PDA

View Full Version : 1st they came for the banks......



badbullgator
03-24-2009, 07:49 AM
Maybe I am wrong but this scares the crap out of me. Chipping away....what is next? Your business?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29847658

http://floridasportsman.com/art/eek3.gif (http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/post?cmd=reply&id=10477546#)

road kill
03-24-2009, 07:57 AM
Maybe I am wrong but this scares the crap out of me. Chipping away....what is next? Your business?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29847658

http://floridasportsman.com/art/eek3.gif (http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/post?cmd=reply&id=10477546#)

Health Care is next my friend!!

Ain't it wonderful??:shock:

YardleyLabs
03-24-2009, 08:47 AM
The power to seize and liquidate banks was based on Federal deposit insurance and the need for the government to be able to provide for an orderly close out of illiquid banks so that the overall stability of financial markets would not be destroyed as it was in the Depression. Today, the money system is much more complex. Bank holding companies that were basically established to circumvent state and federal regulation now have more of an impact on financial stability than traditional banks as the current crisis has made clear.

To protect the financial system, the federal government has stepped in to protect creditors of illiquid institutions. However, it has not had the tools to allow it to liquidate illiquid institutions forcing the type of abortion we have at AIG and could end up having at places like Citigroup. While we could theoretically allow these institutions to declare bankruptcy, that type of abrupt failure endangers the overall structure of financial markets as was illustrated by the failure of Lehman Brothers. It seems to me that we cannot afford to permit unregulated companies to play a central role in the operation of our national and international financial markets. Too big to fail means, I believe, to big to live without oversight. Part of that oversight requires that there be better mechanisms for managing insolvency in a way that protects the balance of the financial industry. If that existed now, AIG would now be out of business as it should be and Citigroup would probably be headed in the same direction.

Patrick Johndrow
03-24-2009, 08:50 AM
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

Captain Mike D
03-24-2009, 03:25 PM
Maybe I am wrong but this scares the crap out of me. Chipping away....what is next? Your business?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29847658

http://floridasportsman.com/art/eek3.gif (http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/post?cmd=reply&id=10477546#)

And this surprises you how?

1. Attempt to seize control of census-Whitehouse control
2. Attempt to place salary cap on execs recieving Tarp funds-Whitehouse control
3.Attempt to stop bonuses for employees of companies recieving Tarp
money-Whitehouse control
4. Attempt to extend salary caps to businesses not recieving Tarp or Bailout money- Whitehouse control
5. Attempt to place high level of control on states recieving bailout cash Whitehouse control
6.Attempt to take over investment firms who are in trouble regardless of weather they are a financial institution or not Whitehouse control

HUGE power play for control by Obama, hell, who needs a Constitution when we have one man who is so brilliant and worthy:(
I just wonder who's power he will want to usurp tomorrow

BonMallari
03-24-2009, 04:41 PM
Health Care is next my friend!!

Ain't it wonderful??:shock:


You are correct...they want to socialize medical healthcare...you think it takes a long time to get in to see your doctor now , just wait and see how long it takes once they change the current system

Richard Halstead
03-24-2009, 05:17 PM
3.Attempt to stop bonuses for employees of companies recieving Tarp
money-Whitehouse control

Why not go one step further and have all campain money given by companies receiving Tarp funds be returned as well by the public officials?
I realise this isn't as great an amount, but it is a step on the way to recovery.

Captain Mike D
03-24-2009, 06:01 PM
Why not go one step further and have all campain money given by companies receiving Tarp funds be returned as well by the public officials?
I realise this isn't as great an amount, but it is a step on the way to recovery.

Your're on it Richard, but they would never agree!! Obama his own self recieved over 100k t from AIG to further his campaign. Damn all those Aholes- pitch them all out and give us some new ones that will adhere to the Constitution

M Remington
03-24-2009, 06:59 PM
So the FDIC should not take over banks that are in danger of failing either? I have a feeling that most of you would be giving an "Amen" to the government if they saved a bank in which you had over the FDIC limit.

The government's role is to keep us from running into the problems we had when Hoover was president. No one wants a company to be taken over if no one is affected (owners, shareholders, vendors). But, when a company's collapse potentially affects the entire U.S. economy, they need to do it.

Hoosier, it sounds like you would like U.S. air quality to be like that of Mexico City. Should we just let plants spew out emissions? Should we let plants dump toxic material into rivers and bays? Should we let people throw trash out of their pick-ups as they are driving down the road?

M Remington
03-24-2009, 08:50 PM
I agree with you on burning coal and clean-coal technology. Should we force businesses to pay for it or is that a government expense?

badbullgator
03-24-2009, 09:45 PM
Why force anyone?

cotts135
03-25-2009, 06:26 AM
And this surprises you how?

1. Attempt to seize control of census-Whitehouse control
2. Attempt to place salary cap on execs recieving Tarp funds-Whitehouse control
3.Attempt to stop bonuses for employees of companies recieving Tarp
money-Whitehouse control
4. Attempt to extend salary caps to businesses not recieving Tarp or Bailout money- Whitehouse control
5. Attempt to place high level of control on states recieving bailout cash Whitehouse control
6.Attempt to take over investment firms who are in trouble regardless of weather they are a financial institution or not Whitehouse control

HUGE power play for control by Obama, hell, who needs a Constitution when we have one man who is so brilliant and worthy:(
I just wonder who's power he will want to usurp tomorrow

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm interesting..................The Laissez Faire policy of the previous administration has worked so well, why would we want to change that?
I think we would all agree that we are in some kinda mess here. Decisions have to made and policys must be changed. We could argue what those changes should be and for certain we are not going to like all of them, but I am fairly sure most of you see the folly in continuing down the road we were on.

