Filibustering GOP still doing Wall Street’s dirty work

The human capacity to rationalize on its own behalf is enormous, as demonstrated by the ethical musings of one “Fabulous Fab” Tourre, the Goldman Sachs trader now at the center of a civil suit filed by the SEC. In an email to his girlfriend on Jan. 27, 2007, Tourre agonized about the impending collapse of the subprime market and the pain it would cause, but quickly tried to banish such thoughts from his mind:

“Anyway, not feeling too guilty about this, the real purpose of my job is to make capital markets more efficient and ultimately provide the U.S. consumer with more efficient ways to leverage and finance himself, so there is a humble, noble and ethical reason for my job ;) amazing how good I am in convincing myself !!!”

But he wasn’t quite as convinced as he wanted to be. In another email, written just two days later, he confessed:

“When I think that I had some input into the creation of this product (which by the way is a product of pure intellectual masturbation, the type of thing which you invest telling yourself: “Well, what if we created a “thing,” which has no purpose, which is absolutely conceptual and highly theoretical and which nobody knows how to price?”) it sickens the heart to see it shot down in mid-flight…It’s a little like Frankenstein turning against his own inventor ;)

That thing “that has no purpose, which is absolutely conceptual and highly theoretical” was of course synthetic collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs. As Tourre acknowledged, the sole purpose of synthetic CDOs was to facilitate the betting of hundreds of billions of dollars by so-called “investors” who in reality were gambling with the global economy at the Goldman Sachs casino that masqueraded as a bank.

Reading those and other emails, I couldn’t help but think of similar rationalizations by Tourre’s boss at Goldman Sachs, Lloyd Blankfein. In a profile in the Times of London last year, Blankfein described Goldman as “doing God’s work.” And when asked whether it was possible that Wall Street bankers were being paid too much money in ways that distorted the economy, he got downright indignant:

“Is it possible to have too much ambition? Is it possible to be too successful?” Blankfein shoots back. “I don’t want people in this firm to think that they have accomplished as much for themselves as they can and go on vacation. As the guardian of the interests of the shareholders and, by the way, for the purposes of society, I’d like them to continue to do what they are doing. I don’t want to put a cap on their ambition. It’s hard for me to argue for a cap on their compensation.”

Blankfein, Tourre and other Goldman officials are testifying this morning before a Senate investigative committee. (You can watch it here.) That will probably be followed later in the day by another Senate vote on whether to proceed with debate and amendments to a Wall Street reform bill.

Yesterday, every Republican senator in the chamber voted against allowing the bill to proceed, effectively blocking its passage. According to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the GOP opposes the bill because it isn’t hard enough on Wall Street, a claim that doesn’t pass the laugh test. Do you honestly believe — and I stress that word “honestly” — that Senate Republicans are waging this fight in order to tighten regulation of Wall Street?

If Republicans truly want to tighten the bill, they ought to allow debate to proceed. They would then have every opportunity to propose and debate amendments in public on the Senate floor and have those amendments voted on, again in public. If Republicans really want to tighten regulation, if Democrats really are trying to pass a sweetheart bill for Wall Street, then the GOP should be eager to have that debate on the Senate floor with the country watching.

But they aren’t. Instead, McConnell and his colleagues want the bill withdrawn back behind closed doors, where deals can be quietly cut and tough provisions can be gutted without anyone hearing the screams. And like Tourre, they have no doubt tried to convince themselves that there are “humble, noble and ethical reasons” for doing so.

245 comments Add your comment

getalife

April 27th, 2010
11:11 am

Filling up their bribe chest for 10.

It will pass and be full of loop holes.

Scout

April 27th, 2010
11:18 am

Jay:

When can someone make Senators and Congressmen/women testify under oath (liberal and conservative) as to their true motives. That would be better for the country than any law passed this year !

Throw in the President too.

Keep up the good fight!

April 27th, 2010
11:20 am

Jay, I am sure you will get a lot of post demands about how the Republicans are wrong and this is part of transparency and open government and should be permitted….really…Hold your breath.

Keep up the good fight!

April 27th, 2010
11:24 am

Ummm Scout… the fact that you claim you are in law enforcement is scary….I mean now we have to have “testimony” about “true motives”…..and how exactly is this decided?

There is no ability to “determine.” We do this by having open government and disclosure of interests and donations….

