Why Wall Street execs want to silence their shareholders
Last year, the Securities and Exchange Commission approved a new “say on pay” policy that allows shareholders to vote on the pay package for a company’s top executives.
You wouldn’t think that would be a particularly controversial measure. For one thing, the vote isn’t even binding; it is advisory only. And shouldn’t shareholders — the people who actually own a company — be allowed to at least voice an opinion about how their own top employees are paid? Surely that is consistent with free-enterprise market principles, right?
Republicans, however, have fought the measure tooth and nail. It was approved by the SEC by a party-line 3-2 vote, with Republican appointees to the panel trying vainly to delay, weaken or kill it. They also fought it in Congress, voting against “say on pay” in party-line votes in 2009, back when Democrats still had enough votes to pass it.
As the Chicago Tribune reported back then:
“Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), in a comment echoed by fellow Republicans, assailed the (say-on-pay) measure as “unprecedented government intervention in the free enterprise system.”
“This bill is an invitation for political meddling at its worst in the private confines of companies that are trying to work hard to create jobs,” complained Rep. Peter J. Roskam (R-Ill.)
I find those complaints hard to fathom. It is government interference to give the owners of a company a voice — a non-binding voice! — in what its executives are paid?
This week, we got a chance to see the rule in action, and also to see why Republicans continue to fight it so hard. Shareholders at Citigroup, one of the 10 largest banks in the world, voted 55-45 percent on Tuesday to object to the pay packages granted to CEO Vikram Pandit, as well as to bonus and compensation packages for other top executives. By one count, Pandit collected as much as $49 million in pay, stock options, retention bonuses and other compensation last year, even though the company’s performance has lagged.
The Citigroup investor rebellion came after the nation’s largest corporate-governance experts, Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis & Co., both recommended against approval of the pay package on grounds that it was too generous and wasn’t linked to company performance.
Glass Lewis, for example, gave the company’s executive pay plan an “F”, explaining:
“Having repaid its TARP funds in 2010, the Company was not subject to restrictions governing the structure of compensation paid to its highest-paid executives during 2011. In turn, the Company has implemented incentive plans rampant with significant issues that, in our opinion, warrant shareholder attention. It is clear to us that the Company has squandered the opportunity to form well-designed, objective incentive plans at the lifting of TARP restrictions, opting instead for often discretionary awards that may qualify as a misuse of company capital.”
In other words, the executives were paying themselves more than they were worth and more than they had earned. (When Pandit became CEO in December 2007, Citigroup was selling at a little over $300 a share. Yesterday it closed at $35.08 a share.)
It’s going to be interesting to see what happens now. According to ISS, only 2 percent of executive pay packages were rejected by shareholders last year, so the action by Citigroup investors is pretty noteworthy, suggesting it’s an egregious case. On the other hand, because the Tuesday vote was non-binding, Pandit and Citigroup’s board of directors are under no legal obligation to honor it.
In addition, pay packages for other major Wall Street firms are also coming up for shareholder review, and those companies are also probably nervous about a shareholder revolt.
All of this strikes me as a very good thing. This is not government interference in free markets; this is stockholders regaining just the slightest bit of control over their own property. And it is almost inexplicable to me that Republicans view it as a bad thing.
I say “almost inexplicable,” because blind loyalty to the top 0.001 percent is the only explanation I can offer. If you have a better one, please, let’s hear it.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
946 comments Add your comment
F. Sinkwich
April 19th, 2012
8:20 pm
Lib ilks have a hard time dealing with their messiah’s indisputable failures. Instead of defending his loserness, they choose to attack his predecessor whom I think hasn’t been in office for 3 1/2 years.
When does O’bozo accept responsibility for ANYTHING?
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
8:20 pm
Bro
I forgot that scene. It is great
“Fred G. Sanford… and the G is for going places. Now we ready to roll”
hahahahahaha
Don't Forget
April 19th, 2012
8:21 pm
Bruno
A healthy economy cures nearly all ills, and beats the crap out of “sympathy and concern”.
Agreed mostly although I’d say “most ills” . The problem is that there’s no way you can always have a healthy economy. So without the sympathy and concern you got nothing .
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
8:22 pm
“Lib ilks have a hard time dealing with their messiah’s indisputable failures.”
Who is the lib messiah?
Who named him that?
When did this occur?
Fill us in……….
