The Obama Economy

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

It is a lack of personal responsibility when signing for a loan you can't afford, and lack of discretion and reverse discrimination when the government pressures you to give the loan out anyway because of ethnicity or socioeconomic status.

what do you think of this discrimination?

Quote

From the 1940s to the early '60s, over $120 billion in home loans were made to whites, preferentially, thanks to these government efforts, while blacks and other persons of color were excluded from the same. Indeed, about half of all homes purchased by white families during this time were financed thanks to these low-interest loans, while folks of color remained locked in cities, their dwellings and businesses often knocked down to make way for the interstates that would shuttle their white counterparts to the suburbs where only they could live.

We remain residentially divided today because of the legacy of those apartheidlike policies, as well as ongoing race-based housing discrimination: between 2 million and 3.7 million incidents per year according to private estimates.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/129505/holder%27s_much_touted_speech_on_race_lets_white_p%20eople_off_the_hook/

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[idrankwhat 0]

Ok, first it's this:
"At the same time if the same guy tries his best and falls on his face and goes home with the million dollar door prize, he still deserves it cuz he took the risk that many wouldnt and couldnt take!

Then it's this:
"And falling on your face from your own stupidity of over spending and getting ear deep in debt isn't punishment, it's your own dumb fault for putting a hurtle in front of you that you knew you couldnt leap over. the balance of the universe, cause and effect, owning up to your own repsonsibility, or should the working class be able to do whatever they want and get hand outs from the government ... when they can't keep up with their spending habits ?



So, which is it? Responsibility and consequences for your actions or not?

[Capt.Slog 0]

Quote

Ok, first it's this:
"At the same time if the same guy tries his best and falls on his face and goes home with the million dollar door prize, he still deserves it cuz he took the risk that many wouldnt and couldnt take!

Then it's this:
"And falling on your face from your own stupidity of over spending and getting ear deep in debt isn't punishment, it's your own dumb fault for putting a hurtle in front of you that you knew you couldnt leap over. the balance of the universe, cause and effect, owning up to your own repsonsibility, or should the working class be able to do whatever they want and get hand outs from the government ... when they can't keep up with their spending habits ?



So, which is it? Responsibility and consequences for your actions or not?

Didn't you get the memo? Only working class folks get to take the consequences of their actions. Corporate execs get "severance packages" when they fuck up the entire nation's economy.

[Capt.Slog 0]

Quote

> The economy worked nicely 40 - 50 years ago when coporate execs didn't take
>home 1000x the income of the average employee.

Google Standard Oil.

Did Rockefeller bankrupt his company and then take a huge bonus?

[BDashe 0]

First off, I'm talking about a hypotheical CEO in the first quotation, and a dumb sh*t over spending working class american that needs the CEOs tax dollars in the second. Don't you f*cking quote me out of context to make a point jack@$$. It's very petty.

Moving foreward, I have repeatedly held the same position: responsibility for your own actions. Again, you seem to be missing what i am saying. Quite honestly, I dont know how many different ways i can say it. Let me try to simplify the simplified:

Youre an american who makes 50K annually after taxes. you live a life that costs you 100k annually by choice. this is unsustainable, and you lose your @$$ eventually. In my world, it's bullsh*t to ask for a handout from the government. you start over after bankruptcy and try not to repeat the same mistake while plunking along in your 50K annual world with no ambition to push farther and earn that 100K lifestyle, just to get money from the government to get you back to normal.

Now, new scenario. You're a CEO. You've worked your way up in an industry and are consisered one of the most experienced in your field. You were heavily recruited and finally signed a contract that says, you try your hardest and we pay you lots of money as you are the head of this billion dollar company with 75,000 employees and you make the most of anybody because you are the head honcho making the decisions that effect everyone. It says, if you get fired, you collect full salary for 2 years, but you cant work for the competition for that 2 years. The government says, if your company does bad for any reason, the stock holders have a legal right to sue you personally. You say, 'OK, that is f*ckin scary, but I will work for you because you offered me the best deal than the other guy and i think i can win here. If i win, everybody wins, this could be great! I think I have the best shot at making this company successful.' That contract says you have a salary of 1 million dollars and you get stock options gifted to you, 100,000 shares per year. For a time things go really well, and you make all the big bucks off your options and sell some shares. Then the economy turns or you make a couple bad decisions and the company goes under. You get fired and lose the potential to make 50 million on the options that are worthless. People think you are too high a risk to hire, so not only ar eyou not allowed to get a job while collecting from your old company, but no one wants you anyway. you collect 1 million for 2 years. People sue the living sh*t out of you since you f*cked up. you lose half your worth (that has already been taxed) to legal fees, and several years of your life battling in court for trying your best.