TaxPayer

April 27th, 2010
11:27 am

All of a sudden, I thinkin’ about my garden and doing some ho-ing. Or is that hoeing.

md

April 27th, 2010
11:34 am

“If Republicans truly want to tighten the bill, they ought to allow debate to proceed. They would then have every opportunity to propose and debate amendments in public on the Senate floor and have those amendments voted on, again in public. ”

Even Olympia now knows better. Fool her once…………

AmVet

April 27th, 2010
11:36 am

I suspect the Democrats will pay for that debacle called “health care reform” come November.

Watered down give aways to BIG pharma and BIG insurance among others.

Now the GOP is gonna give them that and more right back on this “finance reform” issue.

The laugher is that the neo-cons are likely right – this bill goes nowhere near far enough to reign in the banksters and casino capitalists.

BUT…the last laugh is gonna be one them, as JB notes. Who really believes these far right wing criminal coddlers are pushing for REAL reform?

Only their gullible base, who are not terribly interested in reality…

theyeshaveit

April 27th, 2010
11:36 am

Tax Payer, I sure hope that you do not have a “ho” in your garden. :-)

md

April 27th, 2010
11:37 am

“Yesterday, every Republican senator in the chamber voted against allowing the bill to proceed, effectively blocking its passage.”

Let’s not leave out the fact that Sen Nelson sided with the reps at the request/advice/suggestion of one Warren Buffet, financial King of the democratic party.

Jay

April 27th, 2010
11:37 am

The markets’ collapse became quite clear almost two years ago, and we’re rushing reform by acting now, in 2010?

No, not hardly.

What Wall Street and the GOP want regarding financial reform is exactly what the state Legislature wanted regarding ethics reform earlier this year. They want to delay and postpone action until the attention goes elsewhere and the demands for reform fade away, so they can return to doing things the way they always did.

Let’s not pretend otherwise.

Jay

April 27th, 2010
11:40 am

I agree on Nelson, md. In fact, he reinforces my point.

Nelson could propose an amendment to protect Buffett on the Senate floor during debate, but he doesn’t dare. He’d rather cut that deal in private.

Susan Collins is questioning now.

pat

April 27th, 2010
11:44 am

If fillibustering prevents yet another large segment of the economy being put under the control of the federal governement, I am all for it. I’d rather have the status quo and suffer another collapse than have the governement screw yet another thing up.

The governement took control of health care and as a result, it’s drivimg medical costs up. Oh goodie just what we needed, higer taxes AND higher medical costs.

I don’t trust this admistration to stack toothpicks with out screwing it up.

md

April 27th, 2010
11:45 am

Sorry Jay, the dems are the ones that spoiled the barrel. Snowe is one of the most moderate reps in the Senate, and tried hard to do her part in the hc debate. It was her vote that got it out of committee, only to be shut out once it got on the floor. She learned the hard way – want compromise now, then keep it off the floor until compromise is reached.

Night Train

April 27th, 2010
11:48 am

Just like the Healthcare Bill?
“They would then have every opportunity to propose and debate amendments in public on the Senate floor and have those amendments voted on, again in public. “

Mick

April 27th, 2010
11:51 am

Republican congress 1994 – 2006 in the federal gov’t, republican legislature in both houses including the governor from 1998 – 2010 in florida, republicans have proven that it is in the best interests of the states and federal gov’t that they should stay or be the permanent minority, when they get the chance to try to govern, they don’t. In the case of the federal gov’t they screwed it up so bad that no matter what the democrats do it will take time to fix the mess. Then while that is being attempted, lay all the blame on the democrats. At the state level here in florida, the state education budget is in shambles even though we have the lottery! Republicans have been vindictive and not in tune with the dire straits, it is a failure of leadership on a grand scale. Make no mistake the democrats are far from perfect but at least they have some interest for the common man. The republicans are all about tax cutting and laying waste to good, effective government. They had their chance and all over this country they have blown it – never trust republicans to make gov’t work, they are all about dismantling and weakening it in good times or bad.

stands for decibels

April 27th, 2010
11:52 am

I don’t want to put a cap on their ambition.

One would have to have a heart of stone not to say in response, “How about we put a cap in yo’ ass instead?”

stands for decibels

April 27th, 2010
11:53 am

If fillibustering prevents yet another large segment of the economy being put under the control of the federal governement, I am all for it.

Pat, I’ve not checked lately–is water still wet? Bear still doing its business in the woods? Pope still Catholic?

AmVet

April 27th, 2010
11:55 am

“They want to delay and postpone action until the attention goes elsewhere…”

But this issue – the attempted corporate destruction of capitalism – is so enormous and so devastating, that it is unique. In scope and effect.

