CNBC host: Wall Street companies can’t ‘be run well’ by those making under $250,000.
CNBC host: Wall Street companies can’t ‘be run well’ by those making under $250,000.
As several bloggers and television pundits have noted, CNBC has consistently advocated on behalf of the interests of the rich during the recent financial crisis. Indeed, in an interview with Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) today, CNBC host Mark Haines made the curious claim that Americans who earn under $250,000 per year — or 98 percent of the population — can’t run Wall Street companies:
HAINES: Let’s get back to what I regard as a fundamental issue here. I know it’s politically unpopular, politically incorrect. I know it goes against all of the populist indignation that’s out there right now. But you can’t really, it seems to me, expect that these Wall Street companies are going to be run well by a bunch of people who don’t make more than $250,000.
Watch it:
Of course, Wall Street has been run so smoothly under millionaire CEOs. Haines also seems to be criticizing the management ability of America’s small business owners, the vast majority of whom do not earn over $250,000 in gross income per year.
It’s just like when the Allies were victorious over Nazi Germany in World War II, when we occupied the country, we left a lot of Nazis in place because they were the ones who made the trains run on time and the bureaucracy function properly, etc. And it was distasteful, but you needed them.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Since they have been run into the toilet by people making over $250,000, where is your argument?
March 19th, 2009 at 7:56 pmCNBC host: Wall Street companies can’t ‘be run well’ by those making under $250,000.
– - Nor, apparently, by those making OVER $250K.
March 19th, 2009 at 7:56 pmLet’s take a vote. This azzhat says you can’t run a Wall Street company making $250,000. The pirates running the companies have been making much more and tanked the whole thing.
All in favor of converting Wall Street into a theme park, say aye.
March 19th, 2009 at 7:59 pmAye.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:00 pmFor 200,000…can I try?
(and if it doesn’t work out, I promise my severance package will be extremely reasonable… 1 million, tops!)
March 19th, 2009 at 8:01 pmHitler didn’t drive the trains.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:02 pmI would venture to say that they aren’t being run very well by those making over, say $250,000 a year. Why not give the janitor the job, couldn’t do any worse, and only makes $22,000 a year.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:03 pmDuhhh, we is just dumb ol’ po’ folks.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:04 pm…sorry, but MY GOD, I can’t stand the arrogance of some of these people. It speaks to the nature of the republicans as the party of the rich. They think the rest of us, including their own “useful idiots”, are too stupid to run the country because we didn’t inherit wealth or earn it through unconscionable, exorbitant salaries. Really, who can actually “earn” $100M? They better be curing cancer on a daily basis…by laying on hands.
Hoodathunk, aye, but I ain’t takin my wallet in there…
March 19th, 2009 at 8:04 pmArchie Bunker, off topic all the time, guaranteed!
March 19th, 2009 at 8:05 pmYes, it was Mussolini who got the Italian Fascist trains to run on time… Hitler’s trains had VERY nefarious cargo (human). It is time for these people of poor character to get out of the way of those who do know how to run business for the benefit of the people, not the CEOs.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:05 pmHere’s an idea (and thank you, belac) how about we hold a lottery and pick new CEO’s for Wall Street companies? Don’t have to worry they will screw things up any worse than they are and we may just find a TP poster who can lead AIG out of the outhouse.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:05 pmArchie and on topic. Sort of like Republican and responsible.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:09 pmThis guy, like his boss (CNBC), is a Wall Street, RepubliCon stooge. CNBC, like Faux News, two of a kind, a couple of frauds.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:11 pmThe clowns on wall street lost money hand over fist.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:11 pmFor a hundred grand I’ll not show up for work and lose nothing, thereby outperforming the lot of ‘em!
What I would really like is a 6 figure bonus for not doing my job. Talk about sweet.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:13 pmWho says you only need one person making $250k running these companies? For what they paid Pandit, Thain, and the rest of the cretins we could hire 25 people to be CEO of CitiChaseAIG.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:13 pmOK, Arch, Rangel’s in the video, but that’s not the effing topic. Please link to tax issues that Rep Rangel to support your off topic claim if you must, then STFU.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:13 pmArchie is angry because people that have the legal authority to write tax laws did so, but they didn’t give a tax break to the rich. Elections have consequences Archie.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:14 pmArchie, is AIG handling any of your investments?
I thought not.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:14 pmTranslation of Haines statement:”Only greedy people can run Wall Street companies”.
Why then Japanese,South Koreans and Chinese executives are beating our executives at every level,except huge pay and bonuses….? !!!
Surprise…
March 19th, 2009 at 8:14 pmCEO’s are the jobs we should be outsourcing to India… there’s got to be some grad’s from the Indian School of Business just itching to school these MBA’s for $250,000 a year…
March 19th, 2009 at 8:16 pmLink, Archie, link. It looks something like this ‘ Archie’s BS Link here
March 19th, 2009 at 8:16 pmAs they say . . . this stuff writes itself.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:16 pmWhat Mark Haines meant was that he didn’t intend to be a lapdog for Wall Street manipulators making “Chump change”, a mere $250′000.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:17 pmArchie, I feel for you. I know you want to believe what your buddy Rush and company tell you but you don’t make enough nickles here for them to take you seriously.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:19 pmUnfortunately, there is a mythology of managers that holds up the idea that managers have something special, unavailable to other people.
Then if you father is a manager, you start higher up in the organization and have the connections to make it higher up the ladder.
Kind of like “blue blood” or Plato’s Republic wanting to introduce a myth of the elite having hereditable blood made of gold.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:20 pmArchie, death threats are against the law.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:21 pmThat excludes 95% of our population.
So in Haines’ mind it is the dollar amount you acquire that determines your level of competence.
I recommend Paris Hilton as the new AIG ceo.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:22 pmSo you think the law only applies to other people Archie? There seems to be a lot of that attitude in the Republican ranks.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:24 pmSo, by inference, if you make them, Archie, they aren’t. Or rather things that you say have no meaning.
I can agree with that.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:26 pmI can see Archie likes to toss around insults when cornered. I have seen a lot of wingnut trolls do exactly the same thing.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:28 pmHaines makes no logical sense.
If people making $250,000 are incapable of running a big corporation, how does he compare that to the greedy idiots who make millions per year and have run corporations into the ground?
Frankly, I am quite sure that there are people here who are quite capable of doing a better job than Haines and make much more sense doing it.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:28 pmI guess the American public just doesn’t appreciate how much a cocaine & hooker habit costs…
March 19th, 2009 at 8:28 pmArchie B Says:
Dr. Hussein Matt Says
Let me guess. You weigh about 375, rarely shower, haven’t dated in yrs and you love anyone with a (d) after their name, right?
Project much, Archie?
March 19th, 2009 at 8:29 pmWall Street is buckling under the weight of interest-only-pick-a-payment-securities-backed mortgages, and still they call themselves “talent” and demand bonuses (now under the guise of “retention”, to retain this luscious talent).
On the other hand, Steve Jobs accepts $1 a year and rallied his company’s stock price to $200, not cashing in on a dime. Apple isn’t in dire straights.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:29 pmTranslation: some rich millionaire bastards think that only rich millionaire bastards can do business with other rich millionaire bastards. I mean, forget about business knowledge and working your way up, if the CEO doesn’t own a 70-foot yacht and diamond-encrusted golf clubs, then he’s not in a position to do business.
Is that the logic they’re following? Because, looking at AIG and Enron, I don’t think it’s been working very well for them rich millionaire bastards.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:30 pmPerhaps you should provide links as evidence of your allegations Archie. Without evidence, your position is quite weak.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:31 pmJudging from the state of the Wall Street management, my dog could do as good a job. He certainly couldn’t crew it up worse.
And I would get to handle his offshore accounts.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:31 pmArchie B Says: Two hands on my keyboard, and my wanker inside Madam Blowup.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:34 pmMr. Haines, I don’t think that word means what you think it means.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:34 pm“CNBC host: Wall Street companies can’t ‘be run well’ by those making under $250,000.”
