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

It should be $$ for banks, big oil and wall street, right?

Posted By: sm on 2009-02-05
In Reply to: It gets worse.. -Money for Hollywood movie - producers. This is just a payback. Think about it.

x


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

"Evil" is George Bush, Wall Street, the Banks,
NM
This is truly socialism. These banks and rich Wall
Street types would be crying out if they gov't did this for the people, but they are begging for the help now. They had better come up with a plan that includes not big pay days for CEOs, etc. I was watching The View and Whoppi said they need to include something for the people, like wiping out half of the mortgages so the actual people who will benefit the economy, i.e. us because we spend money here in the U.S. can get back on our feets and go out and put some money back in the economy and not have to worry about losing a home, etc. I totally agree with that, but I can pretty much guarantee that will not happen.
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


 


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



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.....


Bush made Wall St Socialist and our banks so why do you even bother
We have socialism now but it's not the poor you blinded bigot.
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
Your precious Bush turned Wall St socialist and the banks TRUE
you voted for him and look what happened SOCIALISM by BUSH
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?
Wall Street Journal is owned by Rupert Murdoch
same owner of Fox Noise
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

Banks

Out of 10,800 banks in this country, only .5% of 1% of the banks failed...............


which means Obama should have left it all alone.  If he truly had people around him that cared about this country, they would have informed him to let the banks fail, that there were plenty of strong ones out there and he should just let the chips fall where they may. 


He has stuck this country to the tune of trillions and we will be paying the price big time in a year or so when the inflation boom hits......   he preyed on fear, knowing so many would just think he suddenly knows the best thing to do.  The best thing to do was nothing.  Private companies fail all the time and the stronger ones survive.  Simple as that.  Strong ones buy out the weaker ones.  That would have happened with no interference from the governement at all, as usual!  Just like all the car manufacturers aren't failing.  Fiat is looking at buying Saturn..... and life goes on.  Private businesses should always be left alone.


The only reason AIG got such a big bailout is because many democratic friends of Obama and his cronies work there.... the names aren't that hard to find but you have to look for who knows who to start getting the picture.  Such a pathetic shame!


And if the gov't had not deregulated banks,
brought about by pubs.
Deregulation of what, may I ask? Banks,

Two more banks go belly up..... sm
bringing the total to 19 failed banks now. 

http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/07/news/companies/bank_failure/index.htm?postversion=2008110721&eref=rss_topstories
don;t forget foreign banks
successfully lobbied to be included in this bailout.  (John McCain's financial advisor Phil Gram is head of USB, Swiss bank)
And government ownership of banks.
x
it is called "job banks" and -
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/11/21/automakers-ask-bailout-paying-workers-sit/

Here's the link to read all the information. They can do volunteer work for the community if they want to - but it is not required. Mostly they just sit there and collect the $31 an hour.
And banks didn't have a choice?
They loaned money to people to buy McMansions that they could not afford - on purpose. The housing industry was booming. That way, they could forclose on these bad loans - keep the down payments and subsequent payments and resell the house. They were trading paper. Maybe you ought to educate yourself. Nah. Too far of a stretch. After all, the constitution-abiding president who just slunk off with his tail between his legs wasn't at all concerned about civil rights or the constitution. He was playing monopoly and destroying everything in his path - like rich, spoiled little boys do. You know, the ones who go AWOL from their service and receive no punishment. He probably still suckles grandma Barbara.
Oh, I get it. Kinda like the bailed out banks
I feel so much better now.
How many mortgages got sold to other banks?
Look at the big picture. They were selling houses to anyone who would sign on the dotted line - they did not give a fig whether or not you could afford it. They then boxed up a pile of these mortgages and sold them to other banks or mortgage companies with the premise - here's a box of rocks, there's gotta be a diamond in there somewhere. They WANTED these mortgages to fail. The housing market was booming - take the down payment, pass the mortgage around - foreclose on hapless patsies - and resell the house. They were MAKING MONEY OFF OF DOING THIS!!! But, they got greedy, and that box held all rocks and no diamonds. They screwed themselves as well as the American people who fell for this sham. But who is going to suffer the most?
That happened when the **banks got drunk**
//
Marx: Centralize credit in the banks.
private property. Right any bells?
How about Bush's plan of buying banks?
What's that called?
A Quiet Windfall for US Banks (While You Weren't Looking)

Here's you starter-kit that went under the radar screen, tax and spend lovers...


» Washington Post: A Quiet Windfall for US Banks


Who gave the banks all that money with no oversight?
This site would be much more interesting if you knew what you were talking about. You'll be sniveling in the bread lines along with the rest of us as a result of Bush's "I'm the Decider" BS. Better add some vodka to that Kool-Aid - it's going to be a miserable ride.
Same with the banks - they've lost MY business,
- if EVER. Take my Mastercard, for instance. Been a loyal customer, same bank for 30 years, yada, yada. Always make my payments, often in full, and other times way over the minimum. Never late, my checks don't bounce. So they raise my finance charges from 9% to 29% in one fell swoop!

Needless to say, that's it for me. I cleaned out my bank savings (which was only earning about .02% interest), and paid off the Mastercard with it. Will close the account. Now that there are checking account debit-cards, who needs the charge card? Plus it'll keep me from spending more than I have. In a dire emergency, I can always siphon a little out of my money market (which still earns something like 4-5% interest) to pay for emergencies in FULL, without running up credit card fees. So, there goes part of the banks' income!

If all of us rearranged our finances in such a way that we pay NO fees or finance charges, maybe the banks would have to find an HONEST way to make a profit. Wouldn't THAT be a revelation.
She said ACORN bullied banks into giving the loans....
she just said Obama was associated with them. ACORN did bully banks, and Obama WAS associated with them, through Project Vote. He trained the ACORN folks how to get out and get people registered, hired them to work on his senate campaign, and ACORN endorsed him. And they are under investigation for voter fraud in ALL the swing states. Admitted in Ohio today: yes, there will be fraud, its not our fault, we can't check every registration. Sounds like "He was just a guy in the neighborhood" excuse. Looks like he taught them well.

This guy is so dirty.
If socialism doesn't work - then why did W give the banks all that $$?
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.