Millions and millions of Americans harmed for no good reason. And they are FINALLY awakened, unlike their once fearless leader, DickHead Cheney who said, “Don’t blame Bush, nobody saw this coming”.

A true professional liar and thief. Enabled by sycophants and Uncle Sam haters.

Though the modus operandi, I don’t think the average ADD American, who lost his job, career, home, etc, is just going to be willing to sweep what happened under carpet this time.

Two years on and the conned want to drag their feet some more.

The Party of Denial…

Del

April 27th, 2010
11:56 am

Obowma was the recipient of a one million dollar contribution from Goldman Sachs. The congressional Democrats got about 60% of the Wall Street contributions and we have B.O. Harry Reid ET All pretending to be populist advocates for the people on Main Street. Talk about sanctimony. Nelson had it right when he said he couldn’t vote in favor of a bill he hadn’t sufficiently studied and also had discussions with the Republican side. Nelsons way of thinking isn’t shared by his counterparts in the democrat controlled congressional lemming herd who just vote in favor of whatever they’re told to vote for without any of their own analysis.

md

April 27th, 2010
11:59 am

“Republican congress 1994 – 2006 in the federal gov’t”

Now Mick, one must also remember that the last balanced federal budget had a GOP Congress. Balanced gov’t is the answer, not shutting out one side or the other. When one side is dominate, we get “agenda” bills vs compromise. I prefer the compromise, as both parties are too far from the middle.

Doggone/GA

April 27th, 2010
12:01 pm

“Obowma was the recipient of a one million dollar contribution from Goldman Sachs”

No, he wasn’t. Try checking your “facts” before you spout them all over this blog. It was the EMPLOYEES of GS that donated to his campaign. There’s a BIG difference. People ARE still allowed to contribute to campaigns, you know.

“President Barack Obama doesn’t plan to give back almost $1 million in campaign contributions from employees of Goldman Sachs Group Inc”

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-22/obama-doesn-t-intend-to-give-back-goldman-donations-update1-.html

Mick

April 27th, 2010
12:05 pm

md

OK but what happened in 98? Clinton impeached – waste of time, money, and security (our enemies were plotting against us during the distraction). Irresponsible tax cuts to the tune of 1.2 trillion plus the iraq debacle another 1.2 trillion. You’re the man of fiscal responsibility and warning of debt overload. Say what you will about the stimulus at least it was money for people in this country. The repubs have obstructed everything – they are led by fools..

md

April 27th, 2010
12:09 pm

“Clinton impeached – waste of time, money, and security (our enemies were plotting against us during the distraction).”

Well…..I see both sides of that equation, one got stupid which led the others to get stupid.

And as for the wars – correct me if I’m wrong, but both “sides” voted for that spending, and continue to do so, so spare me the good vs bad on that one.

Del

April 27th, 2010
12:10 pm

Doggone/GA,

People ARE allowed to contribute. Really, you sound a little naive. I think you need to understand the campaign contribution process before you tell me or anyone what they can post.

Southern Comfort

April 27th, 2010
12:13 pm

And as for the wars – correct me if I’m wrong, but both “sides” voted for that spending, and continue to do so, so spare me the good vs bad on that one.

At the time, I think it was a unifying, patriotic-type reaction that both “sides” voted for that. As more came out, I remember one “side” being attacked as “Un-Patriotic” if they did not give in to everything the President and Congress wanted done. I could be wrong though, as my memory sometimes fails me.

Mick

April 27th, 2010
12:16 pm

md

It is not always a balanced equation. Which side has inflicted more economic damage the past ten years? You seem to be real sympathetic to the republican/corporatist ideology, there is no perfect model but I would lean on throwing my support to the worker/common man in most cases.

md

April 27th, 2010
12:16 pm

“Say what you will about the stimulus at least it was money for people in this country.”

Not nearly enough people in this country, and don’t forget, it is also “people in this country” that must pay for it. Putting money in one pocket then taking it out of the other, or the pocket of your kids.

md

April 27th, 2010
12:19 pm

“I remember one “side” being attacked as “Un-Patriotic” if they did not give in to everything the President and Congress wanted done.”

You mean the side that could care less what others thought when passing the hc bill? Just an excuse for the decision they didn’t make.

Night Train

April 27th, 2010
12:21 pm

SoCo, “I remember one “side” being attacked as “Un-Patriotic” if they did not give in to everything the President and Congress wanted done.”