Matt McKenzie
03-25-2009, 06:34 AM
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm interesting..................The Laissez Faire policy of the previous administration has worked so well, why would we want to change that?
I think we would all agree that we are in some kinda mess here. Decisions have to made and policys must be changed. We could argue what those changes should be and for certain we are not going to like all of them, but I am fairly sure most of you see the folly in continuing down the road we were on.

You just can't help it, can you? It's the default position to go to the "failed policies of the last eight years" card. No need to discuss the merits of the current issue being discussed. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

zeus3925
03-25-2009, 06:52 AM
You just can't help it, can you? It's the default position to go to the "failed policies of the last eight years" card. No need to discuss the merits of the current issue being discussed. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

While I am still affected by the policies of the last eight years I am not about to forget "W" and his minions. Nor will I let up on criticizing them.

Matt McKenzie
03-25-2009, 07:55 AM
Nobody expects you to change your mind about the Bush years. Nobody expects you to stop speaking your mind about it. I just find it ridiculous (and telling) that some of those on the left can't manage to have a conversation about the actions of a Democrat without comparing it to the actions of a Republican. Why can't you just discuss the issue at hand? For example, I will not justify the excessive spending and pork-barrel projects that happened while the Republicans controlled Congress by citing examples of the same thing since the Dems took control. I was pissed off when the Republicans did it and I'm pissed off that the Dems do it. I will not justify Bush's actions in Iraq or Afganistan by comparing them to Clinton's actions in Bosnia or Somalia. I will, however, discuss Bush's actions, Clinton's actions, or Obama's actions on their own merits. From my perspective, the inability to directly discuss the issue without inserting the dig at Bush seriously diminishes the credibility of the poster. One man's opinion.

Pete
03-25-2009, 08:12 AM
we are the world,,,,,we are the people (puke emoticon needed)

Pete

badbullgator
03-25-2009, 10:15 AM
we are the world,,,,,we are the people (puke emoticon needed)

Pete

here ya go

http://www.floridasportsman.com/art/puke.gif (http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/post?cmd=reply&id=10483253#) http://www.floridasportsman.com/art/puke.gif (http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/post?cmd=reply&id=10483253#) http://www.floridasportsman.com/art/puke.gif (http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/post?cmd=reply&id=10483253#)

Not as good as the one Ken had on his site, but it will have to do

Bob Gutermuth
03-25-2009, 10:26 AM
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/uc/20090325/snq090325.gif (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/uclickcomics/20090325/cx_nq_uc/nq20090325)

K.Bullock
03-25-2009, 10:53 AM
Maybe I am wrong but this scares the crap out of me. Chipping away....what is next? Your business?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29847658

http://floridasportsman.com/art/eek3.gif (http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/post?cmd=reply&id=10477546#)

Last week I completed a series of finals on how the Soviet Union came into existence. what is scary is how similar the political climate In Russia was at the time of Lenin's rise to power is to the political climate of America today.

The people willingly let Lenin and the Bolsheviks in and it did not take too long before they were sorry for their decision. By the time they realized what Lenin's ambitions were, it was too late the Bolsheviks had power and eerily enough for us, the first thing they did was ...take over private industry and banks.
I am not suggesting that Obama wants to be another Lenin ( although i honestly don't think that would break his narcissistic heart) But I do believe the example is not lost on him that in extreme times extreme social changes can be made by the government. I would not trust this move by the Administration a bit ...It should scare the crap out of you.

Pete
03-25-2009, 07:06 PM
Thanks Corey
I needed that,,,,I feel better now:p


Pete

zeus3925
03-26-2009, 08:08 AM
Nobody expects you to change your mind about the Bush years. Nobody expects you to stop speaking your mind about it. I just find it ridiculous (and telling) that some of those on the left can't manage to have a conversation about the actions of a Democrat without comparing it to the actions of a Republican. Why can't you just discuss the issue at hand? For example, I will not justify the excessive spending and pork-barrel projects that happened while the Republicans controlled Congress by citing examples of the same thing since the Dems took control. I was pissed off when the Republicans did it and I'm pissed off that the Dems do it. I will not justify Bush's actions in Iraq or Afganistan by comparing them to Clinton's actions in Bosnia or Somalia. I will, however, discuss Bush's actions, Clinton's actions, or Obama's actions on their own merits. From my perspective, the inability to directly discuss the issue without inserting the dig at Bush seriously diminishes the credibility of the poster. One man's opinion.


Thank you, Matt. Can't say I disagree much. But, we are still dealing with a bases loaded, nobody out situation, the last pitcher left us with.

Marvin S
03-26-2009, 11:59 AM
But, we are still dealing with a bases loaded, nobody out situation, the last pitcher left us with.

:) :) - Were you not the person commenting about barroom courage? My experience has been that those calling attention to the failings of others are just trying to divert attention from their own failings.

The last pitcher has been relieved - this pitcher wanted the opportunity - He was given unprecedented access prior to taking on the responsibility - so what does he do - makes a big deal out of changing previous policy & finds himself in deep excrement - proposes a budget that will create unprecedented deficits. Now that appears to me that the reliever allowed a home run, cleared the bases & is managing to load them up on his own, a couple of times.