Doggone/GA
April 19th, 2012
8:24 pm
“For all his rhetorical sweet talking, he is just as out of touch with the common citizen as Bush ever was”
Yes, I agree. I pretty much wrote him off with how the bank bailouts were handled. Everything for the bankers and NOTHING for the “little people” that were hurt the most.
Adam
April 19th, 2012
8:27 pm
Lib ilks have a hard time dealing with their messiah’s indisputable failures.
Now, I know you guys actually don’t believe Jesus would support helping the poor with anything other than taking money away from them, but I am finding it hard to find a “failure” on Jesus’ part.
Oh wait, you meant your phony idea that liberals think that OBAMA is a messiah, somehow. Carry on….
F. Sinkwich
April 19th, 2012
8:27 pm
“Who is the lib messiah?”
O’bozo.
“Who named him that?”
Lib ilks. MSM. Leeches. Miscreants. Loafers.
“When did this occur?”
2007, but took off in 2008.
Thanks for asking.
Adam
April 19th, 2012
8:29 pm
If you need any further proof that Sinkwich is a bald faced liar, there it is.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
8:29 pm
“I am just over listening to the libs standard garbage line..you just want to…”
Be over it…………. I’m over a lot of conservative leaning talk, but seeing this is a free country. I will have to live with it………
I suggest you try and live with it as well……
The rhetoric and hyperbole from both sides has been with us for years and years……. and it isn’t going anywhere
But I trust you will make it and be ok
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
8:29 pm
Bruno If you voted for Bush, why change from Bush Light?
If you can find my old posts on the former W2W blog, you’ll see that I was very critical of Bush near the end of his term, and never supported the Patriot Act or even waterboarding (though I still don’t think it equates to severe torture). However, there’s no way in Hell that I could have picked either Gore or Kerry over Bush.
Why should it? I don’t pretend to be objective in my likes and dislikes. I’m not happy with all of Obama’s policies, anything else doesn’t matter.
Again, Doggone, if it’s just something personal you don’t like about Bush, that’s ok. I can’t say that I intensely dislike Obama in any personal way, I just don’t want him to be President. There are a few politicians who rub me the wrong way as people, chief among them Nancy Pelosi.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
8:31 pm
Sinkwich
No need to be an angry man and lie
I was just asking you to back up your assertions………
Hint: the guy at the gas station will probably not serve as a good therapist, but maybe your insurance covers one that is licensed……….. check into it……… ASAP
F. Sinkwich
April 19th, 2012
8:32 pm
“Oh wait, you meant your phony idea that liberals think that OBAMA is a messiah, somehow. Carry on….”
I know it’s hard for doofuses, be there is such a thing as a dictionary.
Messiah: noun, a professed or accepted leader of some hope or cause.
Look it up.
carlosgvv
April 19th, 2012
8:32 pm
Brosephus – 7:48 – “those who are holding up the flow of currency to release the currency”
Of course you know that many of those here with less than average reading comprehension skills will interpret that as Godless Marxist Socialist liberal anti-American wealth distribution thinking and will lambast you accordingly.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
8:33 pm
Bruno
You know I was messing with you………….
I wasn’t a huge Gore or Kerry fan, but Bush?
We were just on opposite sides but same line of thinking
Adam
April 19th, 2012
8:34 pm
Messiah: noun, a professed or accepted leader of some hope or cause.
Well then I guess that makes Rush Limbaugh, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, and a number of other people Messiah’s as well. I’ll remember that. Thanks for the info
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
8:34 pm
Sink
You want someone else to look up a definition of something YOU and many on the right proclaim and project on to others?
what an fn clown?
But keep posting… you provide some of the best laughs on this blog
Don't Forget
April 19th, 2012
8:35 pm
I don’t blame Bush, I blame supply side economics of which Bush is a disciple. Every economic problem we have right now is a result of the recession and the collapse of the financial and housing markets. And ALL of that was the result of supply side economics.
Aquagirl
April 19th, 2012
8:36 pm
“Who named him that?”
Lib ilks.
Sinky needs therapy for that ilkphobia.
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
8:37 pm
Agreed mostly although I’d say “most ills” . The problem is that there’s no way you can always have a healthy economy. So without the sympathy and concern you got nothing .
