quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by GunnyRet03:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
South Carolina Governor must accept TARP funds court rules.

quote:

(CNN) -- South Carolina's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Gov. Mark Sanford must accept $700 million in federal stimulus money, ending the only formal effort by a governor to reject funding intended to jump-start an ailing economy.

Source: "http://www.cnn.com/2009/
POLITICS/06/04/south.carolina.
sanford.stimulus/index.html"

Kegler300 you forgot to mention that it was the Republican-controlled legislature that forced him to take the funds the court just ruled that they had the power to do so. IMo Gov. Mark Sanford was just trying to position himself for getting the Repub Presidential nomination at the expense of the people in his state.

quote:

the Republican-controlled legislature passed a budget that included the funds.

Students and education officials in South Carolina filed lawsuits demanding that the governor take the money. Sanford tried to have those suits merged and heard in federal court.

On Monday, however, a federal judge rejected that effort, and said that the South Carolina Supreme Court must decide what to do.

In its ruling, the state's highest court said the legislature, not Sanford, has the power to decide whether to accept the federal stimulus money.

At the expense of the state yeh get money that we dont want. Most people here dont want it. And sanford during his tenure has been trying to stop spending.

Note it was the Republican-controlled STATE legislature that forced him to take the funds

Just shows that the legislature isn't truly representing their constituents. Just because Republicans do something, doesn't make it right. I hope the people of SC vote their butts out of office.

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
Who doesn't understand the underlying premise of this thread?

quote:

Dems, they like it. They want the fed to control all pay as long is it isnt their pay. But the fact that eveil businesses get controlled they are to stupid to realize that affects their pay to especially since they work for these evil businesses and they pay taxes.

Stifle pay at businesses you are bringing down prodcution, bringing down the tax base from those businesses which mean joe public has to make it up in higher taxes.

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
South Carolina Governor must accept TARP funds court rules.

quote:

(CNN) -- South Carolina's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Gov. Mark Sanford must accept $700 million in federal stimulus money, ending the only formal effort by a governor to reject funding intended to jump-start an ailing economy.

Source: "http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/04/south.carolina.sanford.stimulus/index.html"

quote:

Originally posted by RRR52:
We now have 16 "czars" to ride roughshod over $1.75 TRILLION. More absolute monarchs than the Romanovs. Good job, Obama! Way to be all-American and remain within the intent of the Constitution . Great! A whole slew of people unaccountable to anyone in the context of checks and balance of government powers. This way the boys and girls of the obamanation can destroy anything, play favorites and polyticks as they wish without direct, routine responsibility to testify under oath to the Congress. Yowzah, baby. . . .just what the Founders would have loved. Real transparency, like southside Chi-Town polyticks. A perfect petrie dish for new growths of corruption.

"The World's Finest"

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:
Just shows that the legislature isn't truly representing their constituents. Just because Republicans do something, doesn't make it right. I hope the people of SC vote their butts out of office.

quote:

Originally posted by PhoenixDark:

quote:

Originally posted by soscorpio:

quote:

Okay, try this on for size before you go screaming about communism:

Communism isn't defined based on how the funds are disbursed but rather the funds are taken from the citizens for the purpose of re-distribution makes it communism.

So now you define communism as trying to avert an economic meltdown that was brought about by gross greed in the banking and corporate sectors?

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:
TARP went from being loans that would be paid back with interest, to being converted to prefered stock, which pay dividends but offers the stockholder(the government)no vote as a shareholder, and will progress to common stock where not only does the shareholder receive dividends, but also gets a vote...



Hmmmm, hasn't something different yet also very similar happened recently in a different, yet also economically significant industry? Anyone?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Bueller?

psychoABN now that you repeated someone talking points try pointing out why the COMPANY management and those owed money by the company would WANT the money to change from loan to preferred stock to common stock. Or do you even understand what is happening well enough to know why?
Hint think about the company being able to get additonal PRIVATE funding and investment and who would get money if the company fails.

You mean that the TARP money was privately funded? Gee, I didn't know that...and I don't know what the hell you're talking about. It may make sense to you, who knows...

I'm pretty darned sure that these TARP companies don't really want the government holding common stock.

psychoABN this post shows that you either DO NOT understand the way stocks work or you are deliberately twisting things since NO ONE said "TARP money was privately funded" and you stated "TARP companies don't really want the government holding common stock" when I talked about Company Management and those owed money by the company.

rayld2(is that how we're doing this?)I give up, you are the most intelligent of all, how dare I even try.....

I totally forgot. Since you're an expert on everything else, why not this too....