Something like what is happening now with health care? :)

md

April 27th, 2010
12:23 pm

“You seem to be real sympathetic to the republican/corporatist ideology, there is no perfect model but I would lean on throwing my support to the worker/common man in most cases.”

Are corporations not the worker/common man? WE are corporations, WE want them to succeed. If they fail, WE fail.

WE are owners, employees, shareholders, investors, etc etc. As a union man Mick, where does your union invest your pension?

pat

April 27th, 2010
12:25 pm

Do you even know what’s in the bill? Or will anything do so long as it’s called reform and your frat boy obama says its good? Because it’s a bad, stupid bill. What killed wall street is easy to fix, you don’t need “sweeping” legislation to do it. Maybe if the SEC wasn’t so busy watching porn, they could have caught some of problems before the colapse.

Southern Comfort

April 27th, 2010
12:27 pm

md/Night Train

Yep, exactly like what went down with health care. Two wrongs don’t make a right, although three lefts do!!

Doggone/GA

April 27th, 2010
12:27 pm

“before you tell me or anyone what they can post.”

I call ‘em as I see ‘em. Try posting the truth for once. If it’s a lie it’ll get called. If not by me, by someone else who is able to look things up on the internet and verify or refute them. Something that seems to have slipped past your ability to do.

Mick

April 27th, 2010
12:29 pm

md

Interesting juxtaposition – you are comparing a vote to go to war with all the death and destruction that goes with it and a healthcare bill which strives however imperfectly, to help people get coverage with pre-existing conditions or availability to qualify for coverage? Think about it, one vote helps lives the other wastes lives, how does that compare?

Normal

April 27th, 2010
12:29 pm

Off topic…so sue me. This kinda reminds me of the beginnings of the Cuban missle Crisis back in ‘62…

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/04/ap_pentagon_venezuela_iran_042710/

Scout

April 27th, 2010
12:30 pm

Keep up the good fight! :

If you know anything about criminals you know they have “motives”! Testifying under oath has a way of forcing one to come clean or to incriminate themselves or taking the 5th. In either case, we would have a better picture of “many” of our representatives who are into nothing less than bribery and extortion.

P.S. “Retired”

Normal

April 27th, 2010
12:31 pm

Mick

April 27th, 2010
12:29 pm

I think I see md’s reasoning…the more dead there are, the less healthcare is needed…

Mick

April 27th, 2010
12:33 pm

WE are corporations, WE want them to succeed. If they fail, WE fail.

No, we are not the corporations, we are the gov’t. I don’t have a problem with corporations per se, I guess it wasn’t so obnoxious when the corporate big wigs were only making 80 times the amount of the workers, but now that they are making in excess of 400 times and worker pay has flatlined for the past 30 years – something is seriously out of whack.

Doggone/GA

April 27th, 2010
12:34 pm

“If you know anything about criminals you know they have “motives”!”

and motive is not required for a conviction. Newspapers, and their readers, like motives…but if the evidence is sufficient then the criminal can be convicted, even if it’s not clear WHY he committed the crime.

Kamchak

April 27th, 2010
12:39 pm

Are corporations not the worker/common man?

No.

WE are corporations, WE want them to succeed. If they fail, WE fail.

At least you’re honest about your corporate worship

TnGelding

April 27th, 2010
12:40 pm

Well, I’m sure the bill could be improved. But regulating Wall Street is a fantasy. The only thing you can do is prosecute the villains after the fact and try to send a message that unethical practices will not be tolerated.

jefferson

April 27th, 2010
12:41 pm

Bankers have the GOP and their minions in their pocket.

Doggone/GA

April 27th, 2010
12:41 pm

“The only thing you can do is prosecute the villains after the fact and try to send a message that unethical practices will not be tolerated”

But that’s true of ANY law. But you DO have to have something defined as illegal before you can prosecute for it.

Bruno

April 27th, 2010
12:42 pm

“Think about it, one vote helps lives the other wastes lives, how does that compare?”

Mick–If you can move beyond the “compassion” argument, you have to admit that the hc bill is nothing but a big money-waster. If you want “universal coverage”, then single payer/socialized medicine is the only sensible solution. The mandated purchase of insurance is not a “step in the right direction” by a longshot, though the lefties continue to try to portray it that way.