Unfortunately, DF, under Obama, I still got nothing out of all his “sympathy and concern” except stuck with a big bill. I received no bailout moneys or TARP funds, I don’t get food stamps, I received no unemployment money despite being out of work for 2 months in 2010, I already owned a home and car so got no assistance there, I have an affordable mortgage so didn’t qualify for mortgage assistance, and I’m not in a union. At the same time, despite ably paying for all the health care I’ve ever received, I’m now expected to pay for everyone else’s as well.
I’m not sure if I can stand any more of this “sympathy and concern”, friend.
Recon 0311 2533
April 19th, 2012
8:38 pm
The last two or three thread topics must be intended as significant issue avoidance as the discourse now has degenerates into meaningless banter. I guess it’s because things aren’t going so well lately for Obama and the Democrats.
barking frog
April 19th, 2012
8:41 pm
Recon
are marines amphibians?
Old Goober
April 19th, 2012
8:43 pm
Aw, c’mon! Some of you act like children. Do you really think the nature of White House guest lists will change, except for political affiliation, if a Republican becomes president? Do you really believe that a Republican president will be any less exclusive or take less expensive vacations? The only real difference is that some of you conservatives now blasting Obama will be falling all over each other to lick Romney’s rectum—that and the fact that the House will be extremely anxious to act on the President’s requests, while the Senate Republicans will discover a deplorable vacancy rate in the judiciary and be anxious to approve nominees.
Go sell your garbage to some newcomer to the political scene.
Recon 0311 2533
April 19th, 2012
8:45 pm
Harry Reid certainly is a congressional leader with a firm grasp on the pulse of Americans.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sen-reid-junk-mail-is-seniors-only-way-of-communicating-or-feeling-like-theyre-part-of-the-real-world/
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
8:45 pm
And ALL of that was the result of supply side economics.
I think that’s vastly oversimplifying things. The housing bubble was fueled by bad banking policies and crazy consumers. I’m not sure how either of those components can be attributed to supply side economics. Please elaborate.
F. Sinkwich
April 19th, 2012
8:46 pm
Obviously you born with a silver spoon in your mouth, Bruno.
C’mon now, ante up!
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
8:47 pm
Recon @ 8:45
Heard that earlier today.
Pretty pathetic…….
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
8:47 pm
dbm
April 19th, 2012
8:18 pm
I saw that you were not the first one that stated that. I should have specified that in my post to you. For that oversight, I appologize if I made it seem like I was attributing that statement to you as if it were your original thought. I would disagree with you a bit on saying that we’ve traveled a ways down that road already. I would instead say that we had almost made it off that street, given our overall history, and recently we did a 180 turn and are going in the wrong direction. I don’t think we would see a dictatorship in this country as the ideologies are so far apart that we would see a true “civil war” with a splitting of the country in half before we see a dictatorship by either ideology. I hope to see neither of those happen.
———————–
josef
It wasn’t me talking about the differences/similarities of Bush and Bush 2.0 *Now with enhanced melanin, but you already know how I feel about the two. Obama reminds me of Clinton when it comes to the smooth talk. I’d agree with you in that both Bush and Obama appear ill-fitted for their contrived environments.
Don't Forget
April 19th, 2012
8:49 pm
Bruno, what I was mainly referring to was Romney’s comments that suggested we didn’t need to care about people losing their homes but rather we needed to let the market work it out and let the chips fall where they may. That’s just cold hearted. I had some challenges in this recession (remember I’ve been in practice less than 2 years) but I got through it ok and am doing fine now. Like you, I had a reasonable mortgage and very little debt. But it’s not about me or anyone else that’s doing ok now for that matter. It’s about people who are in trouble largely because of the shennanigans of Wall Street.
F. Sinkwich
April 19th, 2012
8:50 pm
Not our fault.
Bush sucks.
Obama/Biden 2012
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
8:50 pm
Some of you act like children…….The only real difference is that some of you conservatives now blasting Obama will be falling all over each other to lick Romney’s rectum—
Old Goober–Maybe you should proofread your posts before hitting the submit button. I haven’t met many folks past middle school who think that rectum licking references are an example of being “grownup”.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
8:52 pm
Sinkwich
When you have the time, you need to thank the Recon’s, Thulsa’s, Bruno’s and Scout’s of this blog.
