1. Welcome To LPSG
    Welcome to LPSG.com. If you are here because you are looking for the most amazing open-minded fun-spirited sexy adult community then you have found the right place. We also happen to have some of the sexiest members you'll ever meet. Signup below and come join us.


Redistributing the Wealth - Republican Style

Discussion in 'Politics' started by b.c., Oct 29, 2008.

  1. b.c.

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Posts:
    20,538
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    21,664
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    Verified:
    Photo
    And this background news on yesterday's NBC news story about the CEO pensions of those companies we taxpayers are footing the bills of:

    Rewrite bailout rules on CEO pay

    "The American people have absolutely no reason to trust Paulson, a former high-finance CEO himself, on executive pay. In his bailout negotiations with Congress, Paulson fought restrictions on CEO compensation at every turn. He simply doesn't see excessive executive pay as a problem that desperately needs fixing.

    The Treasury secretary's current course, unless Congress intervenes, will mean more business as usual on Wall Street. Last year, the CEOs of the nine major banks that we taxpayers now partially own took home, on average, $32.2 million each, nearly triple the average CEO pay at the 500 biggest U.S. companies. That's more than $600,000 a week."


    "Share the wealth," anyone?
     
  2. D_season 5

    D_season 5 Account Disabled

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Posts:
    622
    Likes Received:
    36
    bc...what is it u don't get? its a DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS...a DEMOCRATIC SENATE...THEY CREATED THIS MESS....THE REPUBLICANS WERE NOT FOR THIS BAIL OUT....and NOW MORE OF THEM SEE WHY....DON"T SHOW OFF UR IGNORANCE.... I WOULD THINK U WOULD FIND IT EMBARRASSING?

    BTW

    In a local restaurant my server had on a "Obama 08" tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference--just imagine the coincidence.

    When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.

    I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I've decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful.

    At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient deserved money more.

    I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application.

     
  3. D_season 5

    D_season 5 Account Disabled

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Posts:
    622
    Likes Received:
    36
    To Barack Hussein Obama,

    The New York Times carried a story on Saturday, October 4, 2008 that
    proved you had a significantly closer relationship with Bill Ayers than
    what you previously admitted. While the issue of your relationship is of
    concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America about it.

    The Chicago Sun Times reported on May 8, 2008 that FBI records showed
    that you had a significantly closer relationship with Tony Rezko than
    what you previously admitted. In the interview, you said that you only
    saw Mr. Rezko a couple of times a year. The FBI files showed that you
    saw him weekly. While the issue of your relationship is of concern, the
    greater concern is that you lied to America about it.

    Your speech in Philadelphia on March 18, 2008 about 'race' contradicted
    your statement to Anderson Cooper on March 14 when you said that you
    never heard Reverend Wright make his negative statements about white
    America . While your attendance at Trinity Church for 20 years is of
    concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America on March 14.

    In your 1st debate with John McCain, you said that you never said that
    you would meet with the leaders of Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, and North
    Korea without 'preparations' at lower levels ... Joe Biden repeated your
    words in his debate with Sarah Palin ... while the video tape from your
    debate last February clearly shows that you answered 'I would' to the
    question of meeting with those leaders within 12 months without 'any'
    preconditions. While your judgement about meeting with enemies of the
    USA without pre-conditions is of concern, the greater concern is that
    you lied to America in the debate with McCain.

    On July 14, 2008, you said that you always knew that the surge would
    work while the video tapes of you from more than a year ago show that
    you stated that the surge would not work. While your judgement about
    military strategy as a potential commander in chief is of concern, the
    greater concern is that you lied to America on July 14.

    You now claim that your reason for voting against funding for the troops
    was because the bill did not include a time line for withdrawal while
    the video tapes of you from more than a year ago show that you voted
    against additional funding because you wanted our troops to be removed
    immediately ... not in 16 months after the 2008 election as you now
    claim. While your judgement about removing our troops unilaterally in
    2007 is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America
    about your previous position.

    You claim to have a record of working with Republicans while the record
    shows that the only bill that you sponsored with a Republican was with
    Chuck Lugar ... and it failed. The record shows that you vote 97% in
    concert with the Democrat party and that you have the most liberal
    voting record in the Senate. You joined Republicans only 13% of the time
    in your votes and those 13% were only after agreement from the Democrat
    party. While it is of concern that you fail to include conservatives in
    your actions and that you are such a liberal, the greater concern is
    that you distorted the truth.

