PDA

View Full Version : Economics Outraged Obama Takes Action On Wall Street Pay Limits: helps firms sidestep rules


trndobrd
04-04-2009, 03:14 PM
U.S. aims to help firms sidestep bailout rules
Obama administration seeks to avoid restrictions, including limits on pay
By Amit R. Paley and David Cho


The Obama administration is engineering its new bailout initiatives in a way that it believes will allow firms benefiting from the programs to avoid restrictions imposed by Congress, including limits on lavish executive pay, according to government officials.

Administration officials have concluded that this approach is vital for persuading firms to participate in programs funded by the $700 billion financial rescue package.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30040075/

SBK
04-04-2009, 03:35 PM
LMAO

Simplex3
04-04-2009, 04:13 PM
For the love of Pete. My five year old doesn't change his mind this much.

patteeu
04-05-2009, 04:41 PM
Obama spin squad in 5, 4, 3, 2, ....

KC native
04-05-2009, 06:24 PM
Well, the story doesn't appear on Washpo anymore so it looks like it may be another case of unnamed sources and being wrong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/05/AR2009040500731.html

Geithner denies White House sidestepping CEO pay limits

By Doina Chiacu
Reuters
Sunday, April 5, 2009; 6:08 PM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner denied on Sunday the Obama administration was crafting bailout initiatives to allow companies to evade limits on executive pay and other restrictions imposed by Congress.

"No, that's not true," Geithner said when asked about a report in Saturday's Washington Post that the White House was trying to allow some exceptions.

"Now, our obligation is to apply the laws that Congress just passed on executive compensation and we're going to do that," he told the CBS program "Face the Nation."

"We're also going to make sure that these programs are as effective as possible in making credit more available to businesses and families across the country."

The Post said President Barack Obama's administration believes it can sidestep the rules because it has in many cases decided not to provide federal aid directly to the financial institutions, instead setting up special entities that act as middlemen to channel the funds.

Executive pay restrictions are among efforts by Congress to claw back bonuses and curb pay amid public anger over executive bonuses at insurer American International Group, which has received a bailout worth up to $180 billion.

The "Pay for Performance Act of 2009" was passed by the House of Representatives last week and now goes to the Senate.

Geithner also said the U.S. government would not hesitate to oust management of big banks that require "exceptional assistance," as it did last week with General Motors.

He noted the government had shaken up management at financial institutions Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and AIG, "and we'll do that in the future if that is necessary."

CONDITIONS ATTACHED

Some financial firms have said the prospect of compensation limits make them reluctant to join in the Treasury's financial rescue package, which could diminish its power to cleanse toxic assets from banks' books and jump-start lending.

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod told "Fox News Sunday" the president does not want to discourage companies from participating in the Treasury programs, but has a tough set of standards on executive pay.

"On some of these programs, we're asking financial companies to come in and help solve this problem by providing more lending, by buying up toxic assets and so on," he said. "We don't want to create disincentives and undermine the program.

"So we have to look very closely at this, making sure that we're not rewarding people for irresponsibility, that people -- that firms that get extraordinary help -- aren't getting, aren't giving out huge bonuses."

Geithner said the White House was committed to enforcing the restrictions approved by Congress.

"Absolutely, because we want the American taxpayers' assistance going to generate greater lending -- not providing excess compensation," he told CBS.

"It is very important to us that every dollar of assistance we provide goes to expand lending."

wild1
04-05-2009, 06:26 PM
Obama spin squad in 5, 4, 3, 2, ....

There are stages of an Obama supporter falling into line on a policy:

1. Denial. This isn't true, the source is suspect, right wing smear machine, etc etc. (leave the impression you don't believe and would not support)

2. Distraction. Well, what about some unrelated issue? Besides, couldn't be any worse than the last 8 years.

3. Acceptance. I fully support this policy. Only government can save us. All hail our glorious Leader.

KC native
04-05-2009, 06:29 PM
There are stages of an Obama supporter falling into line on a policy:

1. Denial. This isn't true, the source is suspect, right wing smear machine, etc etc. (leave the impression you don't believe and would not support)

2. Distraction. Well, what about some unrelated issue? Besides, couldn't be any worse than the last 8 years.

3. Acceptance. I fully support this policy. Only government can save us. All hail our glorious Leader.

Well, since the story is no longer available from the source there must have been something wrong in it.

KC Dan
04-05-2009, 09:35 PM
Well, since the story is no longer available from the source there must have been something wrong in it.
Yep, Rahm gave MSNBC and other media centers a call....

trndobrd
04-06-2009, 01:13 PM
Well, the story doesn't appear on Washpo anymore so it looks like it may be another case of unnamed sources and being wrong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/05/AR2009040500731.html

It does still appear on the Washington Post website...so it looks like it may be another case of the truth coming out.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/03/AR2009040303910.html?hpid=topnews

If the Washington Post taking a story off the front page of the website is the best argument the Obama apologists are able to summon it's going to be a long four years.