Even when I disagree, it is evident that they bring much more than talking points, rhetoric and frankly the BS you bring
If this were a covered dish dinner………. you would be struggling to show up with paper cups and napkins……….. No substance at all
Mighty Righty
April 19th, 2012
8:52 pm
A note for the Bush bashers: W is the only president with an MBA. After graduating from Yale with better grades than John Kerry, Bush obtained and MBA from Harvard no less. You Obamanistas should take note that both Kerry and Bush and Gore released their college transcripts. They had nothing to hide. I am not a Bush fan. I think he screwed up by not leaving Iraq after the capture of Hussein. I think he contributed to the housing mess by not fighting the Democrats over Fannie and Freddie. But blame should go where it is deserved. The whacky left over look the financial impact 9/11 had on our economy. Eight months after Bush took office our Airlines and travel industry were virtually destroyed with devestating effects through out our entire economy. No intelligent thought can blame the collapse of the good economy inherited from Clinton on Bush with out remembering the effects of 9/11.. The fact is 9/11 was a disaster not caused by Bush. The fact that he was delt that catastrophe and the economy essitially recovered from it is certainly to his credit. Also, Bush did not blame Clinton for the problem. He shut up and fixed the problem unlike Barack Oblamea.
Recon 0311 2533
April 19th, 2012
8:52 pm
Supply side has historically delivered results, while keynesian economics has resulted in where we are today. Anyone who refuses to understand this must either have their head stuck deep in the sand or have O.D.’d on far-left Kool-Aid.
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
8:52 pm
carlos
Let them lambaste until their pectorals sieze up. If I need to, I could translate that into elementary language so that everybody could understand it. A consumption based economy needs consumption in order for it to run properly. No consumption hurts the economy. Hoarding massive amounts of cash is the opposite of consumption. Hoarding cash outside of the economy is even worse. Customers don’t appear out of thin air. If you don’t create jobs and make sure they actually pay worth a damn, you don’t give people the opportunity to become a customer.
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
8:52 pm
Obviously you born with a silver spoon in your mouth, Bruno.
Nah, though I did try to steal josef’s spoon once. Sucker was too fast for me.
Don't Forget
April 19th, 2012
8:55 pm
I think that’s vastly oversimplifying things. The housing bubble was fueled by bad banking policies and crazy consumers. I’m not sure how either of those components can be attributed to supply side economics. Please elaborate.
Ok. The bad banking policies were the result of financial deregulation. The commercial banks joined with the investment side and sold crap to the rest of the economy. They knew they were bad loans but didn’t care and they were obviously much more aware of this than the consumers who believed their “pie in the sky” sales pitches. I blame those who committed the fraud, not those who fell for it.
F. Sinkwich
April 19th, 2012
8:55 pm
” It’s about people who are in trouble largely because of the shennanigans of Wall Street.”
Can’t any of you lib ilks man-up around here and accept the fact that you’re in dire straits because you’re just stoopid?
You idiots signed the contract, right?
No one held a gun at your head, right?
Get over it.
Pussies.
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
8:56 pm
Bruno, what I was mainly referring to was Romney’s comments that suggested we didn’t need to care about people losing their homes but rather we needed to let the market work it out and let the chips fall where they may. That’s just cold hearted.
Well, my core temperature must be in the 30s, then, because that’s exactly the same course of action that I support. Markets operate via supply and demand. Following the building boom, we ended up with millions of vacant homes and commercial properties. The market can only right itself when demand eventually catches up to the supply. Using artificial means to alleviate the short-term suffering can only prolong the inevitable and creates more long-term harm in the form of new debt.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
8:58 pm
“Also, Bush did not blame Clinton for the problem”
Are you sure you are confident in that statement?
F. Sinkwich
April 19th, 2012
8:59 pm
“If this were a covered dish dinner………. you would be struggling to show up with paper cups and napkins……….. No substance at all”
You obviously didn’t see my post about your solemn day last Tuesday.
Perhaps I should re-post…
You’ll be moved, I guarantee it.
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
8:59 pm
Also, Bush did not blame Clinton for the problem. He shut up and fixed the problem unlike Barack Oblamea.
Well, as much as I hate the blame game, there are times that I don’t fault Obama for doing just that. If he didn’t stand up for himself, the history books would probably say that everything was smooth sailing on 1/19/09 since that’s how many of his detractors come off on their criticisms of his policies.
As a sidebar on the blame game, it’s a bit hypocritical to blast Obama for blaming Bush when his detractors still blame his policies. In the real world, he hasn’t seen the light of day in his “policies” since the summer of 2010. The question should be why are those who fault him for blaming Bush doing the same thing in blaming his policies when he had at most a full calendar year to enact his “agenda”? The GOP has, as many gleefully proclaimed, stopped his agenda. So, maybe people should be questioning if the gridlock itself is the reason for all our woes at this current time.
