Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Barney Frank Wants A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary! (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Beyond-AIG-A-Bill-to-let-Big-Government-Set-Your-Salary-42158597.html - broken link)
Dumbocrats are running wild to destroy America!
Hope you libs are happy!
Your salary? Not mine, because my company has not been bailed out. If you are bailed out, the party bailing you out should have some say in your salary policy. For example a freeze in pay increases etc. Of course when the debt it paid off, you'll get full contol again. It is ridiculous to just hand them the money and let them do whatever they want with it. We have already seen what happens then. Bonuses, parties, office remodels etc, etc
The 2008 bailouts and nationalizations were a big mistake. BIG MISTAKE. They did nothing but open the door to more bailouts and nationalizations.
Unless this was part of the deal when the money was offered(remember the fedgov. could have said no...) I cannot see how this is legal.
The board of Directors chose to offer those bonuses and perks...
What you seem to want is the fedgov. to be able to retroactively decide what they are to be paid.
I do not think ANY athlete or entertainer should be paid more than $10/hour....but it isn't my place to dictate such a thing.
You seem to favor such a thing....
Your right, the government should have foreseen this which is what the feds said last year when this came up, but Congress unfortunately did not pick it up at that time until the AIG bonus came into play again. You can't have it both ways, do the tax payers want to get the money back in a timely fashion instead of uhm NEVER, which is what will occur if this companies are allowed to keep running amuck.
But in the event (god forbid) anything like this should ever happen, like a need for a bailout 5, 10 or 20 years from now, better safe than sorry.
Your salary? Not mine, because my company has not been bailed out. If you are bailed out, the party bailing you out should have some say in your salary policy. For example a freeze in pay increases etc. Of course when the debt it paid off, you'll get full contol again. It is ridiculous to just hand them the money and let them do whatever they want with it. We have already seen what happens then. Bonuses, parties, office remodels etc, etc
The 2008 bailouts and nationalizations were a big mistake. BIG MISTAKE. They did nothing but open the door to more bailouts and nationalizations.
Shouldn't this have been agreed upon BEFORE the deal was made?
Isn't deciding AFTER you have loaned the money a little like loan sharking....
Shouldn't this have been agreed upon BEFORE the deal was made?
Isn't deciding AFTER you have loaned the money a little like loan sharking....
Of course that does fit the fedgov.
They didn't, they rushed through it, now what? Should they continue to run through what little money they have on bonuses and parties instead of trying to pay off their debt. Yes the government is going back after the fact, because they made a HUGE and STUPID mistake that they need to rectify.
I believe until the Tax payers are paid back, they should not receive millions of dollars in bonus money. Thats crazy. They should still receive their contracted salary, but not bonuses. Until all of this started occuring i really had no idea how much they actually recieved as well as the perks they were giving themselves. I can't recall which bank it was last year that received heated responses because they were still planning on taking their employees to a carribean trip for a wee. Like WTF...
Obama and his merry band of thieves cannot and should not retroactively d*** with a contract. There was no precondition with the bailout money. Additionally, existing salaries are set by contract and the law demands these agreements be honored, assuming these individuals remain employed.
They didn't, they rushed through it, now what? Should they continue to run through what little money they have on bonuses and parties instead of trying to pay off their debt. Yes the government is going back after the fact, because they made a HUGE and STUPID mistake that they need to rectify.
Let them fail.
What would happen if the fedgov. didn't bail them out?
Obama and his merry band of thieves cannot and should not retroactively d*** with a contract. There was no precondition with the bailout money. Additionally, existing salaries are set by contract and the law demands these agreements be honored, assuming these individuals remain employed.
Again in my post I said they should STILL RECEIVE their contracted salary. But the Bonus and the extra perks should be cut out...How can ANYONE received a bonus without profits. Thats crazy. I find this amazing, Everyone was in an uproar when it was learned last year about the bonuses, concerns and vacations and then again this year with the bonus for AIG. Now the government is looking to mitigate this slap in the taxpayers face due to enept planning on the government part last year its "Obama and his merry band".
You can't have it both ways..What happens next time Bank of America decides that they want to take all of their employees to Las Vegas for 5 days, to celebrate the 4th of July. Everyone will be once again blaming the administration and Congress. Damn if you do damn if you don't.
There seems to be some confusion (or, as I suspect, out-and-out lying). The definition of "your" is not "those who work for companies receiving taxpayer funds."
To the OP: Your title is misleading. Did you actually read the article?
I agree with Barney Frank 100% on this. I believe that if you receive government funds, you have to play by the governments rules regarding pay. This will force companies to think twice about taking hand outs and make them find alternative methods of making a profit.
Shouldn't this have been agreed upon BEFORE the deal was made?
Isn't deciding AFTER you have loaned the money a little like loan sharking....
Of course that does fit the fedgov.
We don't know what language and conditions the bailouts came with, but in many cases when the governemnt bails you out they end up owning enough of the stock of that company, and therefore become eligible for calling some of the shots at these companies. If I had taken bailout money, I'd try to pay it off asap to get the govt off my back. This is the direct result of Bush-Obama policy of bailing out companies as opposed to letting them fail. Now they have been bailed out, and they are already crying about how unfair it is because they don't get to call all the shots anymore. It's like selling 51% of your shares to a competetor, and they crying about the purchaser making desicions you don't like.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