SC–I missed you the other night with my Main Ingredient selection:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q5-xPbpE00

TaxPayer

April 27th, 2010
12:42 pm

md has you on the corporations thingy, Mick. The Supremes have done ruled that a corporation is a person. It walks, it talks, it thinks, it votes. It just doesn’t pay taxes. HEY! THAT’S NOT FAIR!

Southern Comfort

April 27th, 2010
12:42 pm

Mick

The comparison makes sense when you look at it from different perspectives. People will always see what they perceive. That’s why I always say that two people can see the exact same thing and give two completely different descriptions and both be correct.

Union

April 27th, 2010
12:43 pm

I like the democratic model for contributions.. you are forced to give.. then you don’t have a say in who they are donated to. :)

TaxPayer

April 27th, 2010
12:44 pm

What we need is the FairTax™ so everyone will get their monthly prebate check and then everyone will have government money to buy food and clothing and shelter and health insurance and… .

md

April 27th, 2010
12:47 pm

Kam and Mick,

Where are your pensions invested? Do you want them to fail?

And you guys seem to be overlooking small business – they are corporations too. You guys want mom and pop to fail too?

Bruno

April 27th, 2010
12:47 pm

“and motive is not required for a conviction. Newspapers, and their readers, like motives…but if the evidence is sufficient then the criminal can be convicted, even if it’s not clear WHY he committed the crime.”

By this line of reasoning, I presume that you oppose “hate crimes” legislation, then?

“The comparison makes sense when you look at it from different perspectives. People will always see what they perceive. That’s why I always say that two people can see the exact same thing and give two completely different descriptions and both be correct.”

Which is the premise of Linear Algebra, of course. I’m reading an interesting book on Projective Geometry right now, which is essentially Geometry using only the straight edge for construction. In that world, neither angles or distances are fixed. It is the type of geometry which allows artists to create “depth” in 2-dimensional drawings.

md

April 27th, 2010
12:50 pm

“I think I see md’s reasoning…the more dead there are, the less healthcare is needed…”

Evidently you don’t see it – the only case I made was that both sides voted for a war in which Mick unfairly attributes to one “side”, whereas only one side voted for the hc debacle which did not correct the problem.

Union

April 27th, 2010
12:52 pm

nothing wrong with wall street..

Feb 10, 2010 Bloomberg

The former president, speaking in an interview, said in response to a question that while $17 million is “an extraordinary amount of money” for Main Street, “there are some baseball players who are making more than that and don’t get to the World Series either, so I’m shocked by that as well.”

“I know both those guys; they are very savvy businessmen,” Bush said in the interview yesterday with Bloomberg BusinessWeek, which will appear on newsstands Friday. “I, like most of the American people, don’t begrudge people success or wealth. That is part of the free- market system.”

Bosch

April 27th, 2010
12:52 pm

md,

“Even Olympia now knows better.”

You know why, right?

Bosch

April 27th, 2010
12:53 pm

“Susan Collins is questioning now.”

Who is, Deputy Goddess of the Senate.

ty webb

April 27th, 2010
12:53 pm

ah yes, those evil corporations. Jobs…we don’t need their stinkin jobs. And are insurance companies corporations? If so, it seems our president, by mandating everyone buy insurance from said corporations, must also be a “corporatist”(whatever that means). Say it isn’t so. I thought he was for the little guy.

Kamchak

April 27th, 2010
12:53 pm

Where are your pensions invested? Do you want them to fail?

Ah yes, the “rising tide lifts all boats” meme. The only problem is that it presupposes everyone owns a boat.

Steven Daedalus

April 27th, 2010
12:54 pm

Face folks, its almost over, I’m glad my days are almost over, with the Repuds and Y
Tea Idiots, America as we know it is gone, Mad Max here we come.

Scout

April 27th, 2010
12:54 pm

Bruno @ 12:47:

Thank you. They just like to be argumentative.

To All My Liberal Friends:

” (Franklin) Graham, who has overseen several initiatives to help people in Muslim countries, told Fox News last week that he loves the people of Islam. But he added, “I do not agree with their religion at all. And if you look at what the religion does just to women, women alone, it is just horrid. And so yes, I speak out for women. I speak out for people that live under Islam, that are enslaved by Islam and I want them to know that they can be free.”

O.K. all you N.O.W. ladies ……….. where are you? Cowering under your liberalism?

Del

April 27th, 2010
12:55 pm

Doggone?USA,

You can just keep on drinking the Kool Aid spinning it out and believing you’re in touch but I don’t care to waste any more time replying to you.