Florida lawmaker Chris Smith blasts Gov. Rick Scott for moving 'at tortoise speed' in reviewing 'Stand Your Ground' law
April 19th, 2012
8:59 pm
A Florida lawmaker is accusing Gov. Rick Scott of moving “at tortoise speed” in examining whether changes are needed to the the state’s controversial “Stand Your Ground” law after the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin by a community watch volunteer.
Scott on Thursday named the members of a 17-person Task Force on Citizen Safety and Protection that will thoroughly examine the controversial 2005 Florida law that says citizens do not have to retreat if attacked and can use deadly force if they “reasonably believe” they are in danger.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/19/11288073-florida-lawmaker-chris-smith-blasts-gov-rick-scott-for-moving-at-tortoise-speed-in-reviewing-stand-your-ground-law?lite
Aquagirl
April 19th, 2012
8:59 pm
If this were a covered dish dinner………. you would be struggling to show up with paper cups and napkins
can’t breath thru the laughing fit…agh
dbm
April 19th, 2012
9:01 pm
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
8:47 pm
Apology accepted.
There are a number of things that constitute giant steps down that road and that show no signs so far of being undone. Three examples:
1. Antitrust laws.
2. Nationalizing the airwaves instead of treating the right to broadcast on a given frequency in a given geographical area as private property in fundamentally the same manner as land.
3. The vastness. pervasiveness, and intrusiveness of government regulation of business.
Maybe we’ll get a dictatorship that claims to compromise between the ideologies and take the best of both. Maybe we’ll get a dictatorship that claims to be a short-term response to an emergency.
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
9:04 pm
Ok. The bad banking policies were the result of financial deregulation.
I guess you could characterize the deregulation as an example of “supply side economics’ in a general way, though many would argue that it was just plain irresponsible to allow the excessive credit leveraging which turned a potentially manageable catastrophe into a tsunami.
I blame those who committed the fraud, not those who fell for it.
Sinkwich said it better @ 8:55 than I could.
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
9:08 pm
dbm
April 19th, 2012
9:01 pm
Are you saying those three things have to be undone in order not to go down that road? Just trying to make sure I’m reading your post correctly…
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
9:10 pm
The GOP has, as many gleefully proclaimed, stopped his agenda. So, maybe people should be questioning if the gridlock itself is the reason for all our woes at this current time.
Gridlock and obstinence blows both ways, Brosephus. The Republicans weren’t even consulted during the first two years of Obama’s term, and the Dem Senate STILL refuses to pass a budget so that the two sides can compromise. But, tip of the cap to the Dems who have won the PR war, since otherwise intelligent people like yourself see it as a one-sided affair.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:10 pm
Sink
Post what you need to post…….
If it is funny I will laugh……………
I’m not your mommy or daddy so I will not be holding your hand
dbm
April 19th, 2012
9:12 pm
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
9:08 pm
I’m saying those three things constitute going part way down that road, and make it harder to keep from going farther down.
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
9:13 pm
I guess you could characterize the deregulation as an example of “supply side economics’ in a general way, though many would argue that it was just plain irresponsible to allow the excessive credit leveraging which turned a potentially manageable catastrophe into a tsunami.
Wouldn’t sensible regulation stop that irresponsibility or restrain it much better? I’m all about giving people a chance to do right. If you can’t do right on your own, then sometimes you need those guidelines to keep you from straying off the path. Money is one of those things that I feel can make even the most honest and trustworthy person lose control and do things far outside of what they would normally even fantasize about doing.
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
9:13 pm
(remember I’ve been in practice less than 2 years)
Coming up on 26 years myself, DF. Rookie.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:13 pm
Bruno @ 9:10
Those are great points.
With that said couldn’t the same be said when Obama offered up a combination of spending decreases and tax increases but was laughed down Pennsylvania Ave by Republicans.
dbm
April 19th, 2012
9:14 pm
I have to leave now, and it may be days before I can check back.
barking frog
April 19th, 2012
9:14 pm
Bro
get the date of the coup
so i can short the market.