Tell me another position or job, especially in the working class, where you face that much financial and personal risk. Do you see the complexity of the latter even in a dumbed down version? This is why they get the "golden parachutes" which are actually considerably less fruitful and more time consuming and stressful than having made the right decisions- but you knew the risks going in and took em and tried your best but fell short. Oh yeah, I forgot- it is an election year and the liberals are looking for scapegoats so your name is plastered all over the news and legal slander ensues.

You lost BIG, way bigger than the burger flipper who can now mow lawns for the same pay he previously had with a minimal lifestyle change, and no risk of jail time for being a f*ck up. This is why the CEOs do, in fact, deserve the door prize. They have lost WAY more than any unmotivated working class lay-off.

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[billvon 2,998]

>Did Rockefeller bankrupt his company and then take a huge bonus?

?? No. You claimed that 40-50 years ago, corporate execs didn't take home 1000x the income of average employees. That's untrue; I posted an example of just that happening. (In Rockefeller's case it was closer to 100,000 times.)

You also claimed the economy worked nicely 40-50 years ago. Again, googling "The Great Depression" might be of benefit.

[Capt.Slog 0]

Quote

You lost BIG, way bigger than the burger flipper who can now mow lawns for the same pay he previously had with a minimal lifestyle change, and no risk of jail time for being a f*ck up. This is why they do, in fact, deserve the door prize.

What a load of BOLLOCKS.

Now read this:

Even With Economic Crisis, President Obama is More Popular Than Ever
Posted March 4, 2009
BY Celeste Katz
DAILY NEWS POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT

Mr. President, Americans think you're the man.

President Obama is more popular than ever, according to a new poll that shows two-thirds of the country feels "hopeful" about Obama's leadership.


The Stimulus Win Gives Obama a Big Political Boost

Obama now has a 60% approval rating, and people feel things are looking up since he took office, according to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll.

The percentage of those who say the country's "headed in the right direction" has skyrocketed compared to the number who felt that way before Obama took office.

Now, 41% of Americans say the country's going the right way, compared to 26% who thought so just before Obama's inauguration.

Forty-four percent of those polled still say the country's on "the wrong track" — but "given the economic conditions, pollsters expected it to be much higher," the Journal said. The survey found "a record 70%" of people very dissatisfied with the economy.

Of course, not everyone likes the new president: About 28% of those polled said they feel "doubtful" about his plans.

Most Americans still back Obama's expansive economic stimulus program, the poll found — even though a majority also feel it will help the economy only a little or possibly not at all.

A solid 80% approve of Obama's plan to get most U.S. troops out of Iraq within 18 months. Just over half of those polled said the war has been a success, up from 43% who thought so last July.

First Lady Michelle Obama has a solid fan base: She scored 63% positive ratings and just 8% negative ratings.

And in a reversal from the rock-bottom ratings Secretary of State Hillary Clinton got just after she and her husband vacated the White House, Clinton had a record-breaking 59% of Americans viewing her in a positive light, compared to 22% who viewed her negatively.

It's the Republicans who took the real beating: By a more than two to one margin, the Journal said, Americans trust Democrats over the GOP to pull the country out of the recession.

The survey of just over 1,000 adults ran from Feb. 26 to March 1 and has an margin of error of about 3%.

[billvon 2,998]

Your one warning.

[BDashe 0]

warning for which?

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[Capt.Slog 0]

Quote

You also claimed the economy worked nicely 40-50 years ago. Again, googling "The Great Depression" might be of benefit.

40 - 50 years ago was 1959 - 1969.

And I thought engineers were good at 'rithmetic. Or is it your history that sucks?

