Obama doesn't want you to succeed

[brencat]

Good bump OP. And you were right...

Obama is turning out to be dangerous. Certainly for capitalism and the free market. But there's no point in reasoning with guys like Harvey. If it were up to him, no one would make more than $75k. After all, too much income disparity breeds resentment among the sheeple :roll:

 

[Vic]

If you don't want gubment controlling your compensation, don't make gubment your boss.

That's the problem here, spidey. These corps ran to the govt to bail them out, but at the same time they don't want to govt to have any say over them. Sorry, it don't work that way.

But I know I'm wasting my time when I'm arguing with a guy who thinks that a state not wanting to pay to maintain dead-end roads into cul-de-sac developments is somehow an infringement of property rights. You are literally the textbook example of everything wrong and hypocritical with the Republican party right now.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: brencat
Good bump OP. And you were right...

Obama is turning out to be dangerous. Certainly for capitalism and the free market. But there's no point in reasoning with guys like Harvey. If it were up to him, no one would make more than $75k. After all, too much income disparity breeds resentment among the sheeple :roll:

Proof?

(besides Rush said so). :roll:

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The last economic expansion has left the middle class no better off than they were but the top 5% have had their wealth grow considerably.

Totally agree. :thumbsup:

Now, if you could just figure out what causes the booms and their busts.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Vic
If you don't want gubment controlling your compensation, don't make gubment your boss.

Well, didn't some of them NOT ask for bailout money?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Vic
If you don't want gubment controlling your compensation, don't make gubment your boss.

Well, didn't some of them NOT ask for bailout money?

And some are even giving it back. To those that asked for it and/or keep it, my argument stands. TANSTAAFL.

Something to remember though is that any publicly-traded corporation enjoys some very unique legal protections granted to it by government. Once again, TANSTAAFL.

That's one of the problems with our country, bam. Everyone seems to want a free lunch. Some are just less (self-)honest about it than others.

 

[brencat]

Originally posted by: bamacre
Now, if you could just figure out what causes the booms and their busts.

There will always be boom and bust. It's part of the natural evolutionary cycle in a capitalistic society, and busts are necessary to correct excesses from capital being overdeployed in certain parts of the economy. We had a huge party in housing and using our homes as ATMs for years, while publicly traded financial companies went on a debt & leverage binge all so they could play 'beat the quarterly number' game.

And now we are paying the price.

But how did we get to a point in our society where people today feel they are not entitled to feel any pain or suffering from stupid behavior?

 

[LumbergTech]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Obama truly does not like the midwest or anyone from a small town or goes to a real Christian Church where people actually read the Bible. Heaven forbid we have hope for the future. I guess he belongs to the Metro Sexual Party.

What the hell are you talking about?

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: senseamp
It is communist for owners (shareholders) of a company to have a say in how much of their money they want to pay to the CEO?
You gotta be kidding me.

Its also communist to fire CEOs of bailed out companies... LOL

 

[ohnoes]

I love the bible. Does your version come with the Cinderella story? Mine does and I love it!

 

[alien42]

uhhh, OP self pwnage anyone? Obama was correct all along as has been shown since this thread was created. more spidey07 bullshit FTL.

 

[Cattlegod]

This is a good thing, this works in the shareholders interest and helps alleviate some of the principle agent problems.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: brencat

Originally posted by: bamacre
Now, if you could just figure out what causes the booms and their busts.

There will always be boom and bust. It's part of the natural evolutionary cycle in a capitalistic society, and busts are necessary to correct excesses from capital being overdeployed in certain parts of the economy. We had a huge party in housing and using our homes as ATMs for years, while publicly traded financial companies went on a debt & leverage binge all so they could play 'beat the quarterly number' game.

And now we are paying the price.

But how did we get to a point in our society where people today feel they are not entitled to feel any pain or suffering from stupid behavior?

That's not possible under capitalism.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: spidey07
MONSTER BUMP! A year later and you see Obama and his administration for what they really are.

If only people had paid attention to all his speeches and notions.

Arent the Obamas millionaires?

 

[brencat]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: brencat

Originally posted by: bamacre
Now, if you could just figure out what causes the booms and their busts.

There will always be boom and bust. It's part of the natural evolutionary cycle in a capitalistic society, and busts are necessary to correct excesses from capital being overdeployed in certain parts of the economy. We had a huge party in housing and using our homes as ATMs for years, while publicly traded financial companies went on a debt & leverage binge all so they could play 'beat the quarterly number' game.

And now we are paying the price.

But how did we get to a point in our society where people today feel they are not entitled to feel any pain or suffering from stupid behavior?

That's not possible under capitalism.

I think you're being sarcastic, but in case you aren't, what do you call the excesses known as the internet/tech, real estate, and commodity bubbles of the last 9 years?

