Paulson basically wants to reward failure

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by WaveStrider, Sep 21, 2008.


    On “Fox News Sunday,” Paulson told Chris Wallace that he would resist the Democrats' desired limits on executive compensation.

    "If we design it so it's punitive and institutions aren't going to participate, this won't work the way we need it to work," Paulson said.

    And why not - some of his best friends are probably in that group of Platinum Parachuters....
  2. loik


    No, US voters want to reward failure, if they didn`t they would vote for Ron Paul/Libertarian Party.
  3. We all deserve to burn in hell for not ensuring Ron Paul for presidency. As the union quickly resolves over the next decade, we will have no one to blame but ourselves.
  4. kxvid


    We can't blame ourselves for RP's failed bid. He didn't spend the 20+ million we gave him.

    A nation gets the leader they deserve. Total economic collapse if McCain is elected, slight delay if Obama (yeah right) gets elected. The American way of life will be dead and buried in 15 years or less due to peak oil no matter what.
  5. Chood


    Hank and Ben are the second set of fearsome fear’trepreneurs (fear + entrepreneur) to exploit a pliable, out-of-his-depth Bush. The first was Dick Cheney’s band of neo-cons who sold the panic of WMD. The price tags for both sets may be close to the same. The beneficiaries? You aren’t one if you have to ask.
  6. I don't want limits on compensation.

    I want CONFISCATION of all the money they stole under false pretenses.

    Then, I want what I've discussed before.

    The Public Hanging.

    I have a very low opinion of the average person. I believe only the fear of punishment is a deterrent to abuse.

    If they think they can get away with robbing you blind, that's what they will do. Guaranteed. 100% Every time.

    They have allowed this for too long.
  7. He went on Meet The Press and said it "pains me terribly" that the taxpayer will have to pay for the bailout.

    Well, that certainly made ME feel better!

    "I feel your pain..." Wonder if his own $700 mill is tax-sheltered?....:D
  8. Okay, confiscate and hang them (start with Johnny Mack). But...

    You're underestimating the power of compensation caps - if you make them low enough. Low compensation will attract only dumbasses who can't get a real job. That'll level the intellectual playing field between the banks who sell the loans to treasury and the moribund buyers of said loans at treasury. It'll increase the probability that the banks will on occasion accidentally sell taxpayers mortgages which aren't 100% sure losers.
  9. You misunderstand me.

    I have called executive compensation an obscenity for DECADES.

    That was only one of many perversions of the capitalist system.

    They need to make comps an average of performance GOING FORWARD to encourage practices that are long term sane.
  10. So, you didn't get my humour? I was only half kidding anyway.

    Executive compensation is none of your business unless you're a shareholder of the company. How much people decide to pay those they hire is not a perversion of the capitalist system - it is by definition a function of the free market to allocate resources. Now that the taxpayers are the residual owners of these pieces of shit, we have a right to dictate compensation and other terms - including a return of the compensation executives took while piling on toxic mortgages which we will now take onto our balance sheets. An executive losing his ass is capitalism too and I hope Hammering Stammering Hank won't protect his buddies from the consequences of their actions.
    #10     Sep 23, 2008