They couldn’t be run any worse.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:35 pmYes, I saw the link you posted, although I think your accusation of a death threat might be a bit strong. After reading through the comments you linked to, it seems Archie may have been attempting to be sarcastic. Probably not a good idea to threaten to either hang or shoot Palin, even if you are trying to be snarky.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:36 pmArchie=don’t look into the light
March 19th, 2009 at 8:39 pmS&L debacle in the 80’s. Wall Street collapse in 2008. Bank failures in the 1930s. Airlines can’t stay out of bankruptcy. Enron was a complete farce. Dot Com bubble, etc, etc.
Can we finally now all get past the conservative GOP battle cry that govt is terrible at running things and only free market enterprises can be successful??
How many more examples of THAT being wrong do you need??
March 19th, 2009 at 8:39 pmArchie B Says:
matty=none too bright.
Says the dim-bulb who revealed his true intent toward the GOP goddess of 2008.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:40 pmArchie B Says:
Keep lying matty, I’ll keep flagging.
And TP admin will keep pissing on your confederate flagging.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:42 pmI’m sure it’s none to bright down in your bunker, Archie.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:44 pmAre you still using incandesant bulbs? Compact fluorescents last much longer, you know. Not that it will matter much when the power goes out.
Archie B Says:
Sock alert
Too much information, Archie.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:45 pmI usually don’t feed the trolls, but Archie, what the Hell are you talking about?
March 19th, 2009 at 8:47 pmYou’re a loser Archie, not long for this blog… we don’t tolerate death threats, even against cow meese.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:53 pm99% of the actual work is being done by employees making less than $250,000. Without having to juice the company to pay all those bonuses, the companies would probably do better in the long run.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:53 pmLook…Any good hooker will tell ya…If you have the talent to f#ck that many people that hard, you deserve to get paid well.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:54 pmThe Republican killer mentality had to seep onto their own turf at some point. Archie’s type simply cannot drink enough blood.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:54 pmYes, but you’re special Archie… flag on…..
March 19th, 2009 at 8:56 pmYou’re a disgusting piece of flotsam on the shores of Liberty.
How to drive progressives away from TP:
Spam that some wingnut made a death threat when he did not.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:57 pmArchie B Says:
Is this a new rule? I’ve seen plenty in the past on this blog made by sec progressives.
You’re going to substantiate those claims by linking to TP’s archives, not your warped mind, right?
March 19th, 2009 at 8:57 pmApparently Hussein Matt hates you enough to be willing to lie to disparage your character Archie. It’s unfortunate that there is so much hatred, but progressives are very angry right now.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:05 pmMatt, I know you are angry at Archie, and all the Republicans, but you are misrepresenting what Archie said. That is how Republicans do business, and I expect we can be better than that.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:08 pmWell… if we ALL start flagging archie every time it shows up, it’ll prolly be gone, pretty quickly.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:08 pmWhy would that be? According to all the left wing blogs, the republicans are dead in the water, has beens. One would think that would make the left happy.
AAAAARCHIE, ever the master of reading comprehension. Progressives are angry that the ghosts are haunting the house (and senate).
March 19th, 2009 at 9:11 pmProgressives are very angry at what the Republicans have done to America. From domestic spying, to torture, to starting wars for profit. The list of things progressives have to hate Republicans for is long and detailed.
Yes, the Republicans are currently dead in the water, and that is where they are likely to stay for a generation. The left is very happy that the Republicans are dead in the water, but justice has yet to be applied. I for one am very disappointed that Obama has not yet appointed a special prosecutor to bring Bush and Cheney to trial for war crimes, but I have hope.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:14 pmHi there Archie B.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:14 pmShould I talk about your sister or your mother? Doesn’t really matter I suppose now does it? You’re pitiful…
Mr. Haines must have failed basic logic in college. Because those making a lot more than $250,000 have run a lot of Wall Street companies into the ground. How do these people know how to dress themselves in the morning?
March 19th, 2009 at 9:15 pmWhat happens under 250,000? Is there a cessation of oxygen? Does the brain stop functioning if in the sub recesses of the brain, the figure of 250,000 keeps going on and off like a neon sign?
It seems from all evidence, that making 500 times that amount does not guarantee the brain functions at it’s highest efficiency. I guess none of them could do most of the jobs the rest of us manage to do. And we do it for way under 250,000. What this says is these people were BORN to earn that much. Even if they do immeasurable harm and only in certain rarefied atmosphere. And there ability to screw up, with those wonderful brains is alright. The middle class Americans that work with less money will bail out all those talented, special people. Did I get that right?
That road to Oz must have been crowded with all these denizens of Wall Street who wanted that brain. They commandeered that special brain and it’s life long deserving inflated amounts of money. This to go with their undeserved inflated egos.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:17 pmBut the Nazis made the trains run on time. If they had ruined the train system, it would be analogous, and it would be still be stupid to keep the executives on with such exorbitant pay.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:20 pmArchie B on March 18th, 2009 at 9:36 pm Says:
Why try to divert?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
March 19th, 2009 at 9:20 pmBWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
March 19th, 2009 at 9:22 pmHey Archie B, I just have one question for ya:
Why try to divert?
(snicker… snicker…)
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
March 19th, 2009 at 9:26 pmArchie B Says:
obama isn’t what he was cracked up to be. Must be why all the disappointed liberals.
President Obama has been handed enormous challenges, unprecedented for any entering president dating at least 60 years. I’m certainly not disappointed, knowing that solving problems are usually a heck of a lot tougher than causing them. The republicans are known for taking the easy way out.
Those who want to regain the platform to continue their shtick are making a theatrical fuss, to put it in perspective.
Sit and spin, prick.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:26 pmarchie seems to have stepped out to power his nose…
March 19th, 2009 at 9:26 pmSomeone needs to send a “Confidential Memo™” to CNBC…
Given just how BADLY the Stewart/Cramer interview went for you guys, is it really gonna make y’all look any smarter to have yer on-air talent making such snide, condescending, and ultimately ASININE comments like this one, right now?
March 19th, 2009 at 9:29 pm.
Dear Mark Haines,
Since the people who gave us this mess earned over $250K, with what stroke of logic dictates that leaving them in place will improve results?
Insane much?
.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:30 pm.
Dear T.P.
Please ban Archie B.
.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:30 pmArckie B. pulls an Archie B.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:31 pmBWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Max-1 Says:
.
Dear T.P.
Please ban Archie B.
_________
If you really WANT archie gone, just flag all his comments…
March 19th, 2009 at 9:32 pmClassic characteristic of a bully: set the target up for failure by setting unrealistic goals or deadlines
Hence the wishful thinking that “obama isn’t what he was cracked up to be.”
For kicks, claim that the good guy’s allies are behind the discontent.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:33 pmI have been flagging this prick for days… nothing.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:34 pmIf I had $250K, I would retire.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:34 pmMcWars Says:
___________
Pretty good example of a straw man in practice, I’d say…
March 19th, 2009 at 9:35 pmArchie is tonight’s designated hitter for the neocon “brain” trust.
He says,”Tax dodgers writing tax laws. Only in an obama adminstration!”
Let’s talk about tax dodging for a minute. Today it was reported that the corporations receiving bailouts owe over $220 million in taxes. (see: http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/2009/03/19/next-scandal-unpaid-corporate-taxes
Archie, I bet you owe a few thou yourself. You can either become a member of this country and pay your fair share or you can leave. Bet you’ll miss all that great drinking water and drivable roads and internet access and phone and TV service. Just go now and let the real Americans decide how we want to run our government. OK?
March 19th, 2009 at 9:35 pmalpuz3 Says:
I have been flagging this prick for days… nothing.
___________
Perhaps we all need to flag at the same time.
TP does ban people…
March 19th, 2009 at 9:35 pmI really wish people like Archie would hang out on sites that would LOVE his point of view. RedState would accept him with open arms. Me, I am a live and let love person. People like Archie can’t be reasoned with. I should know, half my family are just as paranoid and hatefilled like him.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:38 pmarchie seems to have stepped out to power his nose…
—–
March 19th, 2009 at 9:39 pmWhy does that always seem to happen right after I get here and start screwing with that lame ass?