    In the primary debates of last February, 2008, you claimed to have
    talked with a 'Captain' of a platoon in Afghanistan 'the other day' when
    in fact you had a discussion in 2003 with a Lieutenant who had just been
    deployed to Afghanistan . You lied in that debate.

    In your debates last spring, you claimed to have been a 'Professor of
    Constitutional law' when in fact you have never been a Professor of
    Constitutional law. In this last debate, you were careful to say that
    you 'taught a law class' and never mentioned being a 'Professor of
    Constitutional law.' You lied last spring.

    You and Joe Biden both claimed that John McCain voted against additional
    funding for our troops when the actual records show the opposite. You
    distorted the truth.

    You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted against funding for
    alternate energy sources 20 times when the record shows that John McCain
    specifically voted against funding for bio fuels, especially corn ...
    and he was right .... corn is too expensive at producing ethanol, and
    using corn to make ethanol increased the price of corn from $2 a bushel
    to $6 a bushel for food. You distorted the truth.

    In your debates last spring, you claimed to have been a 'Professor of
    Constitutional law' when in fact you have never been a Professor of
    Constitutional law. In this last debate, you were careful to say that
    you 'taught a law class' and never mentioned being a 'Professor of
    Constitutional law.' You lied last spring.

    You and Joe Biden both claimed that John McCain voted against additional
    funding for our troops when the actual records show the opposite. You
    distorted the truth.

    to be continued
     
    #3 D_season 5, Oct 29, 2008
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2008
  4. D_season 5

    D_season 5 Account Disabled

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Posts:
    622
    Likes Received:
    36

    You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted like both of you for a
    tax increase on those making as little as $42,000 per year while the
    voting record clearly shows that John McCain did not vote as you and Joe
    Biden. You lied to America ..

    You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted with George W. Bush 90%
    of the ti me when you know that Democrats also vote 90% of the time with
    the President (including Joe Biden) because the vast majority of the
    votes are procedural. You are one of the few who has not voted 90% of
    the time with the president because you have been missing from the
    Senate since the day you got elected. While your absence from your job
    in the Senate is of concern, the greater concern is that you spin the
    facts.

    You did not take an active roll in the rescue plan. You claimed that the
    Senate did not need you while the real reason that you abstained was
    because of your close relationships with the executives of Fannie Mae,
    Freddie Mac, Countrywide, and Acorn ... who all helped cause the
    financial problems of today ... and they all made major contributions to
    your campaign. While your relationship with these executives and your
    protection of them for your brief 3 years in the Senate (along with
    Barney Frank, Chuch Schumer, Maxine Waters, and Chris Dodd) is of
    concern, the greater concern is that you are being deceitful.

    You forgot to mention that you personally represented Tony Rezko and
    Acorn. Tony Rezko, an Arab and close friend to you, was convicted of
    fraud in Chicago real estate transactions that bilked millions of tax
    dollars from the Illinois government for renovation projects that you
    sponsored as a state senator ... and Acorn has been convicted of voter
    fraud, real estate sub prime loan intimidation, and illegal campaign
    contributions. Tony Rezko has contributed hundreds of thousands of
    dollars to your political campaigns. You personally used your political
    positions to steer money to both Tony Rezko and Acorn and you used Acorn
    to register thousands of phony voters for Democrats and you. While your
    relationships with Rezko and Acorn are of concern, the greater concern
    is that you omitted important facts about your relationships with them
    to America .

    Du ring your campaign, you said: 'typical white person.' 'they cling to
    their guns and religion.' 'they will say that I am black.' You played
    the race card.. You tried to label any criticism about you as racist..
    You divide America .

    You now claim that your reason for voting against funding for the troops
    was because the bill did not include a time line for withdrawal while
    the video tapes of you from more than a year ago show that you voted
    against additional funding because you wanted our troops to be removed
    immediately ... not in 16 months after the 2008 election as you now
    claim. While your judgement about removing our troops unilaterally in
    2007 is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America
    about your previous position.

    after agreement from the Democrat
    party. While it is of concern that you fail to include conservatives in
    your actions and that you are such a liberal, the greater concern is
    that you distorted the truth.


