Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

90% of Wall Street is owned and run by....sm

Posted By: ms on 2008-09-17
In Reply to: I agree with Bill Maher ... - Well said, IMO ... SM

liberal democrats.





Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Wall Street Journal is owned by Rupert Murdoch
same owner of Fox Noise
Oh Wow. Don't think Wall Street
likes what was done today. It's down 383.73 points and it's not even 4:00 yet!
Wall Street Journal for one

I know, I know a "liberal rag"!!!!   ha ha ha


 


From the Wall Street Journal

World greets Obama:


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122592900344403049.html


Obama's Dour Vision:


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122592129148302567.html


What an Obama Presidency Means for Your Money:


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122591367859702209.html


Pelosi, Automakers to Meet:


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122599560485005549.html


Obamas's Real Opposition:


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122593259568103473.html


 


Wall Street Grieves

The stages of grief:


Denial - okay that was last year, just read old Paulson reports.


Anger -  that was Lehman Bros.


Bargaining - TARP anyone?


Depression - 


Acceptance -


I think we have a ways to go until they get over it.....


It should be $$ for banks, big oil and wall street, right?
x
wall street journal more credible than CNN?
One of them is a link to a video...hard to say that was manufactured. It wasn't...I saw it live. Just leave it up to the people to decide. Both sides presented, and people can do their own research as well. They should not take what I post for the truth, or what anyone posts. It is a place to start to look on their own. I would just advise...both sides...anything on blogs needs to be verified with something a bit more credible.

This is America, and there is nothing wrong with presenting both sides of an issue. Is there?
Wall street bonuses expected

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/finance/wall-street-bonuses-expects-come-season-despite-bailout/


Paying bonuses this year is likely to result in a lot of backlash from the average American. After all, even with bonuses down dramatically, they are still higher than the average American, who is losing his or her home, makes. Not to mention the government bailout of financial firms, which seems to change daily, is coming from taxpayer dollars. Concerns abound—rightly or wrongly--that some of the $700 billion bailout could go to pay bonuses this year.


Wall Street has zero confidence in Obama's
nm
Wall Street Journal says Obama's tax cuts

Some need to pay close attention to this.........  it's called welfare handouts.  "Entitled mentality".  The working class will get NO tax cuts.  You all will be working to put money in the hands of those that do not.  It makes perfectly good sense.  I've been saying there is no way he can do anything he is leading people to believe he can because 1/3 of people in this country pay NO TAXES.   He has led so many to believe he will cut middle class when he can't.  He is blatantly trying to disguise "government handouts" as "tax credits".   You want your hard earned money going to everyone who doesn't bother to work? 


One of Barack Obama’s most potent campaign claims is that he’ll cut taxes for no less than 95% of “working families.” He’s even promising to cut taxes enough that the government’s tax share of GDP will be no more than 18.2% — which is lower than it is today.


It’s a clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he’s also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever on the other 5%. But how does he conjure this miracle, especially since more than a third of all Americans already pay no income taxes at all? There are several sleights of hand, but the most creative is to redefine the meaning of “tax cut.”


For the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts that are disguised by the phrase “tax credit.” Mr. Obama is proposing to create or expand no fewer than seven such credits for individuals[.]


 


Wall street, China, Japan, whoever they gave
@
this from the wall street journal, interesting article
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB122515112102674263-lMyQjAxMDI4MjI1ODEyNTgxWj.html
Wall Street loves the new president....ouch! nm
//
Wall Street loves the new president....ouch! nm
//
Should Wall Street Bankers have their compensation capped?

Wall Street bankers, with their $18 billion in bonuses, private jets and gaudy conferences, are causing headaches for the GOP.


President Obama has proposed capping compensation for executives at banks that take taxpayer bailout money at $500,000. Republicans hate the idea -- a position puts them uncomfortably on the side of people currently about as popular as child-porn producers and subprime mortgage brokers.


Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) blamed the "tone deaf" bankers for creating the political environment that allows Obama to call for a cap.