Hey TRoS, when you get a chance, check out the Cramer-Stewart thread.
b-cup came back for some more paddling. still wearing the same pants…
March 19th, 2009 at 9:42 pmTRoS,
March 19th, 2009 at 9:43 pmI have, for over a week now.
dbadass, that’s because you own him. He’s ashamed to appear weak in front of you.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:43 pmdbadass Says:
archie seems to have stepped out to power his nose…
—–
Why does that always seem to happen right after I get here and start screwing with that lame ass?
I realize it was a typo, but “power his nose” conjures up some pretty disgusting images of Archie and his pinky . . .
March 19th, 2009 at 9:45 pmgummitch I really need you help as to those key limes, fresh squeezed lemon juice and the oj. Thanks!
March 19th, 2009 at 9:49 pm134
March 19th, 2009 at 9:52 pmThe thing is ralph, if old Archie B would just suck it up and acknowledge his mistake, I would let him go. He just isn’t man enough to so I suppose I am stuck with the burden of grinding his lame ass into the ground at each and every opportunity.
Well, to ease your burden, dbadass, we’re always here to help out.
March 19th, 2009 at 9:53 pmhey you guys miss the point. the wallstreet crowd can’t get a long with the 250,000 salaries. That is entry level. Who would you trust with your money. The real thing to consider is how much worse it could have been without all these talented people watching the store.
(I think the matress would have been a better place)
March 19th, 2009 at 10:06 pmLooks like Archie B finally got himself bannned
March 19th, 2009 at 10:24 pmArchie B Says:
Let’s adopt a flag on sight policy for the inevitable sockpuppet resurrection..
March 19th, 2009 at 10:25 pmI think provoking him so we had more flag targets was quite brilliant. You really know how to push the dude’s buttons. Bet he broke his keyboard trying to register a new TP account.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:40 pmthe brown acid Says:
Looks like Archie B finally got himself bannned
Archie B Says:
March 19th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Who needs a Bowflex when you can firm up those abs by simply clicking that link?
March 19th, 2009 at 10:45 pmWell, shoot I missed all the archieb blathering. Some people are just born stupid and attempt to hang on to whatever belief system that soothes them for the moment. The creep will be back, he’s an attention whore. I would suggest flagging and ignoring him; do not engage.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:53 pmI’m even going to take another wild guess about trolls like arch and JK, these guys are people earning minimum wage (and in the south minimum wage is quite minimal) and they keep voting and cheerleading tax cuts for the wealthy 1% even though they will never know that kind of money. So their King George gives them an extra $60 a year — and they slobber all over the fool in chief. Quite astounding if you think about it.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:00 pmMy god, I am so bored with these morons making such idiotic statements.
Can we go back to the days when we had no idea what a news reader’s politics or opinions were? Please?
March 19th, 2009 at 11:08 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
Hey TRoS, when you get a chance, check out the Cramer-Stewart thread.
____________
I did, ralphie. I was gonna come back here and make a comment… nice work, if you don’t mind getting that dirty.
AMAZING performance on b-cup’s part, huh? G-D f-er hadn’t even WATCHED the entire interview and h was bad-mouthing it like crazy.
A Troll’s troll, indeed!!!
March 19th, 2009 at 11:10 pmI think the interpretation of the statement is incorrect. The statement is not commenting on the skills of anyone running a Wall Street firm, its a comment what one must paid if they happen to be a Wall Street executive – can’t be $250,000, it must be millions by virtue of the firm and the position, not the skills needed. Its a perfect example of what’s wrong with CEO compensation: its a payment by status system, completely divorced from actual performance or capability.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:10 pm.
Tee & hee…
So archie DID get his Cheney blipped outta here…
March 19th, 2009 at 11:14 pmFlagging works!!!
March 19th, 2009 at 11:24 pmYou know what makes flagging work even better?
Copy the whole damn comment, beginning to end, paste it into the flagging box, add a little comment of your own, and send.
I think it draws a bit of attention. :-)
March 19th, 2009 at 11:26 pmSomething tells me Archie is lurking this thread right now, RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGING and plotting. Howdy loser!
March 19th, 2009 at 11:27 pmIm sure Charley is the person I would go to for tax, and ethics advice.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:35 pmWhen these idiots make statements like this, it becomes very apparent that these people truly believe they are better than everyone else. They’ve been whining about private planes, redone offices, bonuses, etc. since the start of this whole recession, and you can tell by their indignation that they feel entitled. They are the aristocracy that is not to be messed with. This is exactly why we NEED things like the estate taxes. To help minimize the number of people who attain power through entitlement. This country must stop conflating wealth with talent and success.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:37 pmthe brown acid Says:
Something tells me Archie is lurking this thread right now, RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGING and plotting. Howdy loser!
___________
Anybody else just catch that whiff of stale urine and human grease?
March 19th, 2009 at 11:37 pmYep, I smell it, TRoS.
There’s a hint of burning hair and desperation as well….
March 19th, 2009 at 11:40 pmNot the brown acid, but Mary Jo.
Hi, Starchie.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:40 pmIm for an estate tax, as long as people on welfare cant vote people into office that will rob the treasury for them.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:41 pmWell, fortunately, mary jo, there’s nothing left to steal after BotchCo got done.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:43 pmZooey Says:
Yep, I smell it, TRoS.
There’s a hint of burning hair and desperation as well….
_____________
MO… BO… same difference…
March 19th, 2009 at 11:43 pmHe’s right.
Who in their right mind would stay at AIG (you know, that company that we own 80% of) now? Where they can be subject to death threats? And work a dead-end job with no future?
Every competent person will leave. Why wouldn’t they?
Sure, $250K is a ton of money. But you can’t expect good people to stay at a unpleasant job for less pay than they could get elsewhere.
But hey, it’s easier to just assume that there are no good people at AIG at all, that they’re all incompetent, right? Much cleaner, and easier to be outrage. It’s also incredibly naive.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:48 pmThat’s true, TRoS. ;)
March 19th, 2009 at 11:48 pmccarollo Says:
But hey, it’s easier to just assume that there are no good people at AIG at all, that they’re all incompetent, right? Much cleaner, and easier to be outrage. It’s also incredibly naive.
__________
Sniff… sniff… yer so right, c. I’m sorry fer doubting the Good People of AIG…
I APOLOGIZE!!! No, really… I mean it. I’m SORRY.
Keep the F-in’ bonuses… you deserve ‘em… every last cent,,,
March 19th, 2009 at 11:50 pmFirst we beg Liddy to come fix the mess we bought at AIG for a dollar a year.
Then we grandstand and try to make him the scape goat to hide the fact the Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, are Elf like Sec of the Treasury etc were the main culprits.
After that, we violate the Bill of Attainder in the Constitution, and then tax 90% of the money we told them they could have!
March 19th, 2009 at 11:51 pmccarollo Says:
But hey, it’s easier to just assume that there are no good people at AIG at all, that they’re all incompetent, right?
Actually, I think it is easier to conclude based on evidence that a company that can’t afford to pay bonuses shouldn’t pay bonuses. Talented employees or not.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:51 pmccarollo,
I’m afraid I’ll be calling bullshit on your comment.
A company that has been so thoroughly augered into the dirt like AIG lost any of it’s good people long ago — when they realized just how bad things were.
Right about now, it’s safe to assume the remainder of employees had their heads firmly up their asses.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:52 pmMary Jo Kopechne Says:
After that, we violate the Bill of Attainder in the Constitution, and then tax 90% of the money we told them they could have!
March 19th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
Mary Jo watched Keith Olbermann tonight. How sweet. Go ahead, tell the rest of the story.
We’ll wait…
March 19th, 2009 at 11:53 pmI did not watch Oblermann, but I did take a high school level government class. You would be shocked to learn how much you can learn about the Constitution. Of course, it was in a high school in Alabama, so I didnt get the blessing of a biased brain washing of how the Constitution promises health care, education, etc.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:59 pmOh please, Mary Jo. We libs may have hearts of gold, but we did not just fall off the turnip truck.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:01 amMary Jo Kopechne Says:
First we beg Liddy to come fix the mess we bought at AIG for a dollar a year.
____________
Actually, Paulson made the choice.
