|
|
| Post Number: 181
|
jimhanson 
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
 |
Posted on: Sep. 16 2008,4:09 pm |
|
   |
I guess I "should be correcting the wikipedia entry on deregulation" because there ISN'T ANYTHING IN IT ABOUT CLINTON'S FOLLY.  Where is a mention of deregulation of executive pay? 
How do you link DEREGULATION with the "reform" act of 1993, capping the ability of a company to deduct executive wages over a given amount--the act that DIRECTLY resulted in golden parachutes and stock options?
Contrary to the libbie spin, these guys aren't getting rich off from STRAIGHT SALARY--they are getting rich from STOCK OPTIONS.
There is no doubt that stock options picked up after the well-meaning but misguided LIBERAL attempt at REGULATION (not DE-regulation).
Did you even bother to read the Business Week article, or are you just taking DU talking points again?
QUOTE
How Bill Clinton Helped Boost CEO Pay
A law he championed to curb compensation has backfired -- and pay packages have exploded
Bill Clinton had what he thought was a great idea to curb the soaring paychecks of the nation's executives. It was 1991, shortly after the launch of his Presidential campaign, and he had just read a best seller on corporate greed by compensation guru Graef Crystal.
Clinton's brainstorm: Use the tax code to curb excessive pay. Companies at the time were allowed to deduct all compensation to top executives. Clinton wanted to permit companies to write off amounts over $1 million only if executives hit specified performance goals. He called Crystal for his thoughts. "Utterly stupid," the consultant says he told the future President.
THE SHAME GAME
Now, 13 years after Clinton's plan became law, the results are clear: It didn't work. Over the law's first decade, average compensation for chief executives at companies in Standard & Poor's 500-stock index soared from $3.7 million to $9.1 million, according to a 2005 Harvard Law School study. The law contains so many obvious loopholes, says Crystal, that "in 10 minutes even Forrest Gump could think up five ways around it."
From the Internal Revenue Service to corporate boardrooms, Clinton's remedy has become the biggest inside joke in the long history of efforts to rein in executive pay.
Sorry, libby--you guys take the fall on this one, (too).
But that won't stop you from blaming Bush (or Reagan, or Nixon) will it?
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 182
|
grassman
Group: Members
Posts: 3858
Joined: Mar. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Sep. 16 2008,4:17 pm |
|
 |
(jimhanson @ Sep. 16 2008,2:46 pm)
QUOTE When the deductability of executive salaries was enacted in 1993, this was predicted. Stock options were allowed--if a company made money, the executives made money. I recalled the debate at the time (one of the advantages of being "older")  and looked it up. Here's an excerpt from Business Week nullMy WebpageAs the article mentions, it is perhaps the biggest insider joke in corporate boardrooms in decades. In true government fashion, the libbies MEANT well--it is just that their antics have the usual UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES--hurting the very people they try to help with government regulation. When executives had straight salaries, they weren't NEARLY as large as the performance bonuses they get today--and they had the best LONG TERM INTERESTS of the business at heart. When limitations were imposed, business was forced to give (and executives willingly accepted) stock options and golden parachutes. The result? Business that lives only for the bottom line, without long-term planning. Business that goes overseas in search of additional profit. "Golden Parachutes" for executives that leave. "Stock option millionaires"--execs that collect millions in options, instead of straight salary. You can lay this right at the feet of libbie congresscritters--they are the ones that enacted the bill, in an attempt to right a perceived wrong that didn't exist, and to pander to their base. Thank you, libbies, you've succeeded AGAIN--just like the successes of every OTHER Socialist/Communist/Liberal/Progressive country.  
So that is the same as Smith and Wesson being responsible for someone taking one of their weapons and committing murder just because they can. Come on, look at the companies and bigwigs for what they are... a bunch of greedy basturds that don't give a rip about anything but their own asses. Sell everyone down the river because they can. A BUCKS A BUCK I GUESS!
--------------
git er done!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 183
|
Self-Banished
Group: Members
Posts: 22650
Joined: Feb. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Sep. 16 2008,5:02 pm |
|
|
W.A.A.C.