Recon 0311 2533
April 19th, 2012
9:17 pm
Making Florida’s ‘Stand your ground law” the villain in this tragedy is stupid. Stand your ground only protects someone who uses deadly force protection from prosecutors who try to force them into proving that they did not fail in retreating from the danger. It does not change the generally accepted rule of Ability, Opportunity, and Jeopardy. Ability=did the deceased attacker possess the ABILITY to maim or kill. Did the deceased attacker have the OPPORTUNITY to maim or kill. Would a reasonable clear thinking person in that same circumstance have reason to believe that they were in JEOPARDY of being killed or maimed. Zimmerman IMO negated a “stand your ground” defense by unlawfully pursuing and confronting Travon Martin.
Mighty Righty
April 19th, 2012
9:17 pm
Brosephus: Your conclusion soesn’t make any sense. Please rewrite so it makes sense. However, I do understand the constant barrage of deflecting Oblamea’s record of failure by attempting to imply the Republican congress is not co-operating. One, Oblamea had two years of no opposition in either the house or the senate to pass anything his heart desired. Two, Why would anyone co-operate with an idealogue who only proposes more destruction? In the twi years he did control the house and senate all he did was push an unconstitutional law through in the middle of the night that wasn’t read or understood by the Deflectocrats and was over the objections of the american people. The law is so bad, today no Democrat even wants to mention it. With absolute control over the government he couldn’t even pass a budget. Even now his party still controls the senate and he still can’t get anything done. Even his Deflectocrat party has again turned down his budget.
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
9:17 pm
dbm
April 19th, 2012
9:12 pm
Ok. I got’cha. I could see both pros and cons on each one of those things, so we’d probably be at least in partial agreement. I’d love to believe that we could control things without the need for government involvement and such. However, I also acknowlege that man is fallible, and we will make mistakes. Some will end up being more costly than others.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:19 pm
“Why would anyone co-operate with an idealogue who only proposes more destruction? ”
Time to take a long and hard look in the mirror
Guess you live on a one way street, but that is ok…… many on both sides do or at least act in that manner
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
9:19 pm
Mighty Righty
I’ll rewrite when you actually write something legible that I can understand. That crap you posted up there ^^^ ain’t it…
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:21 pm
Recon @ 9:17
Will be interesting to see what Zimmerman’s attorney’s defense strategy will be…….. unless they plead down to a manslaughter charge
Doggone/GA
April 19th, 2012
9:21 pm
I see that reasonable discussion has died again. Too bad, it was nice while it lasted.
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
9:21 pm
Money is one of those things that I feel can make even the most honest and trustworthy person lose control and do things far outside of what they would normally even fantasize about doing.
I hope I won’t shock you by agreeing wholeheartedly. As I said to DF the other night, I have no recollection of Glass-Steagal being repealed. I remember no special mention in the press, though DF found a great video of a Congressman who warned of its consequences.
You’re not going to find many folks out there who think ALL regulation is bad, other than extreme Libertarians.
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
9:22 pm
frog
I don’t know about messing with that coup crowd. If I get around those meetings trying to swipe info, they might try to terminate a brother with extreme prejudice.
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
9:23 pm
I see that reasonable discussion has died again. Too bad, it was nice while it lasted.
“Reasonable discussion” meaning you and josef trashing Bush??
barking frog
April 19th, 2012
9:26 pm
Bro
yep, too bad dbm and
all the other dictator
expecters don’t have
method or time frame.
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
9:28 pm
Bruno
Doesn’t shock me at all as I don’t see you as one that spouts the lines without thinking. I have no problem with people who think and analyze things through. I don’t necessarily feel the same about those who spout without using their cerebral cortex first.
You’re not going to find many folks out there who think ALL regulation is bad, other than extreme Libertarians.
That reminds me of one of my biggest gripes with many conservatives. I hate to hear the standard response of “I am for smaller government” when there is no attempt to define what constitutes a smaller government. Personally, I don’t think the size is anywhere near as important as the effectiveness. Anytime I ask a person what defines a small government and how will we know when we get to that point, I usually get that blank stare in return. Then either the number of fed employees or regulations, typically EPA, will be spouted off as though there are cue cards behind me.