____________
Then we grandstand and try to make him the scape goat to hide the fact the Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, are Elf like Sec of the Treasury etc were the main culprits.
____________
A little factual substantiation of this accusation would be nice…
____________
After that, we violate the Bill of Attainder in the Constitution, and then tax 90% of the money we told them they could have!
____________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder
Bill of attainder
A bill of attainder (also known as an act or writ of attainder) is an act of legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial.
____________
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/aig_outrage
The bill would impose a 90 percent tax on bonuses given to employees with family incomes above $250,000 at American International Group and other companies that have received at least $5 billion in government bailout money. It would apply to any such bonuses issued since Dec. 31.
_____________
That doesn’t quite fit the definition of a bill of attainder, does it?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:06 amWhy can brilliant academic medical specialists, scientists, lawyers and engineers be recruited easily for salaries deemed insufficient for a banker? And haven’t the ones who’ve been making the big bucks been too clever by half?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:08 amZooey, I’ve never even seen a turnip truck, have you?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:08 amMary Jo Kopechne Says:
You would be shocked to learn how much you can learn about the Constitution.
________
Or, in some cases, not learn…
March 20th, 2009 at 12:08 amtbone: So we’ll cut off our nose to spite our face? You think it’s a good thing to lose all the employees that know how the incredibly complex derivatives work and wait a couple months as new people are trained up — taxpayers losing money all the while? Because, as emotionally satisfying as that might be, that sounds really dumb to me.
Zooey: But that’s what these “bonuses” were — they agreed to pay them their effective salary from previous (profitable) years to keep them around. Now that’s gone.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:09 amJane,
Well, no actually. Let me amend that to “beet truck.” I’ve seen plenty of sugar beet trucks. :-)
March 20th, 2009 at 12:09 amTRoS, nice dissection.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:09 amRos: “That doesn’t quite fit the definition of a bill of attainder, does it?”
Actually, it kind of does if you consider the penalties of a civil case — it’s effectively a fine levied for committing no crime.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:11 amBut since it only exists in the minds of wingnuts, and try as they might, they still haven’t come up with a Wingnut Delusion Replicator for the Reality-Based Universe… I’m thinking we won’t be seeing it.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:11 amccarollo Says:
Zooey: But that’s what these “bonuses” were — they agreed to pay them their effective salary from previous (profitable) years to keep them around. Now that’s gone.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:09 am
Maybe you could provide a link showing exactly when AIG last had a profitable year?
Are you seriously making the case that these executives have contracts that cannot (or should not) be tossed in the crapper?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:11 amCorrect me if i’m wrong… but I thought the problem with the whole shebang was that these incredibly complex derivatives didn’t work…
… at least, not under their current level of regulation…
March 20th, 2009 at 12:14 amSo you can point to the act of legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial?
Thanks.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:15 amcarollo Says:
Actually, it kind of does if you consider the penalties of a civil case — it’s effectively a fine levied for committing no crime.
______________
Then I’m sure the stalwarts at AIG will end up pleading their case to the SCOTUS before this is over.
But right now, it doesn’t fit the definition. They haven’t been accused of anything. And I guess the ones voluntarily GIVING THEM BACK are just chumps, huh?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:15 amZooey Says:
Maybe you could provide a link showing exactly when AIG last had a profitable year?
Are you seriously making the case that these executives have contracts that cannot (or should not) be tossed in the crapper?
___________
Well… if the company had actually GONE UNDER, they all would have been out of a job, period, and bonuses be damned, huh?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:16 amBTW, ralphie… I did go back and read the end of the Stewart/Cramer thread.
Nice work if you don’t mind getting dirty…
March 20th, 2009 at 12:17 amI don’t trust anyone who makes more than 250,000 dollars in a year. I work for and earn my money.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:17 amTRoS, think y’all can handle this lot?
I’m a little beat, and I still got pieces of b-cup’s a$$ to pick out of my boots…
March 20th, 2009 at 12:18 amYeah, ralphie. So’skay. I’m sure those tendons are achin’.
Just return the ice bag when yer done w/ it.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:19 amAside from the squandered bonus money, what are they doing with the rest of it? Could these bonuses just be a smoke screen for a bigger crime?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:19 amccarollo Says:
tbone: So we’ll cut off our nose to spite our face? You think it’s a good thing to lose all the employees that know how the incredibly complex derivatives work and wait a couple months as new people are trained up — taxpayers losing money all the while? Because, as emotionally satisfying as that might be, that sounds really dumb to me.
If I have a problem with my car and take it to a mechanic. In the process that mechanic screws up my car further, does that mean I should take my car back to the same mechanic because he might know what he did wrong?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:20 amWhat the hell, folks?! Why the hell did your liberal messiah Obama bail them out in the first place, and why the hell did congress sign the stimulus that gave them the bonuses? What a royal government screw-up.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:20 amIt is not a government screw up, but a Corporate culture of greed screw up.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:21 amccarollo Says:
tbone: So we’ll cut off our nose to spite our face? You think it’s a good thing to lose all the employees that know how the incredibly complex derivatives work and wait a couple months as new people are trained up — taxpayers losing money all the while? Because, as emotionally satisfying as that might be, that sounds really dumb to me.
So you really think that there are absolutely no other people on the face of the earth who could step in and manage to unravel the mess? Do you think that the employees who made this ‘incredibly complex’ mess are capable of unraveling it?
Zooey: But that’s what these “bonuses” were — they agreed to pay them their effective salary from previous (profitable) years to keep them around. Now that’s gone.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:09 am
As are 52 of the employees who were paid these fruitless ‘retention bonuses.’
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/18/business/18bailout.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
Why on earth would anyone defend the people who fcked up the economy worldwide?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:22 amkymd82 Says:
What the hell, folks?! Why the hell did your liberal messiah Obama bail them out in the first place, and why the hell did congress sign the stimulus that gave them the bonuses? What a royal government screw-up.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:20 am
Wrong royal family, dick head. King George the Turd bailed out AIG.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:22 amAh Zooey, the compassionate and kind liberal. You are correct, the Bush administration did contribute to this sad atrocity, as well as Obama….and JB, I halfway I agree with you. This is a corporate greed screwup/government screwup.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:24 amZooey Says:
Wrong royal family, dick head. King George the Turd bailed out AIG.
__________
Awww geez… why do you allus hafta let “facts” get in the way of a perfectly pointless screed?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:24 amZooey: “Are you seriously making the case that these executives have contracts that cannot (or should not) be tossed in the crapper?”
Yes, I am. For one, because I believe contracts should be upheld. And because I think it’s important to not remove every talented employee of a company we own 80% of.
ralph: “Correct me if i’m wrong… but I thought the problem with the whole shebang was that these incredibly complex derivatives didn’t work…”
Ha ha, aren’t you clever. You know what I mean. Those that know how these incredibly complex derivatives are structured, and how to unwind them and clean them up.
RoS: AIG was profitable in 2007 (read the excellent post by nate over on 538: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/03/why-aig-paid-bonuses.html). And if AIG had gone into bankruptcy, salaries and guaranteed payments to employees are very close to the front of the line. They almost surely would have gotten paid if the government hadn’t stepped in.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:24 amTo avoid any writ of attainder issues, perhaps everybody making $250,000 should be taxed at 90%. Works for me.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:25 amZooey, I normally flag anyone who uses the term ‘messiah’ in a comment, but my flagging finger’s tired tonight.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:27 amNo doubt it is way past due to submit all corporations to some serious REGULATION. This is not capitalism, its predation.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:27 amThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
Awww geez… why do you allus hafta let “facts” get in the way of a perfectly pointless screed?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:24 am
It’s a habit. What can I say? ;)
March 20th, 2009 at 12:28 amYes, Jane, but as compassionate, kind, and caring liberals, we don’t flag “dick head”.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:29 am“For one, because I believe contracts should be upheld.”
ccarollo, should the UAW workers have been forced to renegotiate their contracts, or should theirs have been upheld as well?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:29 amccarollo Says:
Zooey: “Are you seriously making the case that these executives have contracts that cannot (or should not) be tossed in the crapper?”