Had the previous POTUS made all the boneheaded choices this guy has signed off on, your media would have crucified him. A CIA director with a daughter that is a Communist-Socialist admirer - :rolleyes: .

But continue to bash the previous POTUS & you will marginalize yourself as Jeff has with his support of all things LEFT.

zeus3925
03-26-2009, 05:47 PM
:) :) - Were you not the person commenting about barroom courage? My experience has been that those calling attention to the failings of others are just trying to divert attention from their own failings.

The last pitcher has been relieved - this pitcher wanted the opportunity - He was given unprecedented access prior to taking on the responsibility - so what does he do - makes a big deal out of changing previous policy & finds himself in deep excrement - proposes a budget that will create unprecedented deficits. Now that appears to me that the reliever allowed a home run, cleared the bases & is managing to load them up on his own, a couple of times.

Had the previous POTUS made all the boneheaded choices this guy has signed off on, your media would have crucified him. A CIA director with a daughter that is a Communist-Socialist admirer - :rolleyes: .

But continue to bash the previous POTUS & you will marginalize yourself as Jeff has with his support of all things LEFT.

Marv, the previous POTUS may have been a a favorite of yours, but the financial collapse happened on his watch. For me it has meant a disappearance of a good part of my life savings. I am not about to recommend him for sainthood.

Adult children don't always follow their parent's ideology. To beat on the CIA chief for his daughter's belief is unfair. In fact, it sounds a bit like the late Senator from Wisconsin. I hope you don't consider Tail Gunner Joe a saint.

I don't believe Obama has wrecked the country yet. To say his proposals didn't work or won't work is way too premature. The large deficits concern me, however. But, shrinking the government by hamstringing and gutting the oversight is no way to fly.

Marv, you sound like a literate guy. What would you do if you were POTUS??

YardleyLabs
03-26-2009, 05:54 PM
......
But continue to bash the previous POTUS & you will marginalize yourself as Jeff has with his support of all things LEFT.

Sorry about the partial quote but I figured I would only address my own "marginal" existence. Marvin, you have previously expressed pride in the fact that you were rated the most conservative candidate around in your brief political career. Did it occur to you that from that exalted position almost the entire country is to the left? Just saying....;-)

IowaBayDog
03-26-2009, 07:52 PM
Thank you, Matt. Can't say I disagree much. But, we are still dealing with a bases loaded, nobody out situation, the last pitcher left us with.


But it appears it was President Clinton that corked and pine tarred the bankers bats long before Bush threw his first pitch. Pretty Bipartisan in Congress by the looks of it.

was approved in the Senate by a vote of 90 to 8 and in the House tonight by 362 to 57.

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/11/05/business/congress-passes-wide-ranging-bill-easing-bank-laws.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1&emc=eta1
CONGRESS PASSES WIDE-RANGING BILL EASING BANK LAWS

By STEPHEN LABATON

Published: Friday, November 5, 1999

Congress approved landmark legislation today that opens the door for a new era on Wall Street in which commercial banks, securities houses and insurers will find it easier and cheaper to enter one another's businesses.
The measure, considered by many the most important banking legislation in 66 years, was approved in the Senate by a vote of 90 to 8 and in the House tonight by 362 to 57. The bill will now be sent to the president, who is expected to sign it, aides said. It would become one of the most significant achievements this year by the White House and the Republicans leading the 106th Congress.
''Today Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system for the 21st century,'' Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers said. ''This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy.''
The decision to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 provoked dire warnings from a handful of dissenters that the deregulation of Wall Street would someday wreak havoc on the nation's financial system. The original idea behind Glass-Steagall was that separation between bankers and brokers would reduce the potential conflicts of interest that were thought to have contributed to the speculative stock frenzy before the Depression.
Today's action followed a rich Congressional debate about the history of finance in America in this century, the causes of the banking crisis of the 1930's, the globalization of banking and the future of the nation's economy.
Administration officials and many Republicans and Democrats said the measure would save consumers billions of dollars and was necessary to keep up with trends in both domestic and international banking. Some institutions, like Citigroup, already have banking, insurance and securities arms but could have been forced to divest their insurance underwriting under existing law. Many foreign banks already enjoy the ability to enter the securities and insurance industries.
''The world changes, and we have to change with it,'' said Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, who wrote the law that will bear his name along with the two other main Republican sponsors, Representative Jim Leach of Iowa and Representative Thomas J. Bliley Jr. of Virginia. ''We have a new century coming, and we have an opportunity to dominate that century the same way we dominated this century. Glass-Steagall, in the midst of the Great Depression, came at a time when the thinking was that the government was the answer. In this era of economic prosperity, we have decided that freedom is the answer.''
In the House debate, Mr. Leach said, ''This is a historic day. The landscape for delivery of financial services will now surely shift.''
But consumer groups and civil rights advocates criticized the legislation for being a sop to the nation's biggest financial institutions. They say that it fails to protect the privacy interests of consumers and community lending standards for the disadvantaged and that it will create more problems than it solves.
The opponents of the measure gloomily predicted that by unshackling banks and enabling them to move more freely into new kinds of financial activities, the new law could lead to an economic crisis down the road when the marketplace is no longer growing briskly.
''I think we will look back in 10 years' time and say we should not have done this but we did because we forgot the lessons of the past, and that that which is true in the 1930's is true in 2010,'' said Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota. ''I wasn't around during the 1930's or the debate over Glass-Steagall. But I was here in the early 1980's when it was decided to allow the expansion of savings and loans. We have now decided in the name of modernization to forget the lessons of the past, of safety and of soundness.''
Senator Paul Wellstone, Democrat of Minnesota, said that Congress had ''seemed determined to unlearn the lessons from our past mistakes.''