--------------
 Remember boys and girls,
Don’t be a Dick …
Or a “Wayne” 
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 184
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Sep. 16 2008,7:56 pm |
|
|
QUOTE Come on, look at the companies and bigwigs for what they are... a bunch of greedy basturds that don't give a rip about anything but their own asses And politicians are SO MUCH DIFFERENT!
The difference--you don't HAVE to buy the products a company is selling--you can go somewhere else.
A COMPANY makes money, and distributes it to their shareholders. Both the COMPANY is taxed by the government on their profits, and the shareholders are taxed AGAIN on their dividends.
The GOVERNMENT, by comparison, PRODUCES NOTHING. They just take the money from those that do.
There are only TWO PARTIES to a compensation package--the owners, and the employee. If the owner wants to give money to the employee because they believe they are worth it, whose business is it to so whether they are or not? Rock starts, athletes, movie stars, singers,--who is to say what THEY are worth? That's the basis of capitalism--the MARKET--not the GOVERNMENT--determines what someone can be paid.
The big difference? Business can GIVE money if it wants to--but the GOVERNMENT JUST TAKES IT.
C'mon--capitalism isn't so hard--did you sleep through that class, as WELL as spelling class? 
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 185
|
Liberal
Group: Moderator
Posts: 11451
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Sep. 16 2008,8:32 pm |
|
|
This "Clinton caused the recession story will go about as far as that Able Danger story went.
Clinton is old news, he hasn't been president for 8 years and you still talk about him daily. I'll bet you even dream about him at night. I don't even want to guess what you and he are doing in those dreams though.
--------------
The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 186
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Sep. 17 2008,4:07 pm |
|
|
QUOTE Clinton caused the recession It happened on his watch, but I don't know that he CAUSED it--I think it was the collapse of the "dot.com" house of cards--but that's a different story.
If you were reading the Business Week piece, this problem was caused by the libbie tenet of "Execs shouldn't make so much money." By limiting exec pay, the execs were given stock options, instead--and it is THOSE OPTIONS that are being exercised. Once again--the government caused a bigger problem than it ever had in the first place in its zeal to "do something." It is that horrible record of harming the very people it purports to help that makes conservatives so contemptuous of government--"I'm from the Government, and I'm here to HELP!" is funny only because MOST of us know how useless the government IS!
That's the problem with libbies--you can beat them over the head with FACTS--you can show them articles to support those FACTS--but if it doesn't come down as Donk "talking points", they never believe them.
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think!" (maybe, like the old joke about the camel, you have to "brick him"--if you don't know the joke, get it from MADDOG)
I take the good time to point out how the problem happened in the first place--and you come up with an article on "deregulation" (libbies HATE not having "regulation") that has no mention of the stock option problem in it. I try to show you the path to RIGHTeousness and TRUE KNOWLEDGE, to no avail. Perhaps the Biblical parable of pearls and pigs is appropriate? Perhaps Obambi was confused (again) when he made the "lipstick" comment.
"You can lead a libbie to knowledge, but you can't make him THINK."
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 187
|
|
|
| Post Number: 188
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Sep. 20 2008,5:02 pm |
|
|
Clinton may be old news, but Jimmy Carter is even OLDER news--and the world is still suffering from HIS ineptitude.
That doesn't stop the Obambi crowd from wanting to relive the "Glory Years" of THEIR administrations with the same old ideas repackaged as his own!
Attached Image
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 189
|
Expatriate
Group: Members
Posts: 16914
Joined: Oct. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Sep. 20 2008,6:47 pm |
|
|
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Phil Gramm’s Banking Deregulation Bill. repealed part of the Glass-Steagall Act that was put into law during the last depression... deregulation WHO voted this crap into law...Phil Gramms you remember him, He was John McCain's campaign manager the one that called the American people whiners than went back to Texas in disgrace...
