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.
Doesn't it give everyone a warm fuzzy feeling to know that all that money we saved through welfare reform and doing away with those programs that fed, clothed, and housed poor children is now being spent 1000 times over to provide lavish parties, expensive "retreats", and millions of dollars in bonuses to the richest citizens?
No dude, I really didn't give it a second thought. By the way, you're COMPLETELY missing the point. You don't seem to understand, they received a MASSIVE bailout because of their incompetency & then turned right around, gave the government the finger & took money so these idiots could go buy a 3rd home.
Their losses ar enothing compared to how much the fedgov is in the red.
Yet the fedgov. is INCREASING spending and its workforce.
If they were not smart enough to put the bonus clause in the oraiginal bailout then i don't see it happening. Besides many so called bonuses to lower paid employeee is part of their pay system. It woulkd be liike many companies not applying commission. Obama seems to be playing to the maddening crowds rather than getting anything effective done.maybe if he wasn't still running for president he could get some plans on just how to reach those goals he keeps talking about and the confidence and markets may react. Berannke can't keep teh stock market up on his own forever;like we have seen lately.Administration talks the markeyts go down;Bernnake talks they go up.Differnce in clarity verus mixed signals.
Doesn't it give everyone a warm fuzzy feeling to know that all that money we saved through welfare reform and doing away with those programs that fed, clothed, and housed poor children is now being spent 1000 times over to provide lavish parties, expensive "retreats", and millions of dollars in bonuses to the richest citizens?
I know, I feel all cozy inside when I think about it. Yay!!!!
Supposedly the fedgov. is going to get its money back from these companies(sure) whereas the welfare queens are money losers.
So you don't believe these companies are going to pay the government back. So they are most certainly "money losers" as well. So why defend them? Why defend their right to pay bonuses with our money?
(I won't even get into it about welfare recipients, so as not to derail)
Their losses ar enothing compared to how much the fedgov is in the red.
Yet the fedgov. is INCREASING spending and its workforce.
But somehow the excesses of it are ignored.
When no one else in an economy has the capacity to spend, taking away the last entity with enough credit to borrow and keep spending makes no sense.
So, yes it does make sense for the feds to keep spending until the market recovers. You can disagree ideologically, but McCain and Bush did the same thing.
Obama has no interest in nationalizing business, but we are in desperate times and businesses need shoring up to minimize the impact of the highs and lows of free markets.
Doesn't it give everyone a warm fuzzy feeling to know that all that money we saved through welfare reform and doing away with those programs that fed, clothed, and housed poor children is now being spent 1000 times over to provide lavish parties, expensive "retreats", and millions of dollars in bonuses to the richest citizens?
the criminals who were responsible for cutting all the welfare programs are now the ones reaping the rewards, all these criminal Reaganites who think the poor should die or try to join their little party
It was all part of the Reagan war on the lower class and it has been a success, a complete success
So you don't believe these companies are going to pay the government back. So they are most certainly "money losers" as well. So why defend them? Why defend their right to pay bonuses with our money?
(I won't even get into it about welfare recipients, so as not to derail)
What I am 'defending' is the fedgov. CANNOT dictate to a company what it will pay its workers simply because of public opinion.
The bailouts that Obama supported were rushed and ill planned,this is the result.
When no one else in an economy has the capacity to spend, taking away the last entity with enough credit to borrow and keep spending makes no sense.
So, yes it does make sense for the feds to keep spending until the market recovers. You can disagree ideologically, but McCain and Bush did the same thing.
It is not the governments place,you are now seeing the results of it.
I wonder how loud the crying will be when it is YOUR pay and benefits being attacked as 'lavish' and extravagant....
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.
) whereas the welfare queens are money losers.