Yes, I am. For one, because I believe contracts should be upheld. And because I think it’s important to not remove every talented employee of a company we own 80% of.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:24 am
That brought a tear to my eye, ccarollo. You must have been absolutely devastated when the Republicans demanded that the UAW contracts be used as toilet paper, and when Ronnie Raygun took a shit on PATCO. **sniff**
March 20th, 2009 at 12:30 amDeclare a War on Greed and corruption. Time for a little shock and awe in Corporate Land.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:31 amZooey, what planet are you living on? Obama signed one of the biggest spending bills in history to bail out greedy MORONS.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:31 amJane E. Schneider Says:
Zooey, I normally flag anyone who uses the term ‘messiah’ in a comment, but my flagging finger’s tired tonight.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:27 am
I’ve got your back, Jane. Rest that finger…
March 20th, 2009 at 12:32 amccarollo Says:
Zooey: “Are you seriously making the case that these executives have contracts that cannot (or should not) be tossed in the crapper?”
Yes, I am. For one, because I believe contracts should be upheld. And because I think it’s important to not remove every talented employee of a company we own 80% of.
____________
Hmmm… let’s not even go into how many times insurance companies have prolly forced others to renegotiate contracts when the insurer had the upper hand…
_____________
Ha ha, aren’t you clever. You know what I mean. Those that know how these incredibly complex derivatives are structured, and how to unwind them and clean them up.
_____________
ha ha, aren’t YOU clever too… ’cause wouldn’t that be the same people who created this mess in the first place?
_____________
And if AIG had gone into bankruptcy, salaries and guaranteed payments to employees are very close to the front of the line. They almost surely would have gotten paid if the government hadn’t stepped in.
_____________
If AIG had gone bust completely… and there was NO govt bailout… where would these “guaranteed payments” have come from… thin air?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:32 amI don’t know – but I am guessing that “Mary Jo” is “archie B”. Anyway, all of you great progressives, take care and don’t let the trolls engage you too much. Have fun and be good and all that. Good night….zzzzzzzzzzzzz
March 20th, 2009 at 12:32 amkymd82 Says:
Yes, Jane, but as compassionate, kind, and caring liberals, we don’t flag “dick head”.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:29 am
Quitcherb!tchin’, kymmie.
You led with this: “What the hell, folks?! Why the hell did your liberal messiah….blah blah blah…”
Somebody call a wahmbulance for this one.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:33 amThe too big to fail are being carried by all of us too small to succeed. Any company deemed too big to fail needs to broken up. It helped for while with the old At&T. Investors in the “baby bells” actually made out just fine.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:34 amSorry, didn’t realize “messiah” was forbidden…Seriously??
March 20th, 2009 at 12:34 amkymd82 Says:
Obama signed one of the biggest spending bills in history to bail out greedy MORONS.
____________
Are you referring to TARP?
Timeline of Changes to the Initial Program
On October 14, 2008, Secretary of the Treasury Paulson and President Bush separately announced revisions in the TARP program.
_____________
Nope, Obama didn’t sign THAT.
Hey… ccarollo… mary Jo is callin’ yer boys at AIG MORONS.
Why don’t you two have at it?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:35 amGreen Says:
I don’t know – but I am guessing that “Mary Jo” is “archie B”.
___________
Yeah…
March 20th, 2009 at 12:36 amkymd82 Says:
Sorry, didn’t realize “messiah” was forbidden…Seriously??
March 20th, 2009 at 12:34 am
Well, maybe you really think Obama is Jesus, or maybe you’re just into blasphemy — or maybe you’re just a f ucking idiot who can’t track a thought from moment to moment.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:37 amZooey, I’m just pointing out that you’re a sheep. Trust me, there’s tons of Bushites out there as well. No one thinks for themselves’ anymore. Toe the party line, toe the party line, toe the party line.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:37 amSo, ccarollo.
There are a lot of educators out there that are getting furloughed and having their pay docked accordingly. Because educating young people is not a 9 to 5 job, those educators are effectively being asked to do the same job for less money. Should fed, state, and local governments honor the sanctity of those contracts and pay them what were promised?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:37 amkymd82 Says:
As a compassionate, kind and caring liberal, I still don’t have to tolerate extreme right-wing talking point lies or meant-to-be incendiary phrases.
Please feel free to flag whatever offends you. Don’t expect an immediate response, admin’s probably worn out from cleaning up the trollshite on some of the other threads.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:37 amkymd82 Says:
Zooey, what planet are you living on? Obama signed one of the biggest spending bills in history to bail out greedy MORONS.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:31 am
Hmmmm, President Obama did sign a stimulus bill to help get the economy back on it’s feet after the Republicans trashed it. Are you calling all Americans morons?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:39 amkymd82 Says:
Zooey, I’m just pointing out that you’re a sheep. Trust me, there’s tons of Bushites out there as well. No one thinks for themselves’ anymore. Toe the party line, toe the party line, toe the party line.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:37 am
Thanks for that. Baaaaa…
When you’ve known me for more than half an hour, and/or outside of the blogosphere, you can make the claim that I don’t think for myself. Otherwise, shove it. M’kay?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:41 amGoodnight, green.
Zooey, thanks for the, excuse the phrase, ‘back-up’. ;)
March 20th, 2009 at 12:42 amYeah but c’mon Zooey, the stimulus bill won’t do BS except put us into more debt. You keeping ripping Bush/Republicans as if I am supposed to be offended. I am neither.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:42 am“should the UAW workers have been forced to renegotiate their contracts, or should theirs have been upheld as well?”
They weren’t forced to do anything. They could have not renegotiated and not taken the bailout. If removing the bonuses was a required element of accepting the bailout, and was agreed to beforehand, I’d be totally fine with it.
“If AIG had gone bust completely… and there was NO govt bailout… where would these “guaranteed payments” have come from… thin air?”
AIG would liquidate assets (they were not without value) and pay off creditors in order. Employee compensation would have been near the front of that line.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:42 amPlease Zooey. You are a sheep. That’s who’s running the damn congress. Democrate and Republican SHEEP.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:44 amJane E. Schneider Says:
Zooey, thanks for the, excuse the phrase, ‘back-up’. ;)
March 20th, 2009 at 12:42 am
Ewww…
March 20th, 2009 at 12:44 amThe troll thinks that a bankruptcy judge would have prioritized big bonuses as a last rite.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:46 amkymd82 Says:
Zooey, I’m just pointing out that you’re a sheep. Trust me, there’s tons of Bushites out there as well. No one thinks for themselves’ anymore. Toe the party line, toe the party line, toe the party line.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:37 am
Zooey, wow, it’s like kymd82 is a psychic–just a couple of comments, and, presto! you’re a sheep!
kymd82, me next, what party am I toeing the line with? What color am I thinking of?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:47 amkymd82 Says:
Yeah but c’mon Zooey, the stimulus bill won’t do BS except put us into more debt. You keeping ripping Bush/Republicans as if I am supposed to be offended. I am neither.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:42 am
Please Zooey. You are a sheep. That’s who’s running the damn congress. Democrate and Republican SHEEP.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:44 am
Awww, come on kymmie.
Who’s spouting talking points now? Frankly, I’d have to care to try to offend you.
Baaaaa….
March 20th, 2009 at 12:48 amRed?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:48 amccarollo Says:
AIG would liquidate assets (they were not without value) and pay off creditors in order. Employee compensation would have been near the front of that line.
____________
Prolly right… perhaps they should have let AIG go under. I have no problem w/ getting the bonuses back. If there is such a big problem, why are some of them GIVING THEM BACK voluntarily?
I personally think this should have been negotiated cleanly up front, but as I recall, Hank Paulson told the country, “You can’t even ask any questions…”.
Talk about arrogant.
If what Congress did in passing that law constitutes a ‘bill of retainder” then I’m sure AIG employees will have their day in court. Of course, if they were retention bonuses, what about the ones who took the money and left?
And there is the possibility that some of those bonuses went to employees of other divisions w/in AIG that DIDN’T screw up. Haven’t seen a meaningful breakdown of that yet.