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
9:30 pm
Well, looks like all the musicphiles are out for the evening, but I though of this cool Bryan Adams tune to add to the Canadian Rocker tribute:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqxLt5KWDik&ob=av2e
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:33 pm
Bruno
early warm up for your show next week
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBvGZP4srZA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8VHHcd0M_o&feature=related
Mick
April 19th, 2012
9:34 pm
bruno
Not entirely, here’s some classic bubblegum-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfuBREMXxts
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
9:35 pm
frog
You can corner the market. I’m going to do my Bill Duke impression…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PR37Z5DzsTg
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:36 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OUYptpCQJ8
Joe Cocker
barking frog
April 19th, 2012
9:40 pm
Bro
not me. too old.
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
9:41 pm
That reminds me of one of my biggest gripes with many conservatives. I hate to hear the standard response of “I am for smaller government” when there is no attempt to define what constitutes a smaller government. Personally, I don’t think the size is anywhere near as important as the effectiveness.
Bro–I guess the best way I can explain it is via a sports analogy. No matter which sport I played, I always ended up as the defensive “captain”. In baseball, I was the catcher. In both soccer and ice hockey, I was the goalie. I was put at defensive end in my short-lived football career. No matter the sport, or coach, I was always put on defense. Why?? It’s a mindset–the same mindset which makes the the standard response of “I am for smaller government” sound very appealing to me as well.
As for your charge that that mindset needs to be translated into specific action steps, I couldn’t agree more. I can guarandamntee you that I could find a ton of ways to save money in our budget if I were in charge. My ex-wife didn’t call me “The World’s Cheapest Man” for nothing. It really can’t be that hard, I just think that both parties lack the political will to do what’s necessary.
Mick
April 19th, 2012
9:43 pm
I guess you know what I’ve got on my mind-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rXhXLsNJL8&feature=related
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:43 pm
“It really can’t be that hard, I just think that both parties lack the political will to do what’s necessary.”
Best line of the day……….
moonbat betty
April 19th, 2012
9:44 pm
Running on Faith
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QfNv_ZYwBo
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:45 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IN1J5sMv28Q
barking frog
April 19th, 2012
9:45 pm
“I remain a simple man
who has more questions
than answers. Please join
me as I seek to turn that
tide.” – Bill Duke
from his website
Recon 0311 2533
April 19th, 2012
9:46 pm
Brosephus, Most conservatives can answer your question easily. I come from from a business background where you had to submit a budgeted business plan and then defend it. You either justified your plan along with projected necessary supporting staff or you failed to do so. If you failed to do so your budget was disapproved and you went back to the drawing board and you only got one more chance before your job was on the line. Government doesn’t work that way but if it did we would have a right sized government that we sadly do not have today. Strong case for term limits and getting people rotating into government form the private sector without aspirations for a political career because a career in government wouldn’t be available.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:47 pm
moonbat
We were on the same wavelength
Clapton……. solo and Blindfaith
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:50 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UwkBmDMfR4&feature=related
Mick
April 19th, 2012
9:51 pm
Off track but still great-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97_TbMmtXmU
moonbat betty
April 19th, 2012
9:53 pm
TBS:
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:53 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEEfDdJyxPY
Don't Forget
April 19th, 2012
9:55 pm
Well, my core temperature must be in the 30s, then, because that’s exactly the same course of action that I support. Markets operate via supply and demand. Following the building boom, we ended up with millions of vacant homes and commercial properties. The market can only right itself when demand eventually catches up to the supply.
Agreed, but that’s not where the problem lies. The value of the properties WILL find the bottom. The problem is that the bubble was created by all these ridiculous and fraudulent loans and left the people who fell for this garbage with upside down loans and a devastated economy where jobs are very scarce. At the very least the banks should allow these people to refinance to make their payments more manageable and I think an pretty persuasive argument can be made that some principle reduction is warranted as well. We agreed that it was bad banking policies that created the problem and there is documentation through internal communication at these firms that they knew exactly what they were doing. Why should the consumer who fell for the fraud bear the burden. Instead we have the banks who made this mess as the only sector that has fully recovered. That’s not right. As far as I’m concerned the banks should not be prospering until the economy they wrecked has recovered. They acted like con men and should be treated that way.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
9:56 pm
Played him with Clapton on my last post
Joe Bonamassa is one of my favs……… especially in todays era
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRxqYoZiYPU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hytToent3kw&feature=related
He can flat out light it up…………..
Soothsayer
April 19th, 2012
9:56 pm
John F. Kennedy and Jacqueline Bouvier. The couple is seen on June 27, 1953, in Hyannis Port, Mass., sitting together in the sunshine at Kennedy’s family home a few months before their wedding.
