderful thing. You're so fucking smart! You should run for president!

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 19, 2008 08:13 PM

FlipsideReport said:

petepolly said:

FlipsideReport said:
I think this really drives the point home.


At one point last week the Morgan Stanley $10.7bn pay pot for the year to date was greater than the entire stock market value of the business. In effect, staff, on receiving their remuneration, could club together and buy the bank.




I have a psychic impression, no wait for it,,,

I have a vision that you and most of the people who post here were in favor of the bailout,

That you all still think Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are idiots for opposing it,

That you all think I am a troll, for opposing it even though i posted a letter signed by hundreds of academic economists of wide variance in political views who said it was a mistake,

That you paid no attention at all when I posted references to the fact that the people who voted for the bailout had received on average more than 1.5 times the campaign contributions (from wall street or financial firms) of those who did not,

That shit like this is really a surprise to anyone who was paying attention to this plan, , ,

This was mugging of the taxpayers, nothing more. I am sure the guys collecting the million buck plus "discretionary" bonuses think of you guys with a smirk of thanks, as they ass rape the taxpayers.



And I have a psychic impression that you like to sit and google your answers to whatever topic is at hand, do a hatchet job to fit your own opinions, and then slap it on here in a pathetic and laughable attempt to make us think that you're some kind of authority on all these subjects.

Guess what, Panda. It ain't working. So please don't condenscend to "know" what I, or any of these other posters, are in favor of based solely on our contributions, unless we're explicit in what we're for. Cuz, if you're so accurate on your "assumptions", then my above paragraph is just as valid.

And for the record, I'm not happy about the bailout, but we couldn't just sit on our hands and do nothing. Will it work? I can hope, just like everyone else. I doubt it'll be answer to all our problems. Not by a long shot, especially with some of the less than stellar points in the version of the bill that was passed. I don't think there's a single person in here who's happy that this version was passed. But you have to start somewhere.



Giving taxpayer money to the idiots who lost the money was FAR from the only thing we could do.

LimoWreck

LimoWreck

I'm lost
October 2007

OCT 19, 2008 08:16 PM

petepolly said:

FlipsideReport said:

petepolly said:

FlipsideReport said:
I think this really drives the point home.


At one point last week the Morgan Stanley $10.7bn pay pot for the year to date was greater than the entire stock market value of the business. In effect, staff, on receiving their remuneration, could club together and buy the bank.




I have a psychic impression, no wait for it,,,

I have a vision that you and most of the people who post here were in favor of the bailout,

That you all still think Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are idiots for opposing it,

That you all think I am a troll, for opposing it even though i posted a letter signed by hundreds of academic economists of wide variance in political views who said it was a mistake,

That you paid no attention at all when I posted references to the fact that the people who voted for the bailout had received on average more than 1.5 times the campaign contributions (from wall street or financial firms) of those who did not,

That shit like this is really a surprise to anyone who was paying attention to this plan, , ,

This was mugging of the taxpayers, nothing more. I am sure the guys collecting the million buck plus "discretionary" bonuses think of you guys with a smirk of thanks, as they ass rape the taxpayers.



And I have a psychic impression that you like to sit and google your answers to whatever topic is at hand, do a hatchet job to fit your own opinions, and then slap it on here in a pathetic and laughable attempt to make us think that you're some kind of authority on all these subjects.

Guess what, Panda. It ain't working. So please don't condenscend to "know" what I, or any of these other posters, are in favor of based solely on our contributions, unless we're explicit in what we're for. Cuz, if you're so accurate on your "assumptions", then my above paragraph is just as valid.

And for the record, I'm not happy about the bailout, but we couldn't just sit on our hands and do nothing. Will it work? I can hope, just like everyone else. I doubt it'll be answer to all our problems. Not by a long shot, especially with some of the less than stellar points in the version of the bill that was passed. I don't think there's a single person in here who's happy that this version was passed. But you have to start somewhere.



Giving taxpayer money to the idiots who lost the money was FAR from the only thing we could do.



Like letting the economy go down the shithole more than it already has by resolutely NOT doing anything because its too much "government intervention" is any better?

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 19, 2008 08:32 PM

FlipsideReport said:

petepolly said:

FlipsideReport said:

petepolly said:

FlipsideReport said:
I think this really drives the point home.


At one point last week the Morgan Stanley $10.7bn pay pot for the year to date was greater than the entire stock market value of the business. In effect, staff, on receiving their remuneration, could club together and buy the bank.




I have a psychic impression, no wait for it,,,

I have a vision that you and most of the people who post here were in favor of the bailout,

That you all still think Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are idiots for opposing it,

That you all think I am a troll, for opposing it even though i posted a letter signed by hundreds of academic economists of wide variance in political views who said it was a mistake,

That you paid no attention at all when I posted references to the fact that the people who voted for the bailout had received on average more than 1.5 times the campaign contributions (from wall street or financial firms) of those who did not,

That shit like this is really a surprise to anyone who was paying attention to this plan, , ,

This was mugging of the taxpayers, nothing more. I am sure the guys collecting the million buck plus "discretionary" bonuses think of you guys with a smirk of thanks, as they ass rape the taxpayers.