    Guys, I went to High School with Barry, I know this man he hasn't changed...btw...in High School...he was known as Barry Dunham then as Barry Santorum and when I ran into him at the U of Chicago..(i did law school at U of C)
    he went by the name of Barak Obama...
    for those wondering...Punahou High School is a private prep school in a section of Honolulu called Makiki. Its definetly upper income and sits behind Waikiki.
    Punahou tuition in the 1979 was 11,000.00 a year.
    again, this is High School...
     
  5. b.c.

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Posts:
    20,538
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    21,664
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    Verified:
    Photo
    And what part don't you get? Bailouts of some sort were acknowledged by both parties (and among governments of various countries) to be necessary.

    BUT:

    "...In his bailout negotiations with Congress, Paulson fought restrictions on CEO compensation at every turn."


    Hey, I'm not asking you to read between the lines, bud. Just read the fuckin' lines.
     
  6. vince

    vince Legendary Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Posts:
    8,274
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Link-
    President Bush signs the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008​


    ^For your information dumbass, that's a Republican^
     
  7. D_season 5

    D_season 5 Account Disabled

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Posts:
    622
    Likes Received:
    36
    BC

    and how is in charge of the funds once they are dispensed? The finance committee...along with Paulson...ex CEO of Goldman Sachs...with Barny Frank and his loons...quit ur partisan shit...this mess was created by the Democratic Party....Bill Clinton, Alan Greenspan, and a democrat congress. and the only two lone voices to reel in Fannie Mae and Freddic Mac...was The President...and John Mc Cain...u can blame Mc Cain for LOTS of bad stuff...but not this mess...its all in the Congressional recored...and those 'fuckin lines' u can read at ur will...
     
  8. D_season 5

    D_season 5 Account Disabled

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Posts:
    622
    Likes Received:
    36
    Mr. Obama, you have done nothing to stop the actions of the teachers
    union and college professors in the USA . They eliminated religion from
    our history. They teach pro gay agendas and discuss sex with students as
    young as first grade. They bring their personal politics into the
    classrooms. They disparage conservatives. They brainwash our children.
    They are in it for themselves..... not America . Are you reluctant to
    condemn their actions because teachers/professors and the NEA contribute
    25% of all money donated to Democrats and none to Republicans? You are
    deceiving America .

    Oh Mr. Obama, Teddy Roosevelt said about a hundred years ago that we
    Americans should first look at the character of our leaders before
    anything else. Your character looks horrible. While you make good
    speeches, motivating speeches, your character does not match your
    rhetoric. You talk the talk but do not walk the walk.

    1. You lied to America . You lied many times. You distorted facts. You
    parsed your answers like a lawyer.
    2. You distorted the record of John McCain in your words and in your
    advertisements.
    3. You had associations with some very bad people for your personal
    political gains and then lied about those associations.
    4. You divide America about race and about class.

    Now let me compare your record of lies, distortions, race bating, and
    associations to John McCain: War hero. Annapolis graduate with 'Country
    first..' Operational leadership experience like all 43 previously
    elected presidents of the USA as a Navy Officer for 22 years. 26 years
    in the Senate. Straight talk. Maverick. 54% of the time participated on
    bills with Democrats. Never asked for an earmark. The only blemish on
    his record is his part in the Keating 5 debacle about 25 years ago.
    Mr. Obama, at Harvard Law School, you learned that the end does not
    justify the means. You learned that perjury, false witness, dishonesty,
    distortion of truth is never tolerated. Yet, your dishonesty is
    overwhelming. Your dishonesty is tremendously greater than the
    dishonesty that caused the impeachment and disbarment of Bill Clinton.
    Your dishonesty is tremendously greater than the dishonesty of Scooter
    Libby. You should be ashamed.

    Mr. Obama, it is time for us Americans to put aside our differences on
    political issues and vote against you because of your dishonest
    character. It is time for all of us Americans to put aside our political
    issues and vote for America first. It is time for America to vote for
    honesty.

