View Full Version : So what's wrong with Paulson?
maestrowork
09-23-2008, 04:58 AM
Is this guy incompetent and out of his mind or what? First, he said the economy was sound just not too long ago. Was he sleeping on the job? And now, with the massive bailout:
1. He is going to keep the multimillion dollar bonus packages for the company executives:
He actually said, "There will be NO LIMITS on Executive Compensation under this plan; that would be punitive".
WTF?
2. He also wants to bail out foreign banks with our tax payers' money. I'm sure he has a good reason, but shoot, I'd like China to bail us out, too.
Is he high on crack?
Gravity
09-23-2008, 05:13 AM
Short answer: yes.
InfinityGoddess
09-23-2008, 05:14 AM
Short answer: yes.
I agree.
Bravo
09-23-2008, 05:32 AM
he's a scam artist.
ColoradoGuy
09-23-2008, 05:39 AM
He actually said, "There will be NO LIMITS on Executive Compensation under this plan; that would be punitive".
WTF?
He's apparently so dense (or possibly elitist? Hmm) that he doesn't see being punitive is the point.
It may not be hard to get consensus across the board on this bozo.
As far as compensation for the company executives, I'm not a big one on spending taxpayer dollars, but I'd be happy to offer them accommodations at Federal expense for a few years. :D
Williebee
09-23-2008, 06:10 AM
I'm with Don on this one.
If nothing else, I nice debtor's wing somewhere.
Don Allen
09-23-2008, 06:13 AM
I think he's a very attractive man, but only in so much as one straight guy can think another straight guy is attractive....So there not all negative......
Don Allen
09-23-2008, 06:22 AM
Actually, something in all this is beginning to stink......
Tell me if I'm way out wack here, but instead of buying a bunch of shit debt owned by shit companies, couldn't we guarantee the paper without purchasing the pony?
In other words, put the accountants to work seperating the tangible assets from the bogus marked up paper, while freezing and guaranting the stock of these companys at SAY a level six months ago, thereby providing a safty net for investors, until the sorting can be done, then applying a number to the fixed assets, in terms of market value, and a number to the bullshit assets in terms of solvency...
It would seem to me that this would be a better approach than just buying the companies and keeping the same asswipes in charge to piss away more money... I'm sure this is to simplistic,,, God knows we can't have a simple answer to a cluster fuck like this....
Don Allen
09-23-2008, 06:25 AM
Ray did you see section 8, I think,, Nobody in the freaken world can tell him his shit stinks under this plan........
How long befor Bush declares that he must remain president FOREVER>>>>>>.
How long befor Bush declares that he must remain president FOREVER>>>>>>.
Careful, Don, they'll have you in the tinfoil hat brigade with me if you say things like that. :D
Don Allen
09-23-2008, 07:02 AM
I think he's a very attractive man, but only in so much as one straight guy can think another straight guy is attractive....So there not all negative......
I got called out on this...... Okay, so I lied.......
LaurieD
09-23-2008, 07:17 AM
Actually, something in all this is beginning to stink......
Tell me if I'm way out wack here, but instead of buying a bunch of shit debt owned by shit companies, couldn't we guarantee the paper without purchasing the pony?
In other words, put the accountants to work seperating the tangible assets from the bogus marked up paper, while freezing and guaranting the stock of these companys at SAY a level six months ago, thereby providing a safty net for investors, until the sorting can be done, then applying a number to the fixed assets, in terms of market value, and a number to the bullshit assets in terms of solvency...
This strikes me as the first good solution I've heard so far!
Inkdaub
09-26-2008, 01:40 PM
His son owns my town's soccer and baseball teams!
Our society is all about the wealthy and powerful taking care of each other and screwing the rest of us. This is nothing new. Ocassionally they will toss out a sacrificial lamb but that is only to maintain the status quo...as they say...
Tirjasdyn
09-26-2008, 07:26 PM
Okay so if his hold getting on his knees to beg for the money works, can I get funding from AW folks to go to DC so that I can beg in front of congress for money for everyone on this board who needs it.
It'll be much less than he wanted.
700 bil is more than enough to make every tax payer a millionaire, and it would be cheaper.
Monkey
09-26-2008, 07:34 PM
The New York Times: "The day began with an agreement that Washington hoped would end the financial crisis that has gripped the nation. It dissolved into a verbal brawl in the Cabinet Room of the White House, urgent warnings from the president and pleas from a Treasury secretary who knelt before the House speaker and appealed for her support.”
“‘I didn’t know you were Catholic,” Ms. Pelosi said, a wry reference to Mr. Paulson’s kneeling, according to someone who observed the exchange. She went on: ‘It’s not me blowing this up, it’s the Republicans.’”
“Mr. Paulson sighed. ‘I know. I know.’”
So he knows that the Republicans are the hold-outs, but he goes all over-dramatic and kneels before Pelosi? What the hell?
I do think he's lost his mind. If not before the crisis, then certainly during it.
Okay so if his hold getting on his knees to beg for the money works, can I get funding from AW folks to go to DC so that I can beg in front of congress for money for everyone on this board who needs it.
It'll be much less than he wanted.
700 bil is more than enough to make every tax payer a millionaire, and it would be cheaper.
$700,000,000,000 / 200,000,000 = $3,500
...just sayin'
Tirjasdyn
09-26-2008, 08:59 PM
$700,000,000,000 / 200,000,000 = $3,500
...just sayin'
Only half of those filed payed taxes last year.
Plus there will be interest.
Only half of those filed payed taxes last year.
Plus there will be interest.
You're still not even in the same ballpark as a million per taxpayer.
DeleyanLee
09-26-2008, 09:42 PM
$700,000,000,000 / 200,000,000 = $3,500
...just sayin'
I'd still take it--as long as it wasn't a pre-payment on future tax refunds.
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.