Hard to believe, but a little over 10 years from the date of this photograph, John F. Kennedy would lie dead.
moonbat betty
April 19th, 2012
9:57 pm
To all the Wall Street Execs:
c/o Bookman
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-tRXewCAmU
Soothsayer
April 19th, 2012
10:02 pm
President Richard Nixon salutes the crowds with a victorious gesture as he passes through Savannah, Ga., on Oct. 8, 1970. He and Mrs. Nixon were on their way to dedicate an oceanographic center.
Recon 0311 2533
April 19th, 2012
10:03 pm
I always liked JFK even though some of his photographs made him look like Alfred E. Newman as “what me worry” in Mad Magazine. He was among the last of the conservative Democrats.
Soothsayer
April 19th, 2012
10:07 pm
Elizabeth Eckford ignores the hostile screams and stares of fellow students on her first day of school on Sept. 6, 1957, in Little Rock, Ark. She was one of the nine African American students whose integration into Little Rock’s Central High School was ordered by a federal court following legal action by the NAACP.
To me, this represents courage that, I believe, very few possess. Certainly not me. I can remember like it was yesterday when our high school was “integrated.” At first, the kids (and I am not going to say black kids), were hated, but by the time they graduated, they were loved.
How far we have come as a country.
moonbat betty
April 19th, 2012
10:11 pm
Thanks, Sooth.
Now go stick your head in a toilet.
Bruno
April 19th, 2012
10:11 pm
Damn–looks like I opened the musical floodgates!! Good selections everyone!!
Recon 0311 2533
April 19th, 2012
10:15 pm
Let it roll
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua8JrNMzc2g
Soothsayer
April 19th, 2012
10:15 pm
After Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is freed from prison under a $2,000 appeal bond, he is greeted by his wife, Coretta, and children, Marty and Yoki, at the airport in Chamblee, Ga., on Oct. 27, 1960.
Less than eight years after this photograph was taken, Martin Luther King would lie dead.
Oscar
April 19th, 2012
10:18 pm
Mighty Righty
April 19th, 2012
9:17 pm
_____
You got your facts all screwed up in this post. It takes 60 votes in the senate to bring a bill to a vote. Democrats don’t have that.
In the two years you mentioned, you state that the president controlled both houses. That’s just not true. Complete control of a party by a president has not existed in a long time. Even if they all called themselves democrats, they were made up of a number of factions, not in agreement and certainly not in control of the majority leader or the president.
Recon 0311 2533
April 19th, 2012
10:18 pm
“Now go stick your head in a toilet.”
but be careful not to flush.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
10:21 pm
Black Country Communion
The band Bonamassa is in when he isn’t doing is solo gig
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aB_JQWX9uOE&feature=related
Brosephus™
April 19th, 2012
10:22 pm
It really can’t be that hard, I just think that both parties lack the political will to do what’s necessary.
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
———————-
Strong case for term limits and getting people rotating into government form the private sector without aspirations for a political career because a career in government wouldn’t be available.
I don’t agree with term limits beyond what we currently have. Enacting term limits is the lazy man’s kill switch. If you’re afraid of somebody getting that hooked into a job, then vote them out. It’s not an impossible task. You simply have to know where to start.
The easier and more effective way to do it is to start from the lower ranks and work your way up, IMHO. Starting at the state and local level does two things. First, it puts the entire party on notice as all fundraising begins on the local level. The other thing is that I feel the major problem we have is due to gerrymandering. Cleaning house on the state level would be the way to do away with that. A rep will be less inclined to do stupid sh*t when he/she knows that they are only 3 votes from losing their next election. Instead of simply pushing the agenda for the far ideologues, they would have to temper their actions to appeal to everybody. Regardless of what people think, there are people of all political ideologies in this country, and they all deserve representation in DC.
As to getting people rotated into government from the private sector, it sounds like a very laudable task. I don’t think that would work based on current trends. Now, the thing is to do your g-time, get all the knowledge and training, and then go to the public sector. Going that route, you’re almost guaranteed to double or triple your income. Check the number of generals that retire and become consultants. Look at the retirees from the CIA, NSA, FBI, and other intelligence agencies that have gone into security consulting. It would be a monumental task to get people to leave a job with very good pay to come and work for the government.
They BOTH suck
April 19th, 2012
10:22 pm
Recon
Great Dr John selection