Marvin S
03-26-2009, 08:39 PM
Sorry about the partial quote but I figured I would only address my own "marginal" existence. Marvin, you have previously expressed pride in the fact that you were rated the most conservative candidate around in your brief political career. Did it occur to you that from that exalted position almost the entire country is to the left? Just saying....;-)

That's Fiscal conservative, the public employees union was worried I would not cater to their whining. But I'll give you one you'll have a hard time getting left of - as a social moderate I believe we should legalize prostitution, regulate & tax the bejesus out of the practice. You are fond of telling us of your foreign experiences & how they do things so much better in other countries, guess that's why so many are clamoring to go there.

I worked & lived in mining camps so have a little experience (not 1st hand) with the practice. In fact, one of my shift bosses used to be a 12 year old paperboy in the crib area. Said they were his best customers as far as paying their bill promptly. In the mining camps you rarely heard of the crime of rape, though the Butte camp had as many as 35,000 miners in it's heyday, most of whom were single. The people most sorry to see the practice stopped were the elected officials & the men in blue, they all had to tone their life style down. I hope you can figure that out. ;)

Marvin S
03-26-2009, 09:11 PM
Marv, the previous POTUS may have been a a favorite of yours, but the financial collapse happened on his watch. For me it has meant a disappearance of a good part of my life savings. I am not about to recommend him for sainthood.

The previous POTUS was the best choice available, twice - I was not happy with his fiscal bumbling - Nor was I happy with some of his policies & catering to fringe groups. I'm sorry about your losses, we've all had a few this time, but as I explain to my sons it's probably a buying opportunity in stocks that will not come along again for many years.


Adult children don't always follow their parent's ideology. To beat on the CIA chief for his daughter's belief is unfair.

What if in this case the daughter is following what she was taught at home? Are you comfortable with that? I raised 4 sons, all successful, I will tell you the acorn does not fall too far from the tree.


I don't believe Obama has wrecked the country yet. To say his proposals didn't work or won't work is way too premature. The large deficits concern me, however. But, shrinking the government by hamstringing and gutting the oversight is no way to fly.

I do not like the way they are strung out, there is too much money for the labor fakers. In fact I read a very good article in Wired on the electric grid & what stupid mandates & deregulation have done to it. The present POTUS is trying to take credit for something already in the works & increasing the price with his participation.


Marv, you sound like a literate guy. What would you do if you were POTUS??

1st - I would begin by keeping my campaign promises?
2nd - Knowing those jobs require competent people I would have had some candidates in mind. The prior POTUS had a problem with attracting competence.
3rd - I would concentrate on value added updates & additions to the infrastructure, which I believe has been neglected for years. If it's non value added, it don't happen.
4th - I would veto any bill that contained earmarks of any sort - but would provide states with a lump sum to work on those projects noted in the 3rd item.
5th - I would use the bully pulpit to institute change that benefitted the country as a whole.

That's it, doesn't sound very hard, but it works well. Do I believe Health Care needs changing, maybe, but not by a bunch of lawyers.

K G
03-26-2009, 09:17 PM
C'mon, IowaBayDog...you know the rules here...only the most recent Republican President can be held responsible for the current state of our economy. Those pesky facts you keep bringing up will only convolute the issue. Stop it now before our resident libs (notice there's only a handful of them now...:cool:...) become more apoplectic than they already are....;-)

Only 19 months 'til the CHANGE can be reversed regards,

kg

cotts135
03-27-2009, 07:07 AM
C'mon, IowaBayDog...you know the rules here...only the most recent Republican President can be held responsible for the current state of our economy. Those pesky facts you keep bringing up will only convolute the issue. Stop it now before our resident libs (notice there's only a handful of them now...:cool:...) become more apoplectic than they already are....;-)

Only 19 months 'til the CHANGE can be reversed regards,

kg

Whatever happened to accountability, Isn't that one of the defining principles of conservatism? In the short time Obama has been president I have heard on more than one occasion that he is responsible and that he will shoulder the blame for what happens. I kind of welcome that myself.
It would seem then that in your world Bush should be absolved of any accountability in the current financial crisis. There is certainly plenty of blame to go around and the previous president deserves some of it.

Matt McKenzie
03-27-2009, 08:58 AM
Whatever happened to accountability, Isn't that one of the defining principles of conservatism? In the short time Obama has been president I have heard on more than one occasion that he is responsible and that he will shoulder the blame for what happens. I kind of welcome that myself.
It would seem then that in your world Bush should be absolved of any accountability in the current financial crisis. There is certainly plenty of blame to go around and the previous president deserves some of it.

OK. Bush is responsible for a significant portion of the financial crisis. Now what? Can we move on? Or do we continue to use this to excuse the actions of everyone else who is taking advantage of the situation to push a leftist agenda and monumental government spending? At what point do you stop looking at what Bush did and start looking at what our leaders are doing TODAY?

Franco
03-27-2009, 09:13 AM
Bush was no leader nor was he a good business person. He just wanted approval and acceptence from his father. That is why we went to Iraq and that was the undoing of the Republican Party.