KC native
04-06-2009, 01:17 PM
It does still appear on the Washington Post website...so it looks like it may be another case of the truth coming out.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/03/AR2009040303910.html?hpid=topnews

Ok, when I searched by the title it wasn't there. However, this is another article with unnamed sources (just like Varney's piece of trash column) that doesn't prove anything and probably isn't true because the officials didn't want to be named.

KC Dan
04-06-2009, 01:19 PM
Ok, when I searched by the title it wasn't there. However, this is another article with unnamed sources (just like Varney's piece of trash column) that doesn't prove anything and probably isn't true because the officials didn't want to be named.
Just like "Deep Throat", hmmm?

KC native
04-06-2009, 01:21 PM
Just like "Deep Throat", hmmm?

Really? You're going to try and make that comparison? ROFL

KC Dan
04-06-2009, 01:21 PM
Really? You're going to try and make that comparison? ROFL
No worse than any of yours...

SBK
04-06-2009, 01:31 PM
Ok, when I searched by the title it wasn't there. However, this is another article with unnamed sources (just like Varney's piece of trash column) that doesn't prove anything and probably isn't true because the officials didn't want to be named.

I see you've moved to the front of the line to gargle Obama's nuts. Good grief you've got true believer syndrome bad.

trndobrd
04-06-2009, 01:31 PM
Ok, when I searched by the title it wasn't there. However, this is another article with unnamed sources (just like Varney's piece of trash column) that doesn't prove anything and probably isn't true because the officials didn't want to be named.

"Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said the congressional conditions should apply to any firm benefiting from bailout funds. He said he planned to review the administration's decisions and might seek to undo them. "We have to make certain that if they are using government money in any sort of way, there should be restrictions," he said. "


Pardon me while I search the archives for other instances of you taking the position that stories with unnamed sources don't prove anything and probably aren't true.

Ooops, looks live you've only been on here a few months. I'm sure you were just as dismissive of articles critical of GWB that were based on unnamed sources. In fact, I'm suprised you didn't get chiefsplanet account just so you could decry the unfairness of the unsubtantiated NYT story claiming that John McCain had an affair with a lobbyist.

KC native
04-06-2009, 01:38 PM
"Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said the congressional conditions should apply to any firm benefiting from bailout funds. He said he planned to review the administration's decisions and might seek to undo them. "We have to make certain that if they are using government money in any sort of way, there should be restrictions," he said. "


Pardon me while I search the archives for other instances of you taking the position that stories with unnamed sources don't prove anything and probably aren't true.

Ooops, looks live you've only been on here a few months. I'm sure you were just as dismissive of articles critical of GWB that were based on unnamed sources. In fact, I'm suprised you didn't get chiefsplanet account just so you could decry the unfairness of the unsubtantiated NYT story claiming that John McCain had an affair with a lobbyist.

So, how does a Representative saying that he plans to make sure that the firms that receive TARP money have to abide by pay limits prove that the Obama Admin is sidestepping pay requirements?

FTR and IMO the McCain affair story was garbage and shouldn't have been published. Any article that relies on one unnamed source is dubious regardless of who it's written about.

patteeu
04-07-2009, 07:33 AM
"Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said the congressional conditions should apply to any firm benefiting from bailout funds. He said he planned to review the administration's decisions and might seek to undo them. "We have to make certain that if they are using government money in any sort of way, there should be restrictions," he said. "


Pardon me while I search the archives for other instances of you taking the position that stories with unnamed sources don't prove anything and probably aren't true.

Ooops, looks live you've only been on here a few months. I'm sure you were just as dismissive of articles critical of GWB that were based on unnamed sources. In fact, I'm suprised you didn't get chiefsplanet account just so you could decry the unfairness of the unsubtantiated NYT story claiming that John McCain had an affair with a lobbyist.

In terms of the President bypassing the will of Congress, this sounds worse than the Iran Contra affair to me. And given Obama's fake outrage over the bonuses, it's definitely far more hypocritical.

HonestChieffan
04-07-2009, 09:16 AM
Ok, when I searched by the title it wasn't there. However, this is another article with unnamed sources (just like Varney's piece of trash column) that doesn't prove anything and probably isn't true because the officials didn't want to be named.

"Varney's piece of trash column"....code for I dont agree with it so it must suck? Or did his column just go over your head?

KC native
04-07-2009, 09:52 AM
"Varney's piece of trash column"....code for I dont agree with it so it must suck? Or did his column just go over your head?

ROFL
That's rich coming from the guy who got de-pantsed in the CRA thread.