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 106th Congress - 1st Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Vote Summary
Question: On Passage of the Bill (S.900 as amended )
Vote Number: 105 Vote Date: May 6, 1999, 08:14 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Bill Passed
Measure Number: S. 900
Measure Title: An Act to enhance competition in the financial services industry by providing a prudential framework for the affiliation of banks, securities firms, and other financial service providers, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 54
NAYs 44
Present 1
Not Voting 1
Alphabetical by Senator Name
Abraham (R-MI), Yea
Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Ashcroft (R-MO), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bayh (D-IN), Nay
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Breaux (D-LA), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bryan (D-NV), Nay
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Nay
Campbell (R-CO), Yea
Chafee, J. (R-RI), Yea
Cleland (D-GA), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Coverdell (R-GA), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Daschle (D-SD), Nay
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Edwards (D-NC), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Fitzgerald (R-IL), Present
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Gorton (R-WA), Yea
Graham (D-FL), Nay
Gramm (R-TX), Yea
Grams (R-MN), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Helms (R-NC), Yea
Hollings (D-SC), Yea
Hutchinson (R-AR), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Not Voting
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Jeffords (R-VT), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Nay
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerrey (D-NE), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Nay
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Nay
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Mack (R-FL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Moynihan (D-NY), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nickles (R-OK), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Robb (D-VA), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Roth (R-DE), Yea
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-NH), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Thompson (R-TN), Yea
Thurmond (R-SC), Yea
Torricelli (D-NJ), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wellstone (D-MN), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Nay
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/
--------------
History is no more than the lies agreed upon by the victors.
~NAPOLEON BONAPARTE
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 190
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Sep. 20 2008,7:08 pm |
|
|
See you, and RAISE you. From the Phoenix Business Journal nullMy Webpage
QUOTE McCain voted for the first version of the Gramm bill in 1999 but did not vote on the final measure. Biden voted against the initial bill but for the final product.
So:
McCain did NOT vote on the final bill, but Joe Biden DID vote for it!
QUOTE Obama is also the second-largest recipient of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac campaign contributions, trailing only U.S. Senate Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn. And while the rest took 9 years to accomplish their record, Obama has only been in the Senate for 3 years!
How about this one? My Webpage Franklin Raines was the former head of Fannie May, made $100 million (he may have to give half of it back) and is now ONE OF OBAMA'S ECONOMIC ADVISORS.
Here's ANOTHER QUOTE Obama Adviser Larry Summers Was Involved In Negotiating The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, And Called It A "Major Step Forward Toward The 21st Century." "Mr. Summers, the Obama adviser, was among those who negotiated the [1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley] measure on behalf of the Clinton administration, and he praised it as a 'major step forward toward the 21st Century.'" (Michael M. Phillips, Elizabeth Holmes and Amy Chozick, "Candidates Call Upon Big Names For Advice," The Wall Street Journal, 9/18/08) Summers met with Obama YESTERDAY.
How about this one? QUOTE Obama Economic Adviser Austan Goolsbee Defended Subprime Lending In 2007 And Warned Against Tightening Regulations:
In March 2007, Goolsbee Wrote "An Economic Defense ... Of The Sub-Prime Loans" That Spurred The Housing Crisis. "He's written extensively ... He even penned an economic defense in March 2007 of the sub-prime loans that have helped trigger the nationwide housing crisis." (Kevin G. Hall, "Obama Relies On Untested Advisors," McClatchy Newspapers, 4/3/08)
Finally, QUOTE Jim Johnson Is The Former CEO Of Fannie Mae. (David A. Vise, "Fannie Mae Lobbies Hard To Protect Its Tax Break," The Washington Post, 1/16/95)
"Jim Johnson, The Former Chairman Of Fannie Mae Who Was One Of Three Advisors Tapped By Democrat Barack Obama To Vet Vice Presidential Candidates, Resigned Today After Questions Were Raised About Favoritism He May Have Received From Countrywide Financial Corp."(Johanna Neuman, "Barack Obama Advisor Jim Johnson Quits Under Fire," Los Angeles Times, 6/12/08)
All of these people are Obama Advisors--and Johnson even helped pick Biden!
His staff is eyeball-deep in this mess, and this is the guy that says he wants "Change"?
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