[BDashe 0]

Quote

Quote

You also claimed the economy worked nicely 40-50 years ago. Again, googling "The Great Depression" might be of benefit.

40 - 50 years ago was 1958 - 1968.

And I thought engineers were good at 'rithmetic. Or is it your history that sucks?

semantics- he makes a good point, just not on your side for once.

correct me if i'm wrong but obama was actually around 80% a few weeks ago? when the DOW was around 9K?

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[billvon 2,998]

>40 - 50 years ago was 1958 - 1968.

Right. And Rockefeller died in 1937, but you seemed to be OK with him as an example.

[billvon 2,998]

>warning for which?

Calling another poster a jackass.

[TheBachelor 5]

Quote

Morris has hit the nail on the head. Anyone who took Economics 101 should see it. I posted the following statement a few days ago. I'll post it again.

"Our president is not a stupid man. He is doing catastrophically stupid things deliberately".

He has an agenda. We're heading for a depression that will make the 'Great Depression' of the 30's seem like a time of prosperity. This is what he wants. It is a power grab.

Well said (by both you and Morris).

There are battered women? I've been eating 'em plain all of these years...

[BDashe 0]

Bill- got it on the warning.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123620884593433947.html

Here is a quick article on the front page of wsj.com. This is exactly what i'm referring to with regards to lawsuits for the top execs. They all know this can happen when they take the job, it is a HUGE risk. The bonuses they were paid are pennies compared to what would be paid if they had steered the company in the right direction. Now, they are fodder for public scrutiny and their names are ruined no matter if what happened was ok or not. You take a top level job and you become a target- every single day.

Tell me all this happens when an hourly employee is laid off... hardly!

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

You also claimed the economy worked nicely 40-50 years ago. Again, googling "The Great Depression" might be of benefit.

40 - 50 years ago was 1958 - 1968.

And I thought engineers were good at 'rithmetic. Or is it your history that sucks?

semantics- he makes a good point, just not on your side for once.

correct me if i'm wrong but obama was actually around 80% a few weeks ago? when the DOW was around 9K?

The economy WAS doing fine from 1958 - 68, JUST LIKE HE SAID. Being 25 years off in your arithmetic is not semantics, it's ERROR.

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

So, Americans as a whole have made some piss poor decisions in at least the last 4 years. Greed has lead to a complete collapse of confidence and the financial system.

Yet the guy with less than 100 days in office is to blame? That just doesn't make any sense.

I've never once blamed him for the current financial mess. I am blaming him for the $1.75T or $1.9T or whatever it is of deficit that he's doing in his first year. I'm blaming him for calling $8 a week a reasonable tax cut while jacking up taxes for the wealthy like you wouldn't believe. That shit is his doing and your response proves my point exactly. People are using their hatred of Bush to justify that crap.

Quote

I certainly don't agree with all the actions he is taking, but to lay such massive blame before results are even measurable is insane.

The results of his first year of deficit are measurable and it is insane. Don't blindly justify everything he does just because the economy was in the shitter when he took office.

Quote

The current drop in the DOW is due to the numbers released pertaining to the 4th Quarter of 2008. The man wasn't even president yet.

The current drop in the Dow is due to a lot of things. There's no confidence in the market. There's no confidence in the banks. There's uncertainty about the talks of nationalization. 4Q losses are definitely a part, but only one part.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[BDashe 0]

The point of the original post was in years past, top execs didnt take huge salaries which is absolutely bogus. the fact that it was happening (justifiably so as well) during the depression as bill quoted is more proof of the poster talking out his ass. It isnt like one day magically in the 80's exec pay increased 1000 fold. it has ALWAYS been this way in the states, it's one of the reasons we are the greatest country. in the 1700s when we were born, the 1800s, 1900s, and today. So long as we want to keep capitalism alive, it'll always be that way!

look at henry ford and that family through the years, the Hiltons, the marriots, even the people that created the slinky! Through every decade they've take a HUGE cut, proportionally larger back then most likely which trumps the "in the good old days 50 years ago" The shit was still going on, it is an absolutely bogus argument made out of desperation to make a point, and bill called him on it.