Mick

April 27th, 2010
12:57 pm

md

How does this morph into me wanting corporations to fail? Do they possess too much power and control? I think so. Do they exploit workers and resources? Again, I think so. Should they be regulated so all can participate on a level playing field? Yes, absolutely. Capitalism during the 1950’s and 1060’s was much more cohesive and balanced. Today we have predatory capitalism which wipes out the economic sustainablity of the many, for enrichment of the few.

Bruno

April 27th, 2010
12:57 pm

“The Supremes have done ruled that a corporation is a person.”

Can you show me a corporation which isn’t a person, or group of people? Without corporate personhood, signing contracts or pursuing liability would be nearly impossible. BTW, the concept was supported by an SC case in 1819–I’m sure that’s what you’re referring to.

“It walks, it talks, it thinks, it votes. It just doesn’t pay taxes.”

Whatever taxes I don’t pay through my corporation, I pay as an individual. Ditto for anyone else who owns/works for a corporation. Six in one hand and half a dozen in the other.

Doggone/GA

April 27th, 2010
1:00 pm

“By this line of reasoning, I presume that you oppose “hate crimes” legislation, then?”

Yes, actually…I do.

md

April 27th, 2010
1:01 pm

“Ah yes, the “rising tide lifts all boats” meme. The only problem is that it presupposes everyone owns a boat.”

True, some don’t have one, but even the unions, the bastion of little guys, have pensions. Every one of them invested in corporations.

Doggone/GA

April 27th, 2010
1:02 pm

“but I don’t care to waste any more time replying to you.”

Awww, gee. Del doesn’t like me anymore. I think I’ll go off in a corner and cry. Not.

md

April 27th, 2010
1:03 pm

Mick – I’m just responding to your assumptions. I believe it was you that painted me as a “corporatist”. If believing in corporations and the free market makes me a corporatist, then so be it.

Bruno

April 27th, 2010
1:05 pm

“Evidently you don’t see it – the only case I made was that both sides voted for a war in which Mick unfairly attributes to one “side”

Ditto for the Patriot Act and the financial deregulation that contributed to the financial meltdown. I’m not sure why so many on the left are loathe to admit that when the votes are all documented.

On a personal note, md, do you have any feeling about the short-term prospects of JASO? I missed an opportunity to sell it at $6.48 per share a few weeks ago, and am now concerned about it tanking again this summer when Germany pulls back on its subsidies.

Kamchak

April 27th, 2010
1:07 pm

You can just keep on drinking the Kool Aid…

But sometimes it’s good “to think outside the box” and “wipe the slate clean.” If we all “put our nose to the grindstone,” then no one “will be left at the altar.” Obviously some are “laughing all the way to the bank,” but I feel the “he who lives by the sword, shall die by the sword.” The notion that this is ” mission critical” and we should all be “firing on all eight cylinders” will help all of us to “get our arms around this” and see “the complete picture.”

TaxPayer

April 27th, 2010
1:08 pm

Can you show me a corporation which isn’t a person, or group of people?

Just as soon as you can show me a corporation that can walk into a voting booth and punch in its choice, right after it shows its photo ID, of course.

Del

April 27th, 2010
1:09 pm

Doggone?GA,

You don’t have to cry. I don’t like nor dislike you because I don’t even know you personally accept that you seem to be unaware of fact beyond spin you pick up from the internet. Probably from far left blogs but that’s okay with me.

md

April 27th, 2010
1:10 pm

“Capitalism during the 1950’s and 1060’s was much more cohesive and balanced. Today we have predatory capitalism which wipes out the economic sustainability of the many, for enrichment of the few.”

Huh? It’s always been survival of the fittest, from day one. Don’t take care of the customer – go bye bye.

Is reform needed at the top of large publicly traded companies? I would go along with that. The good ole boy system needs to end. But it won’t, as it includes our politicians. Since they are joined at the hip, don’t look for changes anytime soon.

Mick

April 27th, 2010
1:11 pm

**If believing in corporations and the free market makes me a corporatist, then so be it.**

I don’t have an issue with your beliefs, I have an issue with corporate behavior and it is my personal opinion that their actions in pursuit of the maximum profit rigged for the CEO’s, even if their company fails, is destroying faith in our capitalist system. Not to mention taking jobs out of the country for cheaper labors costs which is basicall un-american – look where we are at heading into the future – looks like a pretty bleak landscape to me.