BTW, I’ve been thru a pretty spectacular business collapse brought on by the front office’s greed and incompetence. I know employee obligations go to the front of the line.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:50 amJane, I’ve gotta say, I’m impressed.
**eyes rolling**
March 20th, 2009 at 12:51 amSorry, try again.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:51 amMcWars Says:
The troll thinks that a bankruptcy judge would have prioritized big bonuses as a last rite.
___________
Regular employee compensation does go to the front of the line.
I’m not sure about bonuses.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:52 amZooey Says:
I’ll give the troll, er, psychic, one more try before I call it a night.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:53 amDamnit Jane. Purple?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:54 amThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
I personally think this should have been negotiated cleanly up front, but as I recall, Hank Paulson told the country, “You can’t even ask any questions…”.
Talk about arrogant.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:50 am
Ahhhh, sweet memories. I gave Hank Paulson the Veruca Salt Award for his arrogance. **sniff**
March 20th, 2009 at 12:54 amkymd82 Says:
Yeah but c’mon Zooey, the stimulus bill won’t do BS except put us into more debt. You keeping ripping Bush/Republicans as if I am supposed to be offended. I am neither.
The stimulus bill consists of 30% in tax cuts and investments in roads, bridges, technologies, public works & schools.
I’m always amazed how right-wingers can categorize long overdue social spending as “a burden on our children.” The package is an investment in humanity, including our children.
I’m still wondering — where’s the outrage for the corporate bailout in September? Where’s the degree of vigilance for accounting for those funds and the application of the Think About the Children! screed from you right-wingers?
Because the last time I checked, the $700 billion bailout should have started paying for itself immediately through immediate lending & mortgage restructuring, but that isn’t happening.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:56 amWell, Jane. Do we have a
March 20th, 2009 at 12:56 amweinerwinner?Nope, not purple. It was cerulean blue.
Goodnight all!
March 20th, 2009 at 12:57 amDamn! I was going to guess cerulean blue!
Goodnight, Jane. :-)
March 20th, 2009 at 12:58 amMcWars, I’m not right wing. I wasn’t jumping for joy in September either.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:58 amI have another point to make — if right-wingers consider $787 billion (figure correct?) ’spending’, even when 30% of that amount is in tax cuts, I’m free to call $2.4 trillion in tax cuts mostly benefiting the wealthy during the Botch years ’spending’, right?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:59 amNice jane
March 20th, 2009 at 12:59 amYikes, I didn’t realize how late it is EST.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:02 amYeah, go ahead McWars. Again, not a right winger.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:02 amHey McWars, you know how it is when you’re having fun with the coolest kids in town. ;)
March 20th, 2009 at 1:02 amMy real concern with the new budget is that we’ll dig a hole that we cannot get out of. Clinton was the only president in decades to actually give us a balanced budget.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:05 amkymmie, that really doesn’t ring true, considering how you introduced yourself by calling names like “liberals” and “messiah.” It was easy to see the intent behind your use of those words in that particular context.
Maybe you’re just hateful in general? Help me out here….
March 20th, 2009 at 1:05 amZooey, I’m a political cynic. I honestly think that all politicians are liars. I don’t think that either party truly has America’s best interest in mind. They just want the POWER. They love it. That’s why these senators stay in office for 40 yrs doing the same shit.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:07 amHi Zoo, I hope all is well. I think TP has the charm of a big city within a small town. Not Palin’s small town, of course, and no meth labs.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:08 amkymd82 Says:
Nice jane
March 20th, 2009 at 12:59 am
Thanks, it was my favorite color in my paintbox, plus it’s got that X-Files reference going for it.
And yes, McWars, it IS late EST, but, well, as Zooey said… ;)
Goodnight-and thank the gods it’s Friday (at least, it is here)
March 20th, 2009 at 1:09 amkymd82 Says:
Clinton was the only president in decades to actually give us a balanced budget.
In his first year?
If you are seriously concerned about Obama’s fiscal policy, why not give him some time to turn things around? That means more than one year’s worth of policy adjustments.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:10 amkymmie,
We’re all political cynics around here. Geez….
That doesn’t explain your name calling, does it? Try to stay on track.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:11 amYeah barfly, I hope he does balance it. I’m just worried that like with Bush, he won’t give a shit.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:12 amMcWars Says:
Hi Zoo, I hope all is well. I think TP has the charm of a big city within a small town. Not Palin’s small town, of course, and no meth labs.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:08 am
As good as it gets on the anniversary of this horrible war. I know, I’m just a big bundle of joy. :-)
No Palin! La la la la laaa……
March 20th, 2009 at 1:12 amI love your nickname for me. It’s strangely sexy.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:13 amI’m just worried that like with Bush, he won’t give a shit.
At this point in his presidency, Bush was an appointed president, amd on record as saying he didn’t really care if he’d won the job or not. Comparing that idiot to Obama is an intellectually useless exercise.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:15 amkymd82 Says:
I love your nickname for me. It’s strangely sexy.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:13 am
Is 82 your birth year or your IQ?
March 20th, 2009 at 1:15 amThere’s always an element of power hungriness in politics, full agreement there.
If you’re an aerial observer, fine, you may not be a right-winger. If you insist, I won’t push.
However, as Zooey pointed your previous post, the “messiah” rhetoric is extremely tiresome and juvenile. I feel that Obama has been striking a balance between being active in his Office and not allow the office to make him lose sight of his campaign, an unprecedented effort to remain humble.
Would you agree somewhat?
March 20th, 2009 at 1:15 ammcwars, yeah I agree for the most part. I’m not an Obama hater. However, I’m not convinced that he (or anybody) can get us out of this mess. When is he going to start taxing the hell out of the top 2%
And Zooey, my year of birth is 82. No idea what my IQ is.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:20 amFor some reason Zoo, I’ve always associated the word anniversary with only good events. Must be a mental tick.
Anyhow, good night to you, Zoo, and the rest.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:20 amCan someone recommend my posts? Feeling left out.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:24 amkymd82 Says:
And Zooey, my year of birth is 82. No idea what my IQ is.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:20 am
I have a son your age. How sexy is that, kymmie!?
Toodles.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:25 amGoodnight, McWars.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:26 amvery sexy. peace.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:28 amGosh. The oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffet, has a salary of 100K. Imagine that.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:35 amUh, the Gross Old Pervert party hasn’t gotten anything right for 30 years….
….except for the Reichwinger Propaganda MSM Machine…
…so close to the Post WW1 Germany, typical Fascist machine…
…same tactics, same fear and destroy the country for poltical gain…
…country first, my butt.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:37 amCNBC host: Wall Street companies can’t ‘be run well’ by those making under $250,000.
Gee, does anyone think maybe there are (media) company boardmembers who might feel threatened by suggestions that their handpicked corporate managers are overpaid, since it’s a well-established fact that corporate boards and CEO’s set each other’s compensation levels? If their top management personnel really aren’t worth what corporate boards have said they were, doesn’t it also mean THEY THEMSELVES might have been overcompensated during that same time? Might stockholders then decide to reduce their compensation levels to reflect economic reality, as well?
March 20th, 2009 at 1:53 amThese greedy arrogant scabbyass thieves.
It’s funny to watch them act as if they are innocent little hard workers.
HAHAHHAHAHA
I bet if you break down the aig staff and list their salaries we would find more crooks than chimpy’s administration.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:07 amIt doesn’t cost large salaries, bonuses and golden parachutes to find honest workers.
flagging Mary Jo Kopechne
offensive name, trolling
March 20th, 2009 at 2:27 amThese lying greedy mobsters have a nerve to use the law to steal more of our money. Are they kidding me?
They want to keep their overly lavish lifestyle off the back of…95% of us. WTF?
I have a problem with the law that allows mobsters to loot our treasury as if it were their personal bank.
No! you can’t be paid to loot, gangta.
A law should have teeth such as taxing their bonuses 100% to recoop our money…OUR MONEY and charge them with hindrance and obstruction.
They are wickly funny and backwardasses. These crooks are using the law to benefit their greedy personal self-interest; It’s a law for them/aig to steal OUR MONEY. It shouldn’t be that way.