    Any people who vote for you after understanding that you are dishonest
    should be ashamed of themselves for making their personal political
    issues more important than character. Would these same people vote for
    the anti-Christ if the anti-Christ promised them riches? Would they make
    a golden calf while Moses was up the mountain? Would they hire someone
    for a job if that someone lied in an interview? .... of course not. So
    why do some of these people justify their votes for you even though they
    know you are dishonest? Why do they excuse your dishonesty? Because some
    of these people are frightened about the future, the economy, and their
    financial security.... and you are praying on their fears with empty
    promises ... and because some (especially our young people) are consumed
    by your wonderful style and promises for 'change' like the Germans who
    voted for Adolf Hitler in 1932. The greed/envy by Germans in 1932 kept
    them from recognizing Hitler for who he was. They loved his style. Greed
    and envy are keeping many Americans from recognizing you ... your style
    has camouflaged your dishonesty.... but many of us see you for who you
    really are ... and we will not stop exposing who you are every day,
    forever if it is necessary.

    Mr. Obama, you are dishonest. Anyone who votes for you is enabling
    dishonesty.
    Mr. Obama , America cannot trust that you will put America first in your
    decisions about the future.
    Mr. Obama, you are not the 'change' that America deserves. We cannot
    trust you.
    Mr. Obama, You are not ready and not fit to be commander in chief.
    Mr. Obama, John McCain does not have as much money as your campaign to
    refute all of your false statements.. And for whatever reasons, the
    mainstream media will not give adequate coverage or research about your
    lies, distortions, word parsing, bad associations, race bating, lack of
    operational leadership experience, and general dishonest character. The
    media is diverting our attention to your relationships and ignoring the
    fact that you lied about those relationships. The fact that you lied is
    much more important than the relationships themselves.... just like with
    Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon ... Monica Lewinski and Watergate were
    not nearly as bad as the fact that those gentlemen lied about the events
    ... false witness ... perjury ... your relationships and bad judgements
    are bad on their own .... but your lies are even worse.

    Therefore, by copy of this memo, all who read this memo are asked to
    send it to everyone else in America before it is too late. We need to do
    the job that the media will not do. We need to expose your dishonesty so
    that every person in America understands who you really are before
    Election Day.

    Mr. Obama, in a democracy, we get what we deserve. And God help America
    if we deserve you..
     
  9. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    10,365
    Likes Received:
    34
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    You can't blame Democrats on this one.
    Here's the REAL outcome of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 in the Senate: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml

    As we can see, 91 Republicans voted FOR the bill. Which means 45%, or nearly HALF of the Republicans at attendance. That's FAR from being against it.

    And back when the bill failed to pass the House...
    Democrats voted 141/94 in favor, Republicans voted 65/133 against.
    Bailout Plan Rejected, Markets Plunge, Forcing New Scramble to Solve Crisis - WSJ.com

    If anything, the findings prove that the second time around MORE REPUBLICANS were in favor of the bill than before. What must've changed to convince 26 more Republicans to come around? To blame Dems for the bailout is not only laughable, it has absolutely no real merit unless you're just bitter about the outcome.
     
  10. mindseye

    mindseye Experimental Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Posts:
    3,401
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male

    His high school yearbook photo is online: He did not go by the name "Barry Dunham" in high school.

    "Santorum" is just wrong on so many levels.

    I won't disclose the date of birth with which you registered on this site to protect your privacy, but unless you lied about your age when you registered, you could not have gone to high school with Barack Obama.

    ...which means that you've told more lies about him than he's told about you.
     
  11. b.c.

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Posts:
    20,538
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    21,664
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    Verified:
    Photo

    ...lies, rants, innuendos, all too familiar (and typical) distortions of reality. Just as a reminder, here is the (still growing) list of some VERY reputable endorsements for Barack Obama.

    He must be one hell of lawyer. He's managed to fool all of these people, eh?

    List of Barack Obama presidential campaign endorsements, 2008 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    (btw...i notice the list omits a recent endorsement, local to me: The New Orleans Times Picayune, usually a bastion of conservatism, endorses Barack Obama.)
     
    #11 b.c., Oct 29, 2008
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2008
  12. marleyisalegend

    marleyisalegend Loved Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Posts:
    6,128
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    545
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    charlotte
    11inch, put the crack pipe down. I repeat. Put the crack pipe down.
     
