Oops. It's probably best that Liddy didn't drop his pants. Barney would have enjoyed that.
Printable View
Oops. It's probably best that Liddy didn't drop his pants. Barney would have enjoyed that.
Hope I’m not intruding here - just wanted to add me ¢¢. Its easy to pound on AIG, but we are ignoring one other important perpetrator in this whole economic mess. I watched some of the AIG hearing yesterday and while I think its outrageous to pay the $165 million in bonuses, I am more outraged by the utter hypocrisy of Congress. They laid the foundation in 1999 and 2000 by passing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 (CFMA). These two pieces of legislation opened the door for the sub-prime mortgage crisis and prevented the regulation of derivative trading, i.e., credit default swaps.
I know that some of you are not fans of Obama, but I can only imagine where we would be if McCain was our President with former Senator Phil Gramm of Texas at his side as Treasury Secretary. Gramm was the principal architect behind the GLBA and was also heavily involved in the passage of CFMA. I know its bad now, but can you image that fox (Gramm) guarding the hen house?
Congress is just as complicit as Wall Street in this economic disaster and every member who voted for the GLBA and CFMA should be outed to voters and should be held responsible along with Wall Street.
tropheee
House is debating a bill that would levy 90% tax on any bonuses paid after Jan 1 for firms receiving more than 5Billion from the government. I see it will need 288 votes - 2/3 - to pass. Anyone have a clue why the need for a 2/3 majority?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (discreetgent @ Mar 19 2009, 02:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>And next the Supremes will chime in that it is patently unconstitutionalQuote:
House is debating a bill that would levy 90% tax on any bonuses paid after Jan 1 for firms receiving more than 5Billion from the government. I see it will need 288 votes - 2/3 - to pass. Anyone have a clue why the need for a 2/3 majority?[/b]
Answer to 2/3. With a 2/3 majority the House can pass a bill without allowing amendments to be brought up and voted on.
PJ, why do you think the Supreme Court will do that, on what basis?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (atlcomedy @ Mar 19 2009, 11:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>LOL....Both!Quote:
Frank or Liddy? :blink:[/b]
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pjorourke @ Mar 19 2009, 01:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Quote:
And next the Supremes will chime in that it is patently unconstitutional[/b]
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (discreetgent @ Mar 19 2009, 01:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Moot point, it did not pass.Quote:
Answer to 2/3. With a 2/3 majority the House can pass a bill without allowing amendments to be brought up and voted on.
PJ, why do you think the Supreme Court will do that, on what basis?[/b]
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (WTF @ Mar 19 2009, 03:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Wrong. It passed the house.Quote:
Moot point, it did not pass.[/b]
DG: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100da...an-lawyers-say/
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pjorourke @ Mar 19 2009, 02:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Quote:
Well that's what I get for getting my news from Fox! Sorry PJ, I heard it wrong. You are correct You are correct You are correct You are correct You are correct....next time I'll wear nut'n but a sheet when I am confused!
I think you will agree that this is a waste of time.....3plus billion to Merril Lynch and we're talking about this. Where is Anna Nichole Smith when you need her!
This vote would not have been necessary had Congress not stripped the bonus ban from the recent stimulus package legislation. The provision was stripped out in the Senate Banking Committee chaired by Senator Dodd, but Dodd said he didn't do it. Funny thing though...........he received $104K in campaign money from whom else, AIG.
We have the best politicians that money can buy!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tropheee @ Mar 19 2009, 02:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Evidently 104k don't buy much!Quote:
. Funny thing though...........he received $104K in campaign money from whom else, AIG.
We have the best politicians that money can buy![/b]
Maybe we should set up a P4P website for the politicians.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tropheee @ Mar 19 2009, 02:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>RNC/DNC....I'm off to play around and then if I'm not to tired to play around again.Quote:
Maybe we should set up a P4P website for the politicians.[/b]
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tropheee @ Mar 19 2009, 03:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>I think there was one. See Spitzer, EliotQuote:
Maybe we should set up a P4P website for the politicians.[/b]
Gee, I'm amazed that the Treasury's plan to form public/private partnerships to buy up toxic assets hasn't been a screaming success. You think those people running billions in assets aren't anxious to dance with Barney Fudgepacker and have their profits taxed away retroactively? Who is John Galt?
I'm a Capitalist at heart, but I must say that Wall Street has brought this pox upon themselves.....I think a little fudge packing is appropriate.