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

You lost BIG, way bigger than the burger flipper who can now mow lawns for the same pay he previously had with a minimal lifestyle change, and no risk of jail time for being a f*ck up. This is why the CEOs do, in fact, deserve the door prize. They have lost WAY more than any unmotivated working class lay-off.

hahahahahahahahahaahahaha

(good one!)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

it's one of the reasons we are the greatest country. in the 1700s when we were born, the 1800s, 1900s, and today. So long as we want to keep capitalism alive, it'll always be that way!

china is the greatest country - usa is the biggest polluter though!

(i like your socialist banks - very cute)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

First off, I'm talking about a hypotheical CEO in the first quotation, and a dumb sh*t over spending working class american that needs the CEOs tax dollars in the second. Don't you f*cking quote me out of context to make a point jack@$$. It's very petty.

Moving foreward, I have repeatedly held the same position: responsibility for your own actions. Again, you seem to be missing what i am saying. Quite honestly, I dont know how many different ways i can say it. Let me try to simplify the simplified:

I fully understand the point that you're trying to make. You think that a heavy hitter in the CEO world deserves the parachute because of his achievements to date and that the consequences of his bad decisions are significant because you're comparing them to what he COULD have made. IMO, he took the risky contract and the POTENTIAL pot of gold (along with a guaranteed VERY comfortable living) was his prize. He fell short, completely ruined the livelihood of the thousands of workers who were relying on him, and now says that he deserves his multimillion dollar parachute even though his defunct company can't meet the pension obligations that were guaranteed to the workers. He knew the risks going in. By your measure he was successful prior to getting his latest gig so he should have put some away in safe investments in case the worst happened and he failed. My opinion is that your claim of "responsibility for your actions" comes in different shades.

And by the way, this discussion completely ignores such things as the student loans that the $50K/yr small business owner has to pay off regardless of bankruptcy (thanks to legislation written by the banking CEO's), the fact that the heavy hitter CEO was able use tax increment financing to plop his business across the street from the $50K dude, or worse yet, take the $50K guy's property through an imminent domain deal with the local government.

[BDashe 0]

You understand me better then the rest i guess, and a difference of opinion is just fine by me. So I'm more than settled with you on that front.

As for the second paragraph, imminent domain can effect BOTH guys, and neither can blame anyone but who? The government!

Location and competition are all part of our way of life, you can't make a free market socialist and still call it a free market.

and as for loans and personal finances, that goes back to being financially responsible for yourself and living within your means. If you can't do that it is your own fault... or get motivated and try to get promoted or take a new job to make more money! Nothing keeps anyone down in our country other than themselves. Sure, some may have more road blocks, but with motivatioon you can beat em.

example- A friend of mine, Milton, incidentally he is from a small village in Kenya near Obama's actually. Anyway, He worked HARD in school as a kid, got a scholarship to go to a secondary school in the big city- Nairobi. He worked really hard there, and was sponsored to go to i think it was Columbia University in the states- where he did very well and earned a scholarship to Vanderbilt Medical School (when I met him) and the guy is now a freaking doctor. If a guy in a tiny village in Kenya can become a doctor in the USA through one of the better medical schools in the country... then what the hell is every else's problem in this country?

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[shropshire 0]

Quote

then what the hell is every else's problem in this country?

Genetics ... Not every one is as smart as your mate. He did good and made the most of his natural talents... Most of us don't have those abilities.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

... then what the hell is every else's problem in this country?

Not everyone has that aptitude.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/odd_thirsty_suspect

[BDashe 0]

So you are saying if you are born stupid or lazy, you have earned hand outs from the government which comes directly from the highly motivated?

I'm not sure if I'm letting you guys in on this little secret... but you don't have to be very bright to make it in this country!!! Look at GWB, and especially in the music and entertainment industry! You don't have to go to princeton in order to be a CEO, all you need is motivation which is exactly what milton has. He just worked REALLY REALLY hard and studied REALLY REALLY hard. It isnt like he woke up one day and said, hmmm I think im smarter than everyone so i'll be a doctor today. he just busted his @$$ since he was young, that's all it takes. being lazy or complacent doesn't pay big bucks, and shouldn't be rewarded with money that someone else earned.

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983