"Because of their excesses, very bad things begin to happen, like the United States government telling a company what it can pay its employees. That's not a good thing in America," Kyl told the Huffington Post.


"What executives have done is troubling, but it's equally troubling to have government telling shareholders how much they can pay the executives," said Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL).


Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) said that he is "one of the chief defenders of Obama on the Republican side" for the president's efforts to reach across the aisle. But, said Inhofe, "as I was listening to him make those statements I thought, is this still America? Do we really tell people how to run [a business], and who to pay and how much to pay?"


Democrats argue that banks that take government money must accept any rules the government decides to send with it. Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry and Rep. Barney Frank are both working on legislation that would complement Obama's attempt to get a handle on executive compensation.


It's not a novel concept, and it's one the GOP supports -- when applied to welfare recipients, at least. "We demand that welfare recipients do an honest day's work for their checks.


It was leaked to the Wall Street Journal, so I'm not sure what your point is.
Assuming you have one?
"Evil" is George Bush, Wall Street, the Banks,
NM
I hate Wall Street. Hope that whole fake-money
$ + $ on WS = 0.
ABC: Obama Is Hypocritical For Limiting Wall Street Pay While Having A ‘Lavish Lifest
Yesterday, President Obama instituted a pay cap on bailed out businesses after it was revealed that Wall Street doled out an estimated $18.4 billion in bonuses last year. “If the taxpayers are helping you, then you’ve got certain responsibilities to not be living high on the hog,” he explained.

In what appears to be an attempt to call Obama a hypocrite, ABC’s Scott Mayerowitz “reports” today that the President also has a “lavish lifestyle.” Under the title: “Obama’s Perks: Private Jet, Chef Tax-Free,” ABC notes that Obama earns $400,000 dollars a year and even has a private jet:



The president makes $400,000 a year, but hasn’t received a raise from Congress since 2001. He also gets a $50,000 annual entertainment expense account (any unused money at the end of the year must go back to the Treasury.)


Then there is the use of two private jets, Boeing 747s better known as Air Force One. And of course the constant security details, drivers, a private chef, a country vacation estate and the rent-free use of a well-known, 132-room mansion called the White House. The president also used to have a yacht, until Jimmy Carter sold it.


As its evidence that “corporate America” is upset, ABC said that “some Wall Street bloggers” are angry with the compensation cap. But the article cited only one blogger, Dealbreaker.com, who — apparently poking fun at Sen. Claire McCaskill’s statement — remarked, “Some accountability needs to be put in place. We won’t have them kicking sand in the face of taxpayers any longer.” Dealbreaker.com also suggests charging rent for White House tenants.


Comparing the President to Wall Street CEOs is absurd. The “private jet” that Obama uses is Air Force One, which is used as a security precaution and necessary for the dozens of staff and press that accompany the President on every trip. Each use of the jet by the President is regarded as a “classified military operation” in order to ensure the President’s safety.


Furthermore, Obama’s salary is set by Congress (whose members are elected by the public). CEO compensation is decided internally within the company, usually by its board of directors. The problem with recent excessive CEO compensation was that executives receiving federal funds were still rewarded for failure with tens of millions of dollars from their companies.


The President, on the other hand, does not get a bonus for his performance, good or bad. Indeed, Presidents Bush and Obama earn the same salary. County Fair at Media Matters has more.


Wait - he wants to monitor health care? Like he monitored Wall Street? Pass.
xx
the death of Wall Street is the death of the USA...you really want that????? nm