TaxPayer

April 27th, 2010
1:11 pm

Whatever taxes I don’t pay through my corporation, I pay as an individual. Ditto for anyone else who owns/works for a corporation. Six in one hand and half a dozen in the other.

Perhaps Exxon and GE will share some of their secrets to avoiding paying taxes with you, if you ask real nice.

I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin....

April 27th, 2010
1:11 pm

“Is it possible to have too much ambition? Is it possible to be too successful?” Blankfein shoots back. “I don’t want people in this firm to think that they have accomplished as much for themselves as they can and go on vacation. As the guardian of the interests of the shareholders and, by the way, for the purposes of society, I’d like them to continue to do what they are doing. I don’t want to put a cap on their ambition. It’s hard for me to argue for a cap on their compensation.”

So what is it that you socialists don’t understand?

Not all of us want to lay in bed and get a check from government, just, um, sayin…

Doggone/GA

April 27th, 2010
1:11 pm

“You don’t have to cry.”

Wow! Only took you 15 minutes to go back on your vow not to “waste” anymore time replying to me.

TaxPayer, Inc.

April 27th, 2010
1:12 pm

Enter your comments here

Normal

April 27th, 2010
1:13 pm

They’re rioting in Africa
They’re starving in Spain
There’s hurricanes in Florida
And Texas needs rain
the Whole world is festering with unhappy souls
The French hate the Germans, the Germans hate the Poles
Italians hate Yugoslavs, South Africans hate the Dutch
And I don’t like Anybody very much.

But we can be tranquil and thankful and proud
For man’s been endowed with a mushroom-shaped cloud
And we know for certain that some lucky day
Someone will set the spark off and we will all be blown away

They’re rioting in Africa
There’s strife in Iran
What nature doesn’t do to us
Will be done by our fellow Man

– Sheldon Harnick @1958

Will be done by our fellow Man….will, is, has been…for ever after.

ALL things remain the same.

md

April 27th, 2010
1:13 pm

“On a personal note, md, do you have any feeling about the short-term prospects of JASO?”

I bought in as a penny stock with intentions of long term hold – they have new technology that will take years to implement. I’m betting on the long term growth of solar.

danjonglee

April 27th, 2010
1:13 pm

adding another 25,000 porn watching SEC Agents ought to fix the problem..

TaxPayer, Inc.

April 27th, 2010
1:14 pm

I’m hungry. What does a corporation eat. (Don’t answer that.)

Union

April 27th, 2010
1:14 pm

TaxPayer
April 27th, 2010
1:11 pm

Perhaps Exxon and GE will share some of their secrets to avoiding paying taxes with you, if you ask real nice.

huh? They do pay taxes.. they pay billions in taxes..

Mick

April 27th, 2010
1:14 pm

**Face folks, its almost over, I’m glad my days are almost over, with the Repuds and Y
Tea Idiots, America as we know it is gone, Mad Max here we come.**

I’m usually pretty optimistic, but you may have a point there..

Rightwing Troll

April 27th, 2010
1:15 pm

“Evidently you don’t see it – the only case I made was that both sides voted for a war in which Mick unfairly attributes to one “side””

Which side made the argument for that war?

Blondie, Inc.

April 27th, 2010
1:16 pm

danjonglee

April 27th, 2010
1:16 pm

didnt Harry Reid vote no?

I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin....

April 27th, 2010
1:18 pm

Gosh, how easy it was to open the closed doors and “hear the screams,” lo and behold, they were coming from dummycrats who want to spend, er, waste, more of your money-

“It is important for the country and taxpayer that we get this right, that we put them before politics. That’s why I was disappointed to read that Senate Democrats are refusing to drop the $50 billion bailout fund—a fund that the Treasury Secretary himself opposes—unless Republicans pay a price for taking it out. This is exactly what Americans don’t like about Washington: when one side tries to ‘get’ something for doing what they should have done in the first place. If everyone agrees it should be dropped, then it should be dropped. And if Senate Democrats think it should stay, then they should explain why they think the Treasury Secretary was wrong when he said that this bailout fund ‘would create expectations that the government would step in to protect shareholders and creditors from losses.’

“Both sides have expressed a willingness to make the changes needed to ensure without any doubt that this bill won’t put taxpayers on the hook for future bailouts of Wall Street banks. Let’s just do that.

You have to be utterly stupid not to realize that this is more of the same thing that brought about this Great Recession we are in, dummycrats guaranteeing the risky behavior of the bankers, using the money of We The People to do it with.

But then again, maybe I’m just smarter than you are…..