The finanacial mess began in the Clinton Administration and Bush was too soft to correct it. Lets don't forget that this mess started in the hosuing market with bad loans encourged by the Dems.

zeus3925
03-27-2009, 04:23 PM
OK. Bush is responsible for a significant portion of the financial crisis. Now what? Can we move on? Or do we continue to use this to excuse the actions of everyone else who is taking advantage of the situation to push a leftist agenda and monumental government spending? At what point do you stop looking at what Bush did and start looking at what our leaders are doing TODAY?

Ok, Matt, what do you propose to do in our current situation, if you were POTUS??

cotts135
03-28-2009, 02:41 AM
OK. Bush is responsible for a significant portion of the financial crisis. Now what? Can we move on? Or do we continue to use this to excuse the actions of everyone else who is taking advantage of the situation to push a leftist agenda and monumental government spending? At what point do you stop looking at what Bush did and start looking at what our leaders are doing TODAY?
Doesn't seem to me that the leaders in the Republican party have a solution either. That 18 page pamphlet they put out really was a joke, no real specifics except for a huge tax cut for the rich. Their plan is to criticize whatever the president proposes. The facts are that no matter who proposes a budget their will be gigantic deficits in 5-10 yrs because of Social Security and Medicaid. The population is getting older and the commitments the government has made to these programs is enormous.

road kill
03-28-2009, 06:49 AM
Bush was no leader nor was he a good business person. He just wanted approval and acceptence from his father. That is why we went to Iraq and that was the undoing of the Republican Party.
The finanacial mess began in the Clinton Administration and Bush was too soft to correct it. Lets don't forget that this mess started in the hosuing market with bad loans encourged by the Dems.


What do you think Afgahnistan will do to the Democratic party??

Marvin S
03-28-2009, 11:28 AM
The facts are that no matter who proposes a budget their will be gigantic deficits in 5-10 yrs because of Social Security and Medicaid. The population is getting older and the commitments the government has made to these programs is enormous.

Apparently, you have little understanding of the system. Social Security & Medicare recipients entered into a one sided contract with the US government. They dictate all terms & you get to shell out the cash to sustain same. Had they put that money into treasuries there would be ample funds for all. Both sides of the input are taxed initially & Clinton decided to tax 85% of the outgo above a certain income level. Many of us had those benefits factored into the meager retirement we received from our employers.

Medicaid is a welfare program where no one contributes but receives benefits. I read somewhere the Octo Mom already has 2 of her previous children in Medicare - how that happened is beyond my imagination.

Actually, a bigger threat to the long term financial well being in the US is the large number of public employees retiring at a young age, taking another position & getting into an additional retirement system. Public employees receive entirely too much from the system based on the value they add to it.

My father in law is a retired FF - disability - makes more today than he made any time when he was employed & pays 0 taxes. Not a bad deal at 92 when you were only employed for 25 years. :rolleyes:

But didn't you say at one time you were on the public teat? If so, I consider any comments about the private sector & real work to be something you would not understand. :razz:

zeus3925
03-28-2009, 11:44 AM
Marv, are public employees supposed to be Little Sisters of the Poor?

Marvin S
03-28-2009, 12:11 PM
They should be properly compensated for their contribution to society, no more - no less. Compensation meaning, all facets are taken into account. Their are very few Public Employees today that fit that definition.

zeus3925
03-28-2009, 08:10 PM
Actually, a bigger threat to the long term financial well being in the US is the large number of public employees retiring at a young age, taking another position & getting into an additional retirement system. Public employees receive entirely too much from the system based on the value they add to it.


But didn't you say at one time you were on the public teat? If so, I consider any comments about the private sector & real work to be something you would not understand. :razz:

Marv, I don't know about the State of Washington but the only ones that retire early in my experience is police and fire. I have worked in both the private and public sectors. The wages of public employees are generally much lower than in the private sector. I was a union negotiator for the public sector and I know this to be true.

Take an AS400 programmer for instance. The employees I represented were making in the mid 50's. My wife was doing comparable work for a private firm making in the high 80's. The lawyers I represented with years of experience were making substantially less than the rookies sitting at the opposite desk across the courtroom. Our road workers were earning $4 an hour less than their local counter parts in the private sector. It would have been far less if we had not successfully bargained for some good contracts --good enough to slow the hemorrhage of experienced employees.

Our retirement plan was not subject to negotiation, but it was identical to those my wife and I had in the private sector.

I really resent your characterizing public employment as not real work. You have never had a butcher knife thrown by a mental patient sail past your ear at four inches.

I doubt if you had to rescue a panicked blind senior citizen at two o'clock in the morning after her drug crazed son threw her down a stairway. You never had the same drug crazed individual stalk you, your wife and kids for weeks afterward.

You never had to walk in to a house so filled with rotten filth that firemen with breathing apparatus were called in to video the evidence.

I am also a trained cartographer. Our county cartographers and highway engineers were comparable and often superior to what I observed in the private sector.

Public employees are not welfare recipients. Many of them are highly trained in their fields. There are no apologies needed or forthcoming for the work of the folks I represented. I am proud to have represented them.

Gerry Clinchy
03-29-2009, 09:39 AM
On the issue of banks being allowed to become involved in non-banking businesses:

It may not be well-known to the general public, but banks made a bid to become the sole purveyors of title insurance. If such had happened, before this current banking fiasco, one can only imagine that it would have been that much worse. Not only would the mortgages be bad, but the sale of many of those properties might have also been subject to questions about clear title to the buyers ... presuming that the banks would have handled title searching as efficiently and honestly (tongue in cheek) as they handled the lending process.