I don’t care if they use their damn money for bonuses or for wiping their incompetent asses.
aig mobsters are arrogant, obnoxious and greedy. they want their bonuses for stealing our money and ruining large chunks of our financial system via deceit, lies, and wanton business practices.
We own 80% of aig worthless bs business, it’s a game changer. You will not get paid to fail and fail again. I WANT TO SEE THEIR BOOKS, EVERYTHING!!
It’s time to smack the smirk off their seedy faces.
it’s only right we use the law that directly stops aig’s looting. benefits aig them to stop the crooks (also they owe taxes!) and
March 20th, 2009 at 2:28 amJane,
I know I’m late to the last bit of FALL TROLL FEST ‘09.
But that kimmie sure did get fleeced.
Are you sure you’re name isn’t Mary?
Happy Spring ‘09 All!
March 20th, 2009 at 3:33 amThe twit actually uses the phrase “a bunch of people who don’t make more than $250,000.”
It’s as if they were trying to make us all communists.
Forgiving the Neocons
March 20th, 2009 at 6:02 amReally? Experience has shown that Wall Street firms can’t be run well by people making OVER $250,000.00. Looks like we have a problem.
March 20th, 2009 at 7:43 amNot every CEO and high ranking corporate manager is to blame for this mess. Demonizing corporate America is easy to do (Americans are mad, they lost a lot of money,) but a much wider view of the economic meltdown has to take place. Starting with the government itself and its lackadaisical efforts in making sure a company like AIG doesn’t take absurd risk without any kind of reasonable hedge. High demand jobs require people with an outstanding resume. It’s easy to compare professional sports to Wall Street. When the highest paid player in football went to jail for dog fighting, why wasn’t there an outcry for all NFL quarterbacks to be put in front on congress. When the Detroit Lions went 0-16 last year I didn’t hear public outrage over the Lion’s players still receiving their million dollar salaries. The economic crisis goes deep, but it’s much easier to string a group of people up and call it a day. There is scum in corporate America. Right now the focus is on them . . . what a great time to be a politician!
March 20th, 2009 at 7:44 amHaines gives new meaning to the old statement about the stupid leading the blind. Haines plays stupid quite well.
March 20th, 2009 at 8:28 amCats r Flyfishn Says:
Really? Experience has shown that Wall Street firms can’t be run well by people making OVER $250,000.00. Looks like we have a problem.
The problem is, apparently, that said companies cannot be run effectively. That’s all.
Obviously, generous salaries and bonuses do not assist in efficient and legal operations in these companies, as we have seen by their bankrupcies (which were forestalled by unprecedented welfare checks).
And anything less than a mere 250K would apparently only employ complete idiotic incompetents.
Thus, it follows that no salary or compensation can hire effective management of these businesses.
March 20th, 2009 at 8:29 ambarack obomber Says:
Damnnit!!! Some strung out meth head has found a laptop and is typing in gibberish.
Dude — that’s someone else’s computer. Give it to the police.
They’ll give you a cup of coffee.
March 20th, 2009 at 8:32 amHAINES: Let’s get back to what I regard as a fundamental issue here. I know it’s politically unpopular, politically incorrect. I know it goes against all of the populist indignation that’s out there right now. But you can’t really, it seems to me, expect that these Wall Street companies are going to be run well by a bunch of people who don’t make more than $250,000.
Let’s see — one or two fallacies here: appealing to the unpopularity of the argument — not common (a twist on the more common ‘appeal to popularity’). But his inferred point (itterated twice) is that because it is a unpouplar idea it has merit. This argument goes over very well with those who believe that the ‘popular opinion’ is wrong…. and this is also known as ‘elitism’ (in its negative sense).
He makes some appeal to authority (as himself). Not always a bad argument, but that “authority” really does need to BE an authority in the field to even begin to be considered as credible. He does not pass the authority test.
He then bundles a couple of fallacies together ina neat bundle: he appeals to consequences (”won’t be run well” i.e. will fail, with appropriate consequences), and appeals to wealth (those who have/make/are worth more money are better, more intelligent, etc.).
I give that the brunt of the argument is an appeal to wealth (those who have/make more money are better people). I am a little taked aback by the level of this opinion I see coming from the right: even working-class near-layoff conservative republican types defend this ignorant class division mindset. I would not have expected that had I been asked about it 6 or 10 years ago.
March 20th, 2009 at 8:50 amI am not even going to examine that retarded nazi comparison of his.
March 20th, 2009 at 8:51 am>Can someone recommend my posts?
Have you considered asking Fred Thompson?
March 20th, 2009 at 9:01 amHere is another slap in the public’s face. AIG is suing the Federal Government for 306 million that they paid in taxes, saying that they should not have to pay these taxes dealing with their off shore holdings. Since we own 80% of this sorry company, its time we fire everybody, breakup this monster and not give it one more dime.
March 20th, 2009 at 9:10 amBert, “booming economy in 2006″??? What planet were you living on? The economy was on a downward slide in 2006. All the warning signs were there that the bubble was going to break. Credit was starting to tighten for small company’s and job growth was flat. People wages were not growing, but were falling. The middle class was shrinking and more people were falling into poverty. That was 2006 buddy.
March 20th, 2009 at 9:27 amAIG CEO Liddy gets $1.00 a year and thereby fails the test of competence to run a corporation. Since he is $249,999 short of the minimum he is bound to be a failure.
Who ran these companies when the CEO’s were all paid less than $250,000?
Is this pundit stupid or is he simply insane?
March 20th, 2009 at 10:09 amThink of Running a Global Multinational (AIG) as being the captain of a Tremendous Ocean Liner with 100,000 passesngers. think Titanic. would you put Gilligan in charge of the ship, and fire the captain? no you would get another Captain.
Liddy is too small time – to manage AIG – his company is 1/50th the size of AIG today and he doesnt know anything about financial products/derivatives
there are some great managers at JP MORGAN/CHASE, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and a few others that could do the job, but the US taxpayer is too small minded to understand something very very elementary in business.
HOW DO YOU GET BACK YOUR 180 BILLION INVESTMENT, when the company AIG is not profitable?
AIG must make 180 Billion in profits – to pay US all back our money
now you tell me someone who is making 250K doing anything anywhere, including congress – is going to be able to make 180 Billion dollars for anyone in the next 5-10 years?
there are maybe 20-30 people in the world with experience like that, the ability to make money at this level, who understand financial markets, asset sales, ect…
good luck hiring someone for $1 a day that is qualified to manage such a large business.
if it were my 180 billion (oops… it is) then i would want the BEST CEO IN THE FREE WORLD to manage my investment
can you find me 1 CEO who would get involved in this mess?????
March 20th, 2009 at 10:49 amWhat a sick logic! Yes trains run…to concentration camps, you idiot!
March 20th, 2009 at 10:50 amWell they obviously can’t be run well by those making over $250K either.
March 20th, 2009 at 10:52 amthis is what happens when a society covets money — it creates greedy, materialistic and unrealistic people.
There are some doctors and surgeons and most definitely nurses that make less than $250,000 and they save lives everyday. so i’m guessing we should just skip going to get medical care or don’t go under the knife because doc doesn’t make enough money to know what their doing? seriously?
March 20th, 2009 at 10:56 amMr. Haines. No! I will never make $250,000 a year. I will also never be Cramer who got creamed by a comedian. I also was not dumb enough to have invested in Bear Sterns nor Lehman Brothers while they were in the middle of pulling off the biggest fraud in the history of this great country.
And I would never claim that a person making less than $250K is not smart enough to operate a finance company nor be a reporter for CNBC. You guys are the Jerry Springer of financial news.
March 20th, 2009 at 11:08 amWall Street companies has proven that these companies can not be run well by overpaid and over-rated executives over $250,000.
sarc OFF!
March 20th, 2009 at 11:22 amWords escape me. The arrogance is astounding.
March 20th, 2009 at 11:22 amClassic. People don’t usually put themselves in the position of the Nazi’s when they do these comparisons. He could have used de-Baathification or something at least.