Seriously, though...I still don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Ok. If you check on the order of who gets money during a bankrupcy it might make more sense to you. There are several categories. To way over simplify it there is secured debt, unsecured debt (for example suppliers), prefered stock holders and common stock holders (leaves out a LOT of groups). Secured debt will get money from sale of assets used to secure the debt. Unsecured debt and preferred stockholders get a higher priority on money than common stockholders. This means that by the government switching to common stock they make it easier for the company management to get private funding and to convince suppliers to sell to them because it shifts more of the risk of loss to the government.

Yeah....it gives the government control in the day to day operations of the company, which is the point that I was making from the beginning, and addresses the topic of the thread. Government beaurocrats have no business sense, no sense of profit margin, none of what it take sto run a successful business. If they did, government services would be run much differently than they are. The auto companies were forced into bankruptcy in order for the government to gain control, with other industries, the common stock approach is going to be taken to gain control of them...We'll see how this effects "private" funding(investment?)becuase we've never been down this road before. I can't think of anyone that would want to be in business with the government, the government's "business" isn't business.

quote:

I totally forgot. Since you're an expert on everything else, why not this too....

Seriously, though...I still don't know what the hell you're talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
"Comrade" Obama is marching forward towards ultimate dictatorship in America. The bailouts are just an excuse to take control of all pay and compensation in the private sector. This will have far reaching implications that will impact all of us.

quote:

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration plans to appoint a "Special Master for Compensation" to ensure that companies receiving federal bailout funds are abiding by executive-pay guidelines, according to people familiar with the matter.

The administration is expected to name Kenneth Feinberg, who oversaw the federal government's compensation fund for victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, to act as a pay czar for the Treasury Department, these people said.

The Obama administration earlier this year issued guidelines that include limiting salary for top executives at some firms receiving TARP funds and requiring that additional pay be in the form of restricted stock, vesting only after the company repays its debt, with interest, to the government. Congress then chimed in with even tougher rules curbing bonuses for top earners at firms receiving TARP money. As part of that effort, lawmakers barred those firms from paying top earners bonuses that equal more than a third of their total compensation.

Mr. Feinberg will report to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, but he is expected to have wide discretion on how the rules should be interpreted. Firms likely won't be able to appeal decisions that Mr. Feinberg makes to Mr. Geithner, according to people familiar with the matter.

Source: "http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124416737421887739.html"

quote:

Originally posted by busnrete8:
-snip-

Interesting that some of the CZARs MAY have to report to someone, they are NOT accountable to anyone--such as Congress and there's only ONE approval step!

quote:

Obama administration: Executive pay needs curbs, better management, across US private sector

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration says executive compensation must be better managed to prevent the sort of risk-taking that jeopardizes the economy.

Gene Sperling, who advises Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, said Thursday the administration does not want to impose caps on executive pay. But he also laid out for the House Financial Services Committee a list of guidelines calling on publicly-held companies to link compensation to long-term performance, not short-term gains.

Sperling said in prepared testimony that the administration believes compensation practices "must be better aligned with long-term value and prudent risk management at all firms, and not just for the financial services industry."

Source: "http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Administration-Rein-in-pay-apf-15500519.html?.v=6"

"The World's Finest"

quote:

Originally posted by GunnyRet03:

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
Liberals are still in their trance staring at the spinning wheel and don't realize that the bailouts are a ruse. TARP is only setting the stage for things to come.

This pay Czar and this adm's control is just the beginning.

quote:

Originally posted by 6837602:

quote:

Originally posted by PhoenixDark:

quote:

Originally posted by soscorpio:

quote:

Okay, try this on for size before you go screaming about communism:

Communism isn't defined based on how the funds are disbursed but rather the funds are taken from the citizens for the purpose of re-distribution makes it communism.

So now you define communism as trying to avert an economic meltdown that was brought about by gross greed in the banking and corporate sectors?

Along with the most corrupt administration this nation has ever had to suffer through. Thanks beto God for all of those brave Americans who stood up in Nov of 08 to rid the nation of these criminals thugs.

quote:

Originally posted by GunnyRet03:

quote:

Originally posted by GunnyRet03:

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
Liberals are still in their trance staring at the spinning wheel and don't realize that the bailouts are a ruse. TARP is only setting the stage for things to come.

This pay Czar and this adm's control is just the beginning.

What did I say......

quote:

In 2004, the ratio of average CEO pay to the average pay of a production (i.e., non-management) worker was 431-to-1, up from 301-to-1 in 2003,

quote:

In 1990, for instance, CEOs made about 107 times more than the average worker, while in 1982, the average CEO made only 42 times more.

quote:

Between 1991 and 2004, the stock of the previous year's most highly paid CEO underperformed the S&P 500 half the time, in some instances by a stunning amount.

quote:

Had the minimum wage risen as fast as CEO compensation since 1990, the researchers calculated, it would now be $23.03 an hour instead of just $5.15.