And I have a psychic impression that you like to sit and google your answers to whatever topic is at hand, do a hatchet job to fit your own opinions, and then slap it on here in a pathetic and laughable attempt to make us think that you're some kind of authority on all these subjects.

Guess what, Panda. It ain't working. So please don't condenscend to "know" what I, or any of these other posters, are in favor of based solely on our contributions, unless we're explicit in what we're for. Cuz, if you're so accurate on your "assumptions", then my above paragraph is just as valid.

And for the record, I'm not happy about the bailout, but we couldn't just sit on our hands and do nothing. Will it work? I can hope, just like everyone else. I doubt it'll be answer to all our problems. Not by a long shot, especially with some of the less than stellar points in the version of the bill that was passed. I don't think there's a single person in here who's happy that this version was passed. But you have to start somewhere.



Giving taxpayer money to the idiots who lost the money was FAR from the only thing we could do.



Like letting the economy go down the shithole more than it already has by resolutely NOT doing anything because its too much "government intervention" is any better?



Umm dude were you paying attention at all to what the stock market did AFTER the bailout passed?

The DOW Industrial average was at 11143 the day the bailout passed (28 September 2008) and the day after it fell over 500 points, it is now at 8852. The month before the bailout it was at 11500.

Looking at those FACTS, not BS Bush administration is feeding you, or BS wall street bankers who are stuffing your money in their pockets are feeding you, I'd say it was a pooch screw.

LimoWreck

LimoWreck

I'm lost
October 2007

OCT 19, 2008 08:45 PM

petepolly said:

FlipsideReport said:

petepolly said:

FlipsideReport said:

petepolly said:

FlipsideReport said:
I think this really drives the point home.


At one point last week the Morgan Stanley $10.7bn pay pot for the year to date was greater than the entire stock market value of the business. In effect, staff, on receiving their remuneration, could club together and buy the bank.




I have a psychic impression, no wait for it,,,

I have a vision that you and most of the people who post here were in favor of the bailout,

That you all still think Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are idiots for opposing it,

That you all think I am a troll, for opposing it even though i posted a letter signed by hundreds of academic economists of wide variance in political views who said it was a mistake,

That you paid no attention at all when I posted references to the fact that the people who voted for the bailout had received on average more than 1.5 times the campaign contributions (from wall street or financial firms) of those who did not,

That shit like this is really a surprise to anyone who was paying attention to this plan, , ,

This was mugging of the taxpayers, nothing more. I am sure the guys collecting the million buck plus "discretionary" bonuses think of you guys with a smirk of thanks, as they ass rape the taxpayers.



And I have a psychic impression that you like to sit and google your answers to whatever topic is at hand, do a hatchet job to fit your own opinions, and then slap it on here in a pathetic and laughable attempt to make us think that you're some kind of authority on all these subjects.

Guess what, Panda. It ain't working. So please don't condenscend to "know" what I, or any of these other posters, are in favor of based solely on our contributions, unless we're explicit in what we're for. Cuz, if you're so accurate on your "assumptions", then my above paragraph is just as valid.

And for the record, I'm not happy about the bailout, but we couldn't just sit on our hands and do nothing. Will it work? I can hope, just like everyone else. I doubt it'll be answer to all our problems. Not by a long shot, especially with some of the less than stellar points in the version of the bill that was passed. I don't think there's a single person in here who's happy that this version was passed. But you have to start somewhere.



Giving taxpayer money to the idiots who lost the money was FAR from the only thing we could do.



Like letting the economy go down the shithole more than it already has by resolutely NOT doing anything because its too much "government intervention" is any better?



Umm dude were you paying attention at all to what the stock market did AFTER the bailout passed?

The DOW Industrial average was at 11143 the day the bailout passed (28 September 2008) and the day after it fell over 500 points, it is now at 8852. The month before the bailout it was at 11500.

Looking at those FACTS, not BS Bush administration is feeding you, or BS wall street bankers who are stuffing your money in their pockets are feeding you, I'd say it was a pooch screw.

Last time I checked the money wasn't even doled out yet. You expect the bailout to have a placebo effect or something?

And I've read where money has, and is, being handed out to executives. I also stated in the above post that this was not, nor do I believe, that this bailout is going to solve the financial crisis. And yes, I'll concede that the bailout money should NOT be going in to the pockets of CEOs. However, you can play Stuffed Panda Quarterbacking all day, criticizing the bailout, like EVERYONE else has been doing, but at the end of the day, doing nothing is the worst possible scenario.

Also, no person with half a brain believes jack shit what come's out of Bush's mouth. Even you know better than that one.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next