The problem with these “geniuses” is that they don’t understand that the amount of money you make is not tied to your competence. Big Business has been overrun by mental midget MBAs who can make pretty graph charts in Excel and know how to create their own ironclad compensation contracts. They hire expensive consultants because it covers their butt if something goes wrong. They don’t care about the actual performance of the company because their golden parachutes ensure that they will be first in line for the bankruptcy judge and this “nation of laws” will ensure they get paid before creditors.
March 20th, 2009 at 11:24 amTHE CRASS ARROGANCE IS ASTOUNDING.. nor surprisingly from the fold of CNBC; the world of Cramer, Moneyhoney, Erin Burnett et al… in short a group of pieholes
March 20th, 2009 at 11:26 amWe live in a free market. Corporate execs have the power to demand a wage in relation to their skills. Just because someone makes over 250,000 a year does not mean you cant trust them.
If that was the case, you guys couldnt follow your man lovers Sean Penn, and Soros.
March 20th, 2009 at 11:33 amFailed insider,
Your analogy was astounding! I must say.
I seem to remember the Titanic never made it back to port. Now, who would dare fire THAT crew? (/snark)
Seriously, not everyone can be a manager of a multi billion dollar business, but I can show you some managers of these business that can’t manage the business.
March 20th, 2009 at 11:45 amLOL…Mark Haines, CNBC financial host, made THE most ludicrous comment I have heard recently: “you can’t expect Wall Street to be run well by those making less than $250,000.00…..” As if those who have been recently running Wall Street (into the ground)and making obscene salaries, benefits, and compensation packages have been operating it well….THINK about it…..
March 20th, 2009 at 11:53 amMary Jo Kopechne Says:
We live in a free market. Corporate execs have the power to demand a wage in relation to their skills. Just because someone makes over 250,000 a year does not mean you cant trust them.
Baloney. Read my last post. Corporate execs and their boards set each others’ compensation levels. It is in no way a competitive appraisal of their job skills.
March 20th, 2009 at 11:54 amHaines is absolutely right. Unpopular as it may be to say it, it takes an enormous amount of experience and knowledge to run a financial institution. Anyone with those skills is going to have the ability to earn much more than $250,000 doing something else (e.g. working for a hedge fund), so if we limit pay for top financial execs to $250,000, it will only ensure that the most capable people go elsewhere.
The populist outrage which takes the very legitimate criticisms to which Wall Street should be subject and extends them to the point of saying that all of these execs are nothing but a bunch of bumbling fools is akin to the sports fan who watches a highly-paid athlete make an error and then concludes that he (the fan) could do just as well as the star. Yes, these financial execs messed up big time. To conclude from this that their jobs don’t require a high degree of skill is foolish and ultimately harmful to our nation’s well-being. If this sort of short-sighted thinking carries the day, it will result in unqualified people being put in positions which require enormous skill, thereby leading to even worse problems down the road.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:20 pmQuick we must raise their salaries because wallstreet is not being run now….must be under paid!
March 20th, 2009 at 12:55 pmIts our own aristocracy without any vestige of the noble part. No honor among thieves as they say. These few of privilege and power rant against entitlements for the poor and middle class but they only do so because they are the masters of gaming and pillaging the system and know how much damage that can lead to. BTW CNBC, those making over 250K seem to have no ability to manage the financial system either or haven’t you noticed the economic facts of the last 6 months? CNBC is filled with some of the worst “journalists” we have in this country. It matches the idiots they “report” on.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:00 pmMark Haines, you have to be the biggest JackAss to say something like that. I would LOVE to come on your show sometime and discuss this matter with you.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:05 pmI have some comments on Mark Haines and Tim Geithner here:
http://notesfromtherustbelt.blogspot.com/2009/03/losing-our-religion.html
I think that Haines and Geithner drank the same koolaid…
March 20th, 2009 at 1:21 pmIt’s an insult to all small business owners, as well as any CEOs prior to this uber self-rewarding culture that overtook the business world since Reagan. I do believe the nation prospered best when those who ran businesses did so because they wanted to and felt they could do it better – not because they thought they deserved to be filthy rich merely by title. They act as if they are kings, and these guys need to pull their heads out of their asses and get real.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:27 pmSomething to consider….
If AIG is paying these bonuses to people that did an outstanding job. I say that only because from my perspective, a $1m bonus is a gigantic reward. Whatever it was they did, they did the best job they could. What I cant understand is, what would failure have looked like and what would their bonuses looked like then. Also, arent bonuses generally in the 10 – 20% range? That would mean that someone getting a $1m bonus, would have an annual salary of around $5m.
We need to follow the money.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:29 pmhttp://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/19/cnbc-rich-wall-street/#comment-5556120, Sidmando sez:
I have no idea what you’re talking about. Why conclude that selling snakeoil takes ‘an enormous amount of experience and knowledge’? None of these people make anything. Zero. Nada. Most of them can’t actually do anything. They can’t – or won’t – do any actual work. Their problem solving skills are often very poor. The “big picture” folks more often than not cannot bear to understand the details wherein lies the “devil” of the problem. (You know, ‘the devil lies in the details…) They have neither the intelligence or insight to grasp complex problems or to solve them, largely because they don’t really do anything or make anything.
I have directly worked for really, really powerful, influential people in very large corporations. They aren’t all that. They aren’t that smart.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:31 pmDid the guy ever justify this statement? You can’t make a statement like that without trying to justify it.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:11 pmWOW…..last time I checked the CEO of the largest company in the world makes $400,000. That person is the President of the United States. If the President can make $400,000, and a firefighter and a teacher can make $50,000 to $60,000. Why can’t a Wall Street company be run by someone making $250,000 or less. Maybe they will understand what the real world is like!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This channel needs to change its anchors and reporters. How much do they earn a year?
March 20th, 2009 at 4:15 pmOh no.. Wall Street can’t afford the drugs they do to speedily do their work.
While Mr. Parsons, whose incarceration is not related to his work for WaMu, oversaw a team screening mortgage applications, he was snorting methamphetamine daily.
Please send your donations of crystal meth and crack to your local Wall Street investor so they can have the motivation to cause an economic collapse.
March 20th, 2009 at 4:24 pmThe populist outrage which takes the very legitimate criticisms to which Wall Street should be subject and extends them to the point of saying that all of these execs are nothing but a bunch of bumbling fools is akin to the sports fan who watches a highly-paid athlete make an error and then concludes that he (the fan) could do just as well as the star. Yes, these financial execs messed up big time. To conclude from this that their jobs don’t require a high degree of skill is foolish and ultimately harmful to our nation’s well-being.
Wrong. No one is referring to them as bumbling fools but you. We acknowledge their jobs are difficult, but there are literally hundreds of highly-talented folks who could do the job just as well, and at a fraction of the price these masters of the universe are being paid. I’ll say once again, the main reason these folks are highly paid, is the financially-incestuous relationship they have with their corporate boards, when each sets the compensation level of the other.
March 20th, 2009 at 5:14 pmCNBC offices should be blown off the face of the earth. We’d all be better off.
March 20th, 2009 at 6:43 pmmaking more money means more smarter lool, how stupid comment is that.
March 20th, 2009 at 8:40 pmHere’s a good video about Charlie Rangel and his thought’s in taxes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdtFWCrCh0s
March 21st, 2009 at 12:47 am@Tim43 the Troll
What does that have to do with capping executive pay?
Former Speaker Hastert traveled home to his Illinois district virtually every weekend and, his former aides tell ABC News, he would almost always travel on military aircraft. 20K a week.. which one is worst? Get a life you Republican Funded Troll.
March 21st, 2009 at 2:09 amConsidering that people are stumbling all over themselves achieve the most difficult job in the world (The US President) and considering it only pays about $400,000 per year, it seems that this is a good top salary to bring in talent for any lesser job.
March 21st, 2009 at 9:12 amPerhaps I’ve missed it, but has anyone mentioned that if a company is “too big to fail” then it is certainly a monopoly and should be broken up, or, have our anti-trust laws been so gutted that a company can be too big and so big in fact that it’s failure will bring down the entire economy but still not be considered a monopoly? Can anyone speak to this, inquiring minds want to know, eh?
March 23rd, 2009 at 10:24 am