Possibly only the culmination of the financial mess prevented the banks from also entering the real estate brokerage business. They might have succeeded in doing so had the house of cards not fallen apart when it did. Can one even begin to imagine what power this would have given these financial institutions?

Even though I am a RealtorŪ, I do not favor today's common practice of real estate brokerages owning and operating their own title insurance agencies and mortgage brokerages ("one-stop shopping" it's called). I believe it is a conflict to remove the "checks and balances" that each of these separate entities should provide during a real estate transaction.

cotts135
03-29-2009, 10:28 AM
They should be properly compensated for their contribution to society, no more - no less. Compensation meaning, all facets are taken into account. Their are very few Public Employees today that fit that definition.

Man, can you please tell me what you mean by that. That premise is just laughable on it's face. Who are the decision makers for this. Is it someone who feels that maybe these executives on Wall St. should get these nice fat bonuses or is it someone who decides that an actor or sports star contributes more to society than say a teacher or doctor. This is just a broad based generalization that some people like to throw around and it serves no purpose.

badbullgator
03-29-2009, 11:06 AM
Actually, a bigger threat to the long term financial well being in the US is the large number of public employees retiring at a young age, taking another position & getting into an additional retirement system. Public employees receive entirely too much from the system based on the value they add to it.



Marvin
Our county manager and school board director, among others in our county gov, are double dipping. I have to go look for the details but both had to "retire" for one month so they could collect a BIG monthly retirement package while they collect HUGE salaries when they unretired after the month. I know one of the two is getting something like 400K annually in addition to his salary.
BTW- both do a great job, but that is beside the point

Marvin S
03-29-2009, 03:24 PM
:) - & thanks for your candid comments -


Marv, I don't know about the State of Washington but the only ones that retire early in my experience is police and fire. I have worked in both the private and public sectors. The wages of public employees are generally much lower than in the private sector. I was a union negotiator for the public sector and I know this to be true.

Everyone in this State has 30 & out if they desire - they can then do the same position, only not full time, as Corey describes. The retirement model has not been properly negotiated in decades.

But your reply is what I would expect of a person negotiating for the public sector, it's never meant to be in the center - always skewed. As they have a very weak opponent.


Take an AS400 programmer for instance. The employees I represented were making in the mid 50's. My wife was doing comparable work for a private firm making in the high 80's. The lawyers I represented with years of experience were making substantially less than the rookies sitting at the opposite desk across the courtroom. Our road workers were earning $4 an hour less than their local counter parts in the private sector. It would have been far less if we had not successfully bargained for some good contracts --good enough to slow the hemorrhage of experienced employees.

Our retirement plan was not subject to negotiation, but it was identical to those my wife and I had in the private sector.

Please, the tired argument of doing better somewhere else is outdated, If they want more money go there. & the one about "road WORKERS" actually makes me smile. We all see the difference daily in our commutes in the summer. Leaning on a shovel or sitting in the truck does not qualify one as a "worker", just a well paid employee. ;)

At our last family reunion (our family is full of educators) the subject of compensation was presented. After listening to one of my cousins give the AEA/NEA model I interjected that I believed teachers in most geographical areas were more than adequately compensated for what they brought to the table & the product they produced. Needless to say, a brisk discussion ensued & my cousin will probably never acknowledge that I am anything more than vermin. :o No one in the public sector likes to deal in fact.


I really resent your characterizing public employment as not real work. You have never had a butcher knife thrown by a mental patient sail past your ear at four inches.

I doubt if you had to rescue a panicked blind senior citizen at two o'clock in the morning after her drug crazed son threw her down a stairway. You never had the same drug crazed individual stalk you, your wife and kids for weeks afterward.

You never had to walk in to a house so filled with rotten filth that firemen with breathing apparatus were called in to video the evidence.

You may skip the theatrical part of the presentation, but I'll ask a few questions.

How did someone like that come into possession of a tool like that? Did someone fail to take the precautions they should have taken?

As for the drug thing, if law enforcement was doing the great job we are paying dearly for them to do, why can't they solve the drug problem? Or, on the other hand, do they want to solve it?


I am also a trained cartographer. Our county cartographers and highway engineers were comparable and often superior to what I observed in the private sector.

You may be really good at what you do, repetition does that, but what is the demand in the private sector for that type of endeavor. BTW, I know what a cartographer is, I collect maps of all kinds.


Public employees are not welfare recipients. Many of them are highly trained in their fields. There are no apologies needed or forthcoming for the work of the folks I represented. I am proud to have represented them.

That's nice! Then why do we always have the whining about what they feel they are required to do?

But I'll close with this, the headlines are daily full of 10's of thousands being laidoff in the real world, where are the corresponding layoffs in the public sector?

zeus3925
03-29-2009, 05:43 PM
:)
Everyone in this State has 30 & out if they desire - they can then do the same position, only not full time, as Corey describes. The retirement model has not been properly negotiated in decades. Can't do it here! I agree it is not fair.



But your reply is what I would expect of a person negotiating for the public sector, it's never meant to be in the center - always skewed. As they have a very weak opponent.

Marv, if I am elected to a union position it is my job to get the best contract I can for my membership or they will elect someone that will. I never considered our negotiating opponent as anything but tough and competent. They always brought in hired guns to do the negotiations.