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: spidey07
MONSTER BUMP! A year later and you see Obama and his administration for what they really are.

If only people had paid attention to all his speeches and notions.

More like MONSTER FAIL, as usual.

The second you take a taxpayer "bailout" you lose the power to control what your execs make, it's that simple. Don't want to be controlled by the government? Don't take their fcking money.

As an aside, this was a really good thread (the first couple of pages). Further proof that ATPN could run the country better than the hacks we have in Congress.

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Phokus
So CEO's who tank their companies into the water and receive golden parachutes and large compensation = capitalism?

The OP is retarded. I think shareholders who have the power to punish executives for poor performance is the very definition of capitalism. If anything, Obama is not going far enough by making it non-binding.

Well shareholders can typically vote out the board that gave the CEO the golden parachute.
The disconnect comes from people owning such a small % of the company their vote ends up being dwarfed by mutual fund managers or people who own a majority stake. But as a shareholder these are the risks you need to weigh before investing.

Hmm. Well in the reality that individual shareholders don't really have any say at all, and the mutual fund managers/etc are likely to be corrupt themselves, there's really no recourse. Not to mention corporate shenanigans affect far more than just shareholders. What of the employees of such corporations, who lose their jobs due to corrupt CEOs & Executives?

Also disturbing is this :

"The average pay for chief executives rose to 369 times that of the average worker in 2005," Josh Fineman of Bloomberg News wrote on January 4. That was "up from 131 times in 1993 and 36 times in 1976, according to a study by Kevin Murphy, a finance professor at the University of Southern California."

So, if the CEO gets paid 369x that of their average employee, that means that capital / $$ is not available for : hiring/keeping employees, investing in the company, R&D, paying the company's bills, etc, etc. This seems a bad omen for the economy overall.

Like I said, when investing in a company this is one of the issues a person(shareholder) needs to weigh before investing. If you dont like the past compensation packages for current and departed CEO's. Then dont invest. But most daytraders or individual investors are either too lazy or dont care. Then complain after the fact. It is almost like they want all the benefits but none of the negatives when it comes to the financial markets. And they are willing to lean on govt to make sure they never get hurt.

/thread

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Atreus21
I don't think he's communist. I think he's uninformed.

Now that's hubris.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Atreus21
I don't think he's communist. I think he's uninformed.

Now that's hubris.

But true.....

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Atreus21
I don't think he's communist. I think he's uninformed.

Now that's hubris.

But true.....

Yes it's true, if by true you mean totally incorrect. Please explain how the US president is uninformed. His day is essentially one meeting after another of experts in each field informing him. And the sitting president has the fortunate ability to actually understand what he's being told.

In fact, if gun to my head I had to pick which description Obama was closer to, Communist or Uninformed, I think commie wins by a mile.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: alien42
uhhh, OP self pwnage anyone? Obama was correct all along as has been shown since this thread was created. more spidey07 bullshit FTL.

:thumbsup:

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: alien42
uhhh, OP self pwnage anyone? Obama was correct all along as has been shown since this thread was created. more spidey07 bullshit FTL.

:thumbsup:

Not really. He's coming after your paycheck next. Just wait. It's coming and it's coming fast and only fools haven't been paying attention to the gubment controlling how much people can make.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: alien42
uhhh, OP self pwnage anyone? Obama was correct all along as has been shown since this thread was created. more spidey07 bullshit FTL.

:thumbsup:

Not really. He's coming after your paycheck next. Just wait. It's coming and it's coming fast and only fools haven't been paying attention to the gubment controlling how much people can make.

I heard they're making tinfoil hats in stylish royal blue and flamingo fuscia. Limited edition of course, get em while they're hot...

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Atreus21
I don't think he's communist. I think he's uninformed.

Now that's hubris.

But true.....

Yes it's true, if by true you mean totally incorrect. Please explain how the US president is uninformed. His day is essentially one meeting after another of experts in each field informing him. And the sitting president has the fortunate ability to actually understand what he's being told.

In fact, if gun to my head I had to pick which description Obama was closer to, Communist or Uninformed, I think commie wins by a mile.

Lets take his automotive task force as an example: Mr. Obama's automotive task force is filled with people who have no experience in the automotive manufacturing business. On top of that, 20% of the task force don't even own automobiles. Do you think that Mr. Obama made an "informed" decision when staffing his automotive task force with people who don't have experience and nearly a quarter of the staff won't even purchase an automobile?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: alien42
uhhh, OP self pwnage anyone? Obama was correct all along as has been shown since this thread was created. more spidey07 bullshit FTL.

he's incorrect for saying that giving shareholders the right to vote on how much they're paying their employees isn't capitalism, rather it's government control.