  13. Pendlum

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    Posts:
    2,096
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    24
    Gender:
    Male
    Verified:
    Photo
    Wouldn't it be a more accurate representation if that waiter made $250,000 yearly income? And we all know there is no way that is true. If I made that much as a waiter, $10 would be nothing tip to me.
     
  14. D_Tully Tunnelrat

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Posts:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    3
    Hilarious line... Rather than hurling rhetorical blame, what's the solution guys? It's not just about tax rates, it's also about how to reduce spending. Where and how much? The President, no matter whom is elected, can't fix this by himself. This mess is gonna need everyone to clean up on aisle 5.
     
  15. D_Tully Tunnelrat

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Posts:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    3
    Barack went to law school at Harvard. He taught Constitutional Law at U of C from '92-'04. How did you just "run into" (on a first name basis..) a Professor/Senior Lecturer?

    BTW the tuition at Punahou is $16,675 for this year: '08, so I doubt it was $11K in '79. It was probably more like $2,500 then.

    If you're gonna rant, at least get the facts straight.
     
  16. marleyisalegend

    marleyisalegend Loved Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Posts:
    6,128
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    545
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    charlotte
    Am I the only one that finds this a bit hard to believe?
     
  17. mindseye

    mindseye Experimental Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Posts:
    3,401
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    I've demolished that claim here.

    What too many Republicans fail to understand is that if you pass along information that doesn't even pass rudimentary fact-checking, then after a while, people just think you're crying wolf. After that, whatever legitimate criticisms you might have won't be taken seriously.
     
  18. marleyisalegend

    marleyisalegend Loved Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Posts:
    6,128
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    545
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    charlotte
    Actually I think it's a brilliant tactic. Spread a lie about Obama. By the time the truth comes out, no one is even talking about it anymore, damage is done.
     
    #18 marleyisalegend, Oct 30, 2008
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2008
  19. D_Tully Tunnelrat

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Posts:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    3
    Agreed, he's off on several other points as well. Although it may appear to be a brilliant tactic, it ultimately discredits the originator/repeater, as Mindseye stated more eloquently.
     
  20. mindseye

    mindseye Experimental Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Posts:
    3,401
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Maybe if it was a credible lie, but not "i went 2 hi shcool with him & he redestribbuted my luch mony." Even a lie has to pass the sniff test. For example:


    • Lie 1: Obama's a mere community organizer with no experience and accomplished nothing significant in the Senate.
    • Lie 2: Obama will transform the world's largest national economy into a marxist, socialist state.
      • So, um, how could someone so inexperienced effect such a change?
    or...

    • Lie 1: Obama's a latte-sipping elitist!
    • Lie 2: Obama pals around with domestic terrorists!
      • Domestic terrorists he met at Chasalla or Symphony Center? You know, 'cause folks like Ted Kaczynski just don't hobnob with anybody.
     
    #20 mindseye, Oct 30, 2008
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2008
  21. D_season 5

    D_season 5 Account Disabled

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Posts:
    622
    Likes Received:
    36
    i think u may have put something into my post that isn't there..i never said..i was in the same class or grade as he was...he is older then i am by a few years...but i do have the year book...and of course as a sr he was in the year book...
    so, in advance..i accept ur apologies..for i suspect ur not man enuf to say so...
    btw...my address in hawaii..was 4747 kahala ave...my grandparents address...999 wilder ave...and if u went on line..u could of looked me up in the year book as well...dahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
     
  22. D_Davy_Downspout

    D_Davy_Downspout Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Posts:
    1,136
    Likes Received:
    5
    Dude, are you retarded, or not a native English speaker? Every thing you've posted that isn't a direct copy-paste hurts my brain to even try and read.
     
  23. D_Davy_Downspout

    D_Davy_Downspout Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Posts:
    1,136
    Likes Received:
    5
    Fixed that for you.
     
  24. findfirefox

    findfirefox Experimental Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Posts:
    2,016
    Likes Received:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    You said "I went to school with him" and "That you know him", you said it, not anyone else.

    Obama worked to fit in at elite school - Boston.com

    Oh and Tuition was 1,990 not 11,000. He also went by Barry Obama..
     