Please, the tired argument of doing better somewhere else is outdated, If they want more money go there. & the one about "road WORKERS" actually makes me smile. We all see the difference daily in our commutes in the summer. Leaning on a shovel or sitting in the truck does not qualify one as a "worker", just a well paid employee. ;)

Yeah, Marv. You were here in Minnesota and saw them all playing soccer on the job, eh?:rolleyes:



At our last family reunion (our family is full of educators) the subject of compensation was presented. After listening to one of my cousins give the AEA/NEA model I interjected that I believed teachers in most geographical areas were more than adequately compensated for what they brought to the table & the product they produced. Needless to say, a brisk discussion ensued & my cousin will probably never acknowledge that I am anything more than vermin. :o No one in the public sector likes to deal in fact.

No wonder your relatives would disown you the moment your bank account is dry. You are long on opinion and short of actual knowledge. Marv, you are becoming a poster child for geezerdom. BTW, Duluth, MN schools tried private sector management. It was a total disaster. Same for counties that contracted with Lockheed for social services.



As for the drug thing, if law enforcement was doing the great job we are paying dearly for them to do, why can't they solve the drug problem? Or, on the other hand, do they want to solve it?

Suggestion Marv: Call your local police chief and ask him directly. Then call a chemical dependency clinic and ask them the same question.




You may be really good at what you do, repetition does that, but what is the demand in the private sector for that type of endeavor. BTW, I know what a cartographer is, I collect maps of all kinds.

Marv, I was damn good at what I did. Being a civil engineer, I thought you'd know what a cartographer is. But you won't be able to collect my maps as they are digital and are in military flight systems.




But I'll close with this, the headlines are daily full of 10's of thousands being laidoff in the real world, where are the corresponding layoffs in the public sector?

Marv, public employees are being laid off nationwide. Check with your state and local govs and get the numbers.

Marvin S
03-29-2009, 09:46 PM
Can't do it here! I agree it is not fair.

Step 1


Marv, if I am elected to a union position it is my job to get the best contract I can for my membership or they will elect someone that will. I never considered our negotiating opponent as anything but tough and competent. They always brought in hired guns to do the negotiations.

Hired guns do as they are told to do, if they want to continue. They are a convenient way to lend credibility to someones agenda without being in the position of taking blame. When at Boeing I was asked to participate on our Engineering Associations negotiation team. I polled my fellow engineers & asked if they would be willing to use the ultimate weapon, they said NO so I declined.


Yeah, Marv. You were here in Minnesota and saw them all playing soccer on the job, eh?:rolleyes:

My wife comes from a long line of public employees so am quite familiar with what they do & their thought process. She has been converted. :eek:

But my wife's BIL was chastised for playing cards on paid time as they were not filling their 10 hour day with production, as measured by the government.


No wonder your relatives would disown you the moment your bank account is dry. You are long on opinion and short of actual knowledge. Marv, you are becoming a poster child for geezerdom.

The only people that counted outside my immediate familym my maternal Grandparents & a maternal Aunt are long since passed to a better place & their bones have been picked clean by the vultures on that side of the family. No one outside my immediate family has any concern for our welfare & they wish us a long & productive life.


BTW, Duluth, MN schools tried private sector management. It was a total disaster. Same for counties that contracted with Lockheed for social services.

Sure sounds good, but why don't they have charter schools, school choice & vouchers?

As for social services, it's best done locally. What makes you think the people hired were not the same ones who caused the experiment & wanted it to fail. When I grew up, all names of people on relief were published in the local paper, created an incentive to get off & not cheat.


Suggestion Marv: Call your local police chief and ask him directly. Then call a chemical dependency clinic and ask them the same question.

Why would you ask the beneficiaries of a failed system to participate in a discussion on how to fix same?


Marv, I was damn good at what I did. Being a civil engineer, I thought you'd know what a cartographer is. But you won't be able to collect my maps as they are digital and are in military flight systems.

Actually, I'm a Mining Engineer, like a Civil but greater emphasis on metals. I will repeat my previous statement which you must have missed "I am sure you are good at what you do" :)


Marv, public employees are being laid off nationwide. Check with your state and local govs and get the numbers.

Where's the press? I would only have your word for it. State & local governments present a budget & then create fanfare when they have to cut it. What they fail to tell you is - Potential income will be up 5% but that not enough, In order to provide the services we think you should have we need a 10% increase over the budget that was already increased 5% to cover this new income. So they are finally forced to cut 1/2 of the 10% increase but raise fees to cover the costs - fees are not taxes, though they come from the same pocket.

The R's congratulate themselves on holding the line, the D's tell you how fiscally responsible they are with their new Liberal Progressive budgeting & the people who really work get hosed.

In WA, the disparity between public sector wages & the private sector is about 29/17 or 71% more per person for those in the public sector. There is a highly paid MSFT, B & medical research work force here. Do you find that disparity acceptable? & it's the little guy who is paying the tab for all those cushy positions. What's it like in MN? or do you know?

zeus3925
03-30-2009, 06:00 AM
:
But my wife's BIL was chastised for playing cards on paid time as they were not filling their 10 hour day with production, as measured by the government.

I that is happening on the job then the burden rests on supervision. I am a taxpayer and I didn't support that stuff either as a union officer.


:Sure sounds good, but why don't they have charter schools, school choice & vouchers?