I did and I owned up to it . . .
If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Not afraid to admit it.
Most newspapers are liberal owned
So, it's not big suprise.  Newspaper circulation is down in this country  for several reasons the biggest one being is that they are just mouthpieces for the liberal agenda.  The NYT is a huge example, and their circulation is dropping weekly.  Like liberal news they refuse to accept that most of the blame is due to the glaring bias they have.  The internet has also taken a big bite out of their profits as people who care about news are bypassing newspapers and T.V. to search out their news from the internet.   You're right.  Ann probably is not batting an eyelash about losing newspapers.  They are a dying breed anyway...mostly from political suicide.
Privately owned board??
Who owns it?? If it is private, why is it on MT Stars along with our company boards, and job hunting boards. I thought it was a part of MT Stars; if not, I don't think it should be here since it is an extremely biased forum. It seems to me to be a venue for a couple of people to espouse their very very conservative views and really that is about all. There is not much civil debate going on. There are only a couple of liberals left who post and most of us stay away a lot of the time because no matter what we say, we will be castigated. There is nothing liberal that is acceptable to this board. The conservatives carry on on their side and when they get tired of that, they come to the liberal side and lambast the liberals. Nothing that is not conservative (one single solitary definition of conservative at that) is acceptable. This has become almost a conservative blog. So, who do I write to to find out how this is run. I think this board ought to be removed from the auspices of MT. It has nothing to do with MT and it is privately owned by extremists. I am going to see what I can find out about ForuMatrix and how one goes about getting things changed. I don't think anything resembling the Drudge Report ought be on a **politics** board that appears on the surface to be all inclusive when it is not.
What percentage of homes are owned by
Does anyone have numbers?
WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch who also owns Fox.....
"nuf said.
she didn't have a choice....stepfather owned everything
--
Government owned Amtrak did not work
I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK!!!!!!!!!!!

une 1st, 2009 12:45 PM Eastern
PHIL KERPEN: It Didn’t Work for Amtrak and It Won’t Work for GM, Either

By Phil Kerpen
Director, Americans for Prosperity

I cautiously cheered the Obama administration’s announcement 60 days ago that GM was on a path to bankruptcy court, because I was hopeful that it would represent an end to political manipulation of the company and a chance to get a clean balance sheet and a new shot as a private company. I couldn’t have been more wrong. Instead GM heads to bankruptcy court with a prepackaged deal that almost completely politicizes the company, with the U.S. government the new majority shareholder.

———

Expect that, like Amtrak, GM will be government-run and subsidized to the tune of billions of taxpayers dollars for decades to come.

———

Taxpayers were already on the hook for $20 billion of bailouts to GM, and today’s deal puts us on the hook for another $30 billion. Even worse, that $50 billion could be just the tip of the iceberg, because the government is now committed to owning and operating an automobile company that could run massive losses for years, even decades, to come.

Today’s New York Times quotes an administration official saying: “We don’t think that after this next $30 billion, they will need more money, but the fact is there are things you don’t know — like when the car market will come back, and how much Toyota and Honda and Volkswagen will benefit from the chaos.” In other words, who knows how much taxpayers will pay. Sky’s the limit.

In 1971, Amtrak was created, the Nixon administration said, “It is expected that the corporation would experience financial losses for about three years and then become a self-sustaining enterprise.” The Obama administration now claims that GM will be a publicly traded company again in six to 18 months. Expect that, like Amtrak, GM will be government-run and subsidized to the tune of billions of taxpayers dollars for decades to come.

The worst part is that government entities are run according to political, not economic, considerations. Every decision—about dealerships and plant closings, about suppliers, about which vehicles to build—will have to pass the Washington tests of political and environmental correctness.

Saab, Saturn, Hummer, and Pontaic will be shuttered. At least nine plants will close. These changes might make economic sense. But with government calling the shots, we will never be sure why certain plants were closed and others were spared.

The Obama administration’s big announcement on fuel-economy standards a couple of weeks ago and the president’s endless drumbeat that Detroit needs to make smaller and lighter cars and stop making trucks and SUVs is proof positive of this theory. Trucks have big margins, and could be a path to profitability. GM does need to find a way to make money on smaller cars, too, but does anyone really have confidence that being overseen and run by government bureaucrats will make that more likely to happen? Instead expect some government-by-committee to turn out vehicles with a Yugo-like design that nobody will want to buy and that taxpayers will end up subsidizing heavily.

