livendive 8 #1 September 25, 2008 Doesn't it strike anyone else as "odd" that the guy Bush tapped to run herd on all these bailouts and to save these banks was one of the very same overpaid CEOs who ran these companies into their current position? Paulson's compensation in his seventh year as CEO of Goldman Sachs (2006) was 16.4 million dollars. So Bush thinks he ought to be in charge of saving them with our dollars? Wow! Apparently his appointment as Treasury secretary was the ultimate golden parachute! Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #2 September 25, 2008 24 views and no comments? Am I really the only one who sees corruption here? He's pushing what's probably the biggest welfare program in our nation's history, to save his own company! This adminstration has been VERY good for a) the oil companies, b) Halliburton, and c) Goldman Sachs (if this bailout goes through). I don't want to be one of those crazy conspiracy theorists, but maybe I'm becoming one anyhow? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #3 September 25, 2008 Quote24 views and no comments? Am I really the only one who sees corruption here? He's pushing what's probably the biggest welfare program in our nation's history, to save his own company! This adminstration has been VERY good for a) the oil companies, b) Halliburton, and c) Goldman Sachs (if this bailout goes through). I don't want to be one of those crazy conspiracy theorists, but maybe I'm becoming one anyhow? Blues, Dave Giving him control of $700B with no oversight is really putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #4 September 25, 2008 That is the sound of the right wing neo-cons hoping no one notices. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #5 September 25, 2008 And who confirmed him, exactly, Jeanne? Ahhh...I see. I don't think it odd at all to go to the Treasury department for a financial matter. Perhaps some do. "I would not go to my money department to lead the solution to a monetary crisis because..." would be the sentence I'd like them to complete. I'd live with disappointment, no doubt. I disagree with the bailout 100%, BTW. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #6 September 25, 2008 I guess you dont see a pattern here do you.....now be a good little frog in your pan of nearly boiling water.Isnt it a little late to decry what the administration is doing??? As I brought up in another thread... tangentially...what is another trillion dollars after so much has already been squandered into the trillions of dollars of debt that... wait for it........ WHICH administrations ran up????? Like how much of the national debt is George's excellent adventure in the sandbox???? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #7 September 25, 2008 Discretionary spending - Republican. Entitlement spending - Democrat. Which is greater? The latter. Deal with it. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #8 September 25, 2008 Quote Discretionary spending - Republican. Entitlement spending - Democrat. Which is greater? The latter. Deal with it. - Reagan, Bush, Bush = climbing debt increase / haywire budget - Clinton = shrinking debt increase / balanced budget Who's plan works the best? It's only been 28 years, do we need 4 or 8 more to be sure the neo-con plan sucks? What do we need, 15, 18, 20 trillion dollars in debt? When are ya happy? You tell me, Anvil, and we'll set the debt there so we can start fixing it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #9 September 25, 2008 You have no desire to address the debt because you have no desire to place every single entitlement program on the table for modification/cancellation. You instead wish to increase them - health care for instance. When you cease calling for increased entitlement programs, come see us. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #10 September 25, 2008 You gotta ask yourself.. how many people were helped by entitlement spending.. on a per person/ per dollar. On the flip side.. How many millions of dollars has it cost to kill one Iraqi... or is it how many billions to kill one Al Queda leader. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #11 September 25, 2008 No, I don't. Nor do I care. The $$ has been expended. If you were interested in solving the debt problem, neither would you. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #12 September 25, 2008 Quote And who confirmed him, exactly, Jeanne? Ahhh...I see. I don't think it odd at all to go to the Treasury department for a financial matter. Perhaps some do. "I would not go to my money department to lead the solution to a monetary crisis because..." would be the sentence I'd like them to complete. I'd live with disappointment, no doubt. I disagree with the bailout 100%, BTW. How about, "I would not go to the guy who created this mess, because, well, he created this mess." As for who confirmed him? It was the GOP controlled Senate, and on a short schedule at that. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #13 September 25, 2008 He created this mess? How so, exactly? He lobbied the Congress in '95 to strengthen the CRA to facilitate government pressure on the banking industry to make stupid loans? I don't think so. Then again, I haven't checked. Get on that and get back to me. He forced idiots to enter into inadvisable contracts? How so, exactly? then again, I haven't researched that - I assume that one person as head of one bank did not engineer a massive wave of idiots going to both himself and his competitors to obtain loans they had no hope of repaying. I could be wrong...but I don't think so. I would think ANYONE would go to their money guy - or possibly DoCommerce - to take the executive branch's lead on this. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #14 September 25, 2008 Quote He forced idiots to enter into inadvisable contracts? How so, exactly? then again, I haven't researched that - I assume that one person as head of one bank did not engineer a massive wave of idiots going to both himself and his competitors to obtain loans they had no hope of repaying. I could be wrong...but I don't think so. Nope, but he was the chief of one of five banks that chose to encourage and heavily invest in those loans despite knowledge of their risks. It's not the actions of the individual homebuyers that placed the national economy at risk. It takes LOTS of such bad loans, distributed across lots of markets to pull that off. And that's exactly what Goldman Sachs, Bear Stearns, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers, and Merrill Lynch gave us. Paulson is stepping in to save exactly two of those companies, one of them being his last and most profitable employer, Goldman Sachs. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #15 September 25, 2008 Banks encouraged by the government via CRA's 1995 revisions. And all those morons are to blame as well. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