We have charter schools and school choice but not vouchers. The Catholics and Lutherans would love to have vouchers but the pols are not willing to go there. The charter schools here are under performing the public schools. Minnesota public schools regularly score significantly above the national average


:

As for social services, it's best done locally. What makes you think the people hired were not the same ones who caused the experiment & wanted it to fail. When I grew up, all names of people on relief were published in the local paper, created an incentive to get off & not cheat.

Minnesota and Indiana are the last two states where the welfare system is local. I believe in Indiana social services may be separate with the social services under the state. All the rest are state controlled (with the requisite federal meddling for federal cash).


:
Why would you ask the beneficiaries of a failed system to participate in a discussion on how to fix same?

Maybe I can give you a starting point on the drug issue. Alcoholism and drug addiction are basically the same animal. Why can't we cure alcoholics faster than they are created? Maybe Corey (BadbullGator) can give you the heads up on that.


:Actually, I'm a Mining Engineer, like a Civil but greater emphasis on metals. I will repeat my previous statement which you must have missed "I am sure you are good at what you do" :)

Ahh, one of those phase equilibria dudes! Thanks for the compliment. I did go back to school to study geology at age 40. The market for geologists crashed in the mid 80's but I did find a firm willing to hire me as a map maker. I did cartography in the private sector until the company lost its government contract as it was owned by a German national and Ronald Reagan disapproved.


:Where's the press? I would only have your word for it. State & local governments present a budget & then create fanfare when they have to cut it. What they fail to tell you is - Potential income will be up 5% but that not enough, In order to provide the services we think you should have we need a 10% increase over the budget that was already increased 5% to cover this new income. So they are finally forced to cut 1/2 of the 10% increase but raise fees to cover the costs - fees are not taxes, though they come from the same pocket.

The newspaper industry is sucking canal bottom nationwide. Coverage of complex issues can't be handled in a 5 minute newscast. So we become mushrooms--kept in the dark and fed skitah.




In WA, the disparity between public sector wages & the private sector is about 29/17 or 71% more per person for those in the public sector. There is a highly paid MSFT, B & medical research work force here. Do you find that disparity acceptable? & it's the little guy who is paying the tab for all those cushy positions. What's it like in MN? or do you know?

Minnesota is the land of small to medium sized businesses. If you want better pay go private. We have an active medical device industry as well as giants like 3M, Target and Cargill. We don't get punched out like Michigan does when the economy goes south. I did see the numbers when I was boning up for negotiations. Generally lower skilled positions were roughly equal. Professional level pay was significantly higher in the private sector. In fact, some of our master degreed people qualified for subsidy if t.
hey were to purchase a house in the local area.

In my case I am driven by other things beside money. My religious and family background is oriented toward public service. I don't fly a desk well. Public service gave me a crack at all the action I could crave and more.

Take care, Marv

Uncle Bill
03-30-2009, 05:11 PM
And this surprises you how?

1. Attempt to seize control of census-Whitehouse control
2. Attempt to place salary cap on execs recieving Tarp funds-Whitehouse control
3.Attempt to stop bonuses for employees of companies recieving Tarp
money-Whitehouse control
4. Attempt to extend salary caps to businesses not recieving Tarp or Bailout money- Whitehouse control
5. Attempt to place high level of control on states recieving bailout cash Whitehouse control
6.Attempt to take over investment firms who are in trouble regardless of weather they are a financial institution or not Whitehouse control

HUGE power play for control by Obama, hell, who needs a Constitution when we have one man who is so brilliant and worthy:(
I just wonder who's power he will want to usurp tomorrow


Reckon you got your answer to that question today, Mike. And while I 'get it', your number 3 item is even MORE egregious...he ignored private business contracts...intimidating every member of that firm that had every right to expect those contracts to be fulfilled.

Regardless of the pomposity of the queers that are in charge of our banking regulators, (Barney is just the Queen...but he's NOT alone), that was as communistic a manuever and show of Federal intimidation beyond anything we have witnessed since Teinnamon Square.

UB

Terry Britton
04-07-2009, 09:14 AM
Health Care is next my friend!!

Ain't it wonderful??:shock:

I have several friends that are young doctors that are leaving the USA because of this. One is an ER doctor in UB's neighborhood. This is not a good trend to start.

badbullgator
04-07-2009, 10:03 AM
I have several friends that are young doctors that are leaving the USA because of this. One is an ER doctor in UB's neighborhood. This is not a good trend to start.

Try to find a new/young ob/gyn....

Gerry Clinchy
04-11-2009, 09:23 AM
Does this make any sense? I don't agree with bailing out the banks, but if they were going to do it, the following doesn't make much sense.

From the NY Times today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/business/economy/11bank.html?th&emc=th

The banks are complaining about the possible government interference with their management (cut bonuses, change leadership). Can't say I can sympathize with that! OTOH, some other conditions seem to be counter-productive.



Douglas Leech, the founder and chief executive of Centra Bank, a small West Virginia bank that participated in the capital assistance program but returned the money after the government imposed new conditions, said he complained strongly about the Treasury Department’s decision to demand repayment of the warrants. That effectively raised the interest rate he paid on a $15 million loan to an annual rate of about 60 percent, he said.

“What they did is wrong and fundamentally un-American,” he said. “Even though the government told us to take this money to increase our lending, the extra charge meant we had less money to lend. It was the equivalent of a penalty for early withdrawal.”
Stephanie Cutter (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/stephanie_cutter/index.html?inline=nyt-per), a spokeswoman at the Treasury Department, said it did not comment about the participation of specific banks in the plan or their efforts to exit the program.