General Motors was once an icon of American capitalism, but is now an exemplar of outright government control of a major industry, something completely un-American. Someone alert Karl Marx—we have government ownership of the means of production.

The legendary GM President Charles “Engine Charlie” Wilson was famous for saying in 1953: “For years I thought that what was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa.”

Today President Obama echoed those sentiments, ending his speech by saying that he hopes that once again what is good for General Motors will be good for the United States of America. We can only hope that he is wrong! — that somehow, what’s being done to GM will not spread to the rest of our country and its economy. That somehow, we will resist the inexorable pull of endless bailouts and government control if we are to restore the free market system that made our country great.
The same person owns this board who owned it when it was on MTStars. sm
She has made herself known on this board several times and stated her rules.  There are not many conservatives who post anymore either, Lurker, because of the whip lashing we took from liberals over the years. But do you see us whining about that all over the place? I don't think so.  You can't follow the rules, because the rules do  not apply to you.  FormMatrix is a host for ths board, but the same person still administrates it.  I wish you WOULD talk to her and stop with all of this.  You come on our board and post and you always have.  There have been some pretty egregious things said here over the years about the President, some of which probably should have been investigated by the FBI. 
It is an agency created by Congress, but is privately owned. sm
The stocks are owned by member banks, and they are private corporations. Every penny of income tax collected goes to private lenders for interest only on the national debt.

Quote from the Grace Commission report: "100% of what is collected is absorbed
solely by interest on the Federal Debt ...
all individual income tax revenues are gone
before one nickel is spent on the services
taxpayers expect from government."
I'll be PERFECTLY clear. MTStars is a PRIVATELY owned
website that contains posts made by the public.  Because it is PRIVATELY owned, we reserve the right to operate the site how we see fit.  If you have specific questions or concerns about this, you can email me directly at admin@mtstars.com.
Well...if it puts Obama in a good light, it is probably owned by George Soros. nm
nm
Two-way street not so equal?
Just my 2 cents... though it is definitely a 2-way street with both conservative and liberal radio talking heads (and others) make these comments about all kinds of stuff, including assassinations of either Bush or Obama... I do see a difference here - in that there are a large number of folks in this country who think Bush should be in prison, impeached, or at the very least, hasn't done our country a big favor with this war...with popularity at an all-time low... NOT that I'm saying he deserves to be assassinated, I'm not!!

But this talk of Obama being in danger - it is not because he has done something wrong, it is not because he is a hugely unpopular person (quite the contrary), and it is not because of his actions.... it is about the color of his skin. Racism. And, fear.

Thanks for listening to my 2 cents...
I would not walk across the street to see either one of them. nm
nm
Picking anyone up off the street........sm
In looking further into al-Marri's case, I see that he did have charges of credit card fraud and making false statements to the FBI (you just don't mess with those guys!) so apparently he was not held illegally. I don't see this setting a precedent for unjust arrests of American citizens just going about their business.

As to your second paragraph....ROFL!! Count your lucky stars!
'Wall Street". NOT "trains".
sheesh......
And we'll be dancing in the street!!!nm
xx
downing street memo investigation





Republican Congressman Breaks Ranks, Joins Demand for Documents on Downing Street Memos






Related stories: antiwar




src=http://www.politicalaffairs.net/images/1x1.gif 8-24-05, 10:58 am

Congressman Jim Leach (R, Iowa) has informed Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D, California) that he will co-sponsor her Resolution of Inquiry into Bush Administration communications with the U.K. about Iraq at the time of the Downing Street Memos.  Leach is the first Republican member of Congress to publicly support a demand for an inquiry into the Bush Administration's pre-war claims.  The 131 congress members who have signed Congressman John Conyers' letter to the President about the Downing Street Memo are all Democrats.  The 11 Senators who have asked the Senate Intelligence Committee to do the investigation it committed to in February 2004 but never did are all Democrats.
 
The Resolution, H. Res. 375, is a privileged resolution which must be brought to a vote in the House International Relations Committee by September 16th, or Lee is permitted to demand a vote of the full House.  Fifty-two Democrats, including Lee, have co-sponsored the Resolution.  Leach is the first Republican to join them, and he is a member of the International Relations Committee..
 
The International Relations Committee has 27 Republican members and 23 Democratic members.  Thus far 10 of the Democrats have co-sponsored the Resolution.  If the other 13 vote for it as well, then along with Leach, one more Republican vote will be needed for a tie, or two more for passage.
 
Leach has questioned Bush's war policies for years and was one of five Republicans in May to vote for Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey's amendment requiring an exit strategy.  Another of those five, Congressman Ron Paul of Texas, also serves on the International Relations Committee. 
 
Congressman Leach has broken the silence of the Republican Party on the Downing Street Minutes, said John Bonifaz, Co-Founder of the After Downing Street Coalition.  His willingness to co-sponsor Congresswoman Barbara Lee's Resolution of Inquiry is bound to make the White House nervous.  It is not possible for the President to paint this demand for documents as coming solely from his opponents.  This is a demand for the truth.  Did the president deliberately deceive and mislead the United States Congress and the American people about the basis for going to war against Iraq?  We as a people -- from Crawford to Des Moines to Washington, DC, regardless of our political persuasion, deserve to know the answer to that basic question.
 
Congress returns to Washington from its summer break on September 6, said David Swanson, Co-Founder of the After Downing Street Coalition.  The first 10 days will test the Democrats' ability to stand together and challenge the Bush Administration, as well as Republicans' willingness to break ranks on an issue where public opinion has diverged widely from White House policy.
 
The text of the Resolution, H. Res. 375, a list of current co-sponsors, and what you can do to help: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/902

From AfterDowningStreet.org


Farmer down the street says regular Americans
nm
Like all those drug-crazed street terrorists did
60s Youth at least could recognize the potential of their country, took control of the situation, engaged directly to forge their own future world and took measures that blasted us out of the complacent post civil war plantation mentality and cold war mongering by working tirelessly on behalf of civil rights for blacks AND women and ending a costly, senseless war that never should have happened.

Not holding my breath here and expect very little out this current crop of spoiled brats. I lay down this gauntlet....stand up for yourselves and prove me wrong, will ya?...but do so with honor. Use your noggens and exercise your intellect, not the Jerry Springer style potty mouth free for all we currently see so much of on this forum.
First because of a hurricane. Now because of Wall St.
an earthquake in California. Or maybe because his favorite show is on TV that night.

I want somebody with some actual ballz in the white house, not an aged wimp.
McCain wants to put Soc Sec in Wall St just like
HE MUST BE STOPPED
I have zero confidence in Wall St......nm
x
The writing is on the wall!!!
xx
I am, however, for building that wall...
Along the Mason-Dixon Line!! 
Chicago Street Scene....sounds a little scary sm
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/11/the_street_scen.html
The feds should use the bank & Wall St.
Then put a lien on, and sell, their fancy mansions in upstate NY, their yachts, their Mercedes, etc.  Let their kids to go public school instead of fancy private ones.   They're the greedy ones who got us into this mess, let THEM pay for it, not us.
McCain wants to privatize SS in Wall St just like
You have to really try to pay attention.  Wall St is now subsidized by us.  The big money is gone.  If GW had his way, everyone's SS would be gone.  McCain still wants to privatize SS.  Even a rabid republican would see this is a dumb idea. 
It's like talking to a brick wall
They don't seem to get it.
Would love to be a fly on the wall if your daughter
got knocked up despite being "taught not to get pregnant". Especially if that mistake were to end up tying her for 18 years of her life to some loser guy, and all the problems that can bring.

So what exactly do you think will happen if the earth's population continues to grow at the rate it's been for the past 50-100 years? What kind of world does that leave your grandchildren? It's too crowded now - how horrible will it be when the earth's population doubles, then triples? Standing-room-only?
Common sense, street smarts and intelligence would be ideal.
Considering the choice we were given, I think we did the right thing and that we will be on the mend sooner rather than later.