Normal

April 27th, 2010
1:19 pm

“As the guardian of the interests of the shareholders and, by the way, for the purposes of society, I’d like them to continue to do what they are doing. I don’t want to put a cap on their ambition. It’s hard for me to argue for a cap on their compensation.”

I would have no argument with that, if they hadn’t been dismal failures.

You don’t have to put a cap on their ambition…just dun their stupidity.

md

April 27th, 2010
1:20 pm

“I have an issue with corporate behavior and it is my personal opinion that their actions in pursuit of the maximum profit rigged for the CEO’s, even if their company fails”

Slippery slope on that one – kind of like testing and teacher salaries. A lot of variables come into play, and none alike.

“Not to mention taking jobs out of the country for cheaper labors costs which is basicall un-american”

Another catch-22. Folks want cheap products and high salaries – the 2 don’t co-exist very well. As costs rise, prices rise, as prices rise demand drops, demand drops, costs need to drop – never ending cycle.

Del

April 27th, 2010
1:21 pm

“didn’t Harry Reid vote no?”

Harry’s procedural gimmick, so it can be brought back up for vote this afternoon.

TaxPayer

April 27th, 2010
1:22 pm

huh? They do pay taxes.. they pay billions in taxes..

So let’s mince words

… In any case, the original story is wrong in this respect: According to the 10-K, a screenshot of which is provided below, ExxonMobil didn’t have a zero-tax liability in 2009; it was actually owed $46 million by the IRS, against $15.1 billion in foreign taxes owed. As Jeffers says, that may not be the case; but it’s what ExxonMobil told the SEC, its shareholders, and the world. And since the firm refuses to share its actual tax numbers with the public, it’s all we have to go by.

Finn McCool

April 27th, 2010
1:22 pm

LOL, good one, I Absorb

A quote by tortoise Mitch McConnel and have no doubt he has America’s best interests in mind.

md

April 27th, 2010
1:24 pm

“Which side made the argument for that war?”

Doesn’t much matter unless one is a side chooser. It is what it is, and both “sides” voted for it.

Unless you are making a case that one side “forced” the other, then that’s just silly.

Finn McCool

April 27th, 2010
1:25 pm

I hear the Republicans might introduce their own bill.

Why didn’t they do this to begin with? What have they been doing the last year and a half? They weren’t busy working on the health care bill. What are they doing with their time? Watching ESPN Classic?

TaxPayer

April 27th, 2010
1:27 pm

Which side made the argument for that war?

Why, it was Clinton. George Clinton. Our nation’s first black president.

stands for decibels

April 27th, 2010
1:28 pm

A quote by tortoise Mitch McConnell

aka “Mitch McChinless”

(h/t Stephanie Miller)

JohnnyReb

April 27th, 2010
1:29 pm

Jay, does Obama know what a friend he has in thee? The Party of No strikes again (finally, thank goodness)! The filibuster is a wonderful thing! Now the Dems have no choice but to TRULY produce a bipartisan bill.

Normal

April 27th, 2010
1:30 pm

md

April 27th, 2010
1:24 pm

“Unless you are making a case that one side “forced” the other, then that’s just silly.”

When one side does not give the other side all of the facts in order to decide for themselves, then it’s not silly, it’s deceitful.

Outhouse GoKart

April 27th, 2010
1:33 pm

Filibuster everything this incompetent president and his cronies, reid and pelosit attempt.

Outhouse GoKart

April 27th, 2010
1:35 pm

I just hope the damage done by the triumverant obama, reid, pelosi isnt undoable by the next Republican adminstration.

Outhouse GoKart

April 27th, 2010
1:36 pm

Obama is ruining this country…he is inept.

TaxPayer

April 27th, 2010
1:41 pm

The Nebraska Democratic Party filed a mail fraud report against the Republican National Committee on Monday for sending out deceiving mailers that appear to be a “Census Document.” A member of Congress has also confirmed that the U.S. Postal Service was investigating the matter.

In a letter (pdf) sent to the Postal Inspection Service on Monday, Victor Covalt III, a bankruptcy lawyer and Nebraska Democratic Party official accused the RNC of “attempting to wrongfully trade off and profit from the 2010 Census.”

He also charged the Committee with violating a recently-passed law, by not including “an accurate return address including the name of the entity that sent such matter,” in its deceptive mailers.

Deceitful! Did someone say deceitful! From the RNC. The GOP! Shocking! Who has the fainting couch. Come on. Pass it around.