  25. rob_just_rob

    rob_just_rob Sexy Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Posts:
    5,860
    Likes Received:
    31
    Location:
    Nowhere near you
    LOL... you went to high school with Obama? Gimme a fucking break. If you're going to lie, at least lie credibly.

    At some point, even die-hard McCain supporters are going to have to shake their heads at the b.s. some of the Obama bashers are spewing here.
     
  26. mindseye

    mindseye Experimental Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Posts:
    3,401
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    I had already considered the possibility that you two weren't in the exact same grade. I even considered the possibility that (despite your atrocious spelling and punctuation) you had skipped a grade. The numbers still don't add up. I did acknowledge in my post the possibility that instead of lying about having attended school with Obama, you were lying about your age on here instead.

    Despite the fact that many sources on the internet list the name of the school as "Punahou High School" -- the name that you gave in your post as well -- that wasn't the name of the school in 1979. Nor was the tuition at that school $11000 in 1979. Nor did Barack Obama ever use the last name "Dunham" for himself while he was there. Each of these claims that you have made are demonstrably false, and while they don't conclusively prove that you didn't attend the school, they're more than ample to suggest you don't know what you're talking about regarding the time you were there.



     
  27. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Posts:
    6,855
    Likes Received:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Banks Owe Billions to Executives

    By ELLEN E. SCHULTZ




    Financial giants getting injections of federal cash owed their executives more than $40 billion for past years' pay and pensions as of the end of 2007, a Wall Street Journal analysis shows.
    The government is seeking to rein in executive pay at banks getting federal money, and a leading congressman and a state official have demanded that some of them make clear how much they intend to pay in bonuses this year.
    But overlooked in these efforts is the total size of debts that financial firms receiving taxpayer assistance previously incurred to their executives, which at some firms exceed what they owe in pensions to their entire work forces.
    The sums are mostly for special executive pensions and deferred compensation, including bonuses, for prior years. Because the liabilities include stock, they are subject to market fluctuation. Given the stock-market decline of this year, some may have fallen substantially.
    Some examples: $11.8 billion at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., $8.5 billion at J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., and $10 billion to $12 billion at Morgan Stanley.
    Few firms report the size of these debts to their executives. (Goldman is an exception.) In most cases, the Journal calculated them by extrapolating from figures that the firms do have to disclose.
    Most firms haven't set aside cash or stock for these IOUs. They are a drag on current earnings and when the executives depart, employers have to pay them out of corporate coffers.
    The practice of incurring corporate IOUs for executives' pensions and past pay is perfectly legal and is common in big business, not limited to financial firms. But liabilities grew especially high in the financial industry, with its tradition of lavish pay.
    Deferring compensation appeals both to employers, which save cash in the near term, and to executives, who delay taxes and see their deferred-pay accounts grow, sometimes aided by matching contributions. In some cases, firms give top executives high guaranteed returns on these accounts.
    The liabilities are an essentially hidden obligation. Even when the debts to their executives total in the billions, most companies lump them into "other liabilities"; only a few then identify amounts attributable to deferred pay.
    The Journal was able to approximate companies' IOUs, in some cases, by looking at an amount they report as deferred tax assets for "deferred compensation" or "employee benefits and compensation." This figure shows how much a company expects to reap in tax benefits when it ultimately pays the executives what it owes them.
    J.P. Morgan, for instance, reported a $3.4 billion deferred tax asset for employee benefits in 2007. Assuming a 40% combined federal and state tax rate -- and backing out obligations for retiree health and other items -- implies the bank owed about $8.2 billion to its own executives. A person familiar with the matter confirmed the estimate.
    Applying the same technique to Citigroup Inc. yields roughly a $5 billion IOU, primarily for restricted stock of executives and eligible employees. Someone familiar with the matter confirmed the estimate.
    The Treasury is infusing $25 billion apiece into J.P. Morgan and Citigroup as it seeks to get credit flowing. In return, the federal government is getting preferred stock in the banks and warrants to buy common shares. The Treasury is injecting $125 billion into nine big banks and making a like amount available for other banks that apply.
    It's imposing some restrictions on how they pay top executives in the future, such as curtailing new "golden parachutes" and barring a tax deduction for any one person's pay above $500,000. But the rules won't affect what the banks already owe their executives or make these opaque debts more transparent.
    Asked about the Journal's calculation, the Treasury said, "Every bank that accepts money through the Capital Purchase Program must first agree to the compensation restrictions passed by Congress just last month -- and every bank that is receiving money has done so."
    Bear Stearns Cos., the first financial firm the U.S. backstopped, owed its executives $1.7 billion for accrued employee compensation and benefits at the start of the year, according to regulatory filings. When Bear Stearns ran into trouble after investing heavily in risky mortgage-backed securities, the government stepped in, arranging a sale of the firm and taking responsibility for up to $29 billion of its losses.
    The buyer, J.P. Morgan, says it will honor the debt to Bear Stearns executives, which it said is shrunken because much of it was in stock that sank in value.
    J.P. Morgan will also honor deferred-pay accounts at another institution it took over, Washington Mutual Inc. It couldn't be determined how big this IOU is. J.P. Morgan's move will leave the WaMu executives better off than holders of that ailing thrift's debt and preferred stock, who are expected to see little recovery. J.P. Morgan's share of the federal capital injection is $25 billion.
    Obligations for executive pay are large for a number of reasons. Even as companies have complained about the cost of retiree benefits, they have been awarding larger pay and pensions to executives. At Goldman, for example, the $11.8 billion obligation primarily for deferred executive compensation dwarfed the liability for its broad-based pension plan for all employees. That was just $399 million, and fully funded with set-aside assets.
    The deferred-compensation programs for executives are like 401(k) plans on steroids. They create hypothetical "accounts" into which executives can defer salaries, bonuses and restricted stock awards. For top officers, employers often enhance the deferred pay with matching contributions, and even assign an interest rate at which the hypothetical account grows.
    Often, it is a generous rate. At Freddie Mac, executives earned 9.25% on their deferred-pay accounts in 2007, regulatory filings show -- a better deal than regular employees of the mortgage buyer could get in a 401(k). Since all this money is tax-deferred, the Treasury, and by extension the U.S. taxpayer, subsidizes the accounts.
    In addition, because assets are rarely set aside for executive IOUs, they have a greater impact on firms' earnings than rank-and-file pension plans, which by law must be funded.
    Bank of America Corp.'s $1.3 billion liability for supplemental executive pensions reduced earnings by $104 million in 2007, filings show. By contrast, the bank's regular pension plan is overfunded, and the surplus helped the plan contribute $32 million to earnings last year.
    While disclosing its liability for executive pensions, the bank doesn't disclose its IOU executives' deferred compensation, and it couldn't be calculated. The bank's share of the federal capital injection is $25 billion.
    Bank of America has agreed to acquire Merrill Lynch & Co. Merrill is a rare example of a firm that has set aside assets for its deferred-pay obligation: $2.2 billion, matching the liability. Morgan Stanley also says its liability for executives' deferred pay is largely funded.
    To be sure, deferred-compensation accounts can shrink. Those of lower-level executives usually track a mutual fund, and decline if it does. Often the accounts include restricted shares, which also may lose value, especially this year. To the extent financial-firm executives were being paid in restricted stock, many have lost huge amounts of wealth in this year's stock-market plunge.
    The value of Morgan Stanley Chief Executive John Mack's deferred-compensation account declined by $1.3 million in fiscal 2007, to $19.9 million; much of it was in company shares. Mr. Mack didn't accept a bonus in 2007.
     
  28. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Posts:
    6,855
    Likes Received:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Executives can even lose their deferred pay altogether if their employer ends up in bankruptcy court. When Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. filed for bankruptcy last month, most executives became unsecured creditors. The government didn't come to Lehman's aid.
    In assessing liabilities, the Journal examined federal year-end 2007 filings by the first nine banks to get capital injections, plus six other banks and financial firms embroiled in the financial crisis. In many cases, the firms didn't report enough data to estimate their obligations to executives. As for identifying amounts due individual executives, company filings provided a look at only the top few, and not a full picture of what they were owed.
    Just as banks aren't the only financial firms getting federal aid amid the crisis, they aren't the only ones facing scrutiny of their compensation programs.
    Struggling insurer American International Group Inc. agreed to suspend payment of deferred pay for some former top executives pending a review by New York state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. Mr. Cuomo is also demanding to know this year's bonus plans for the first nine banks getting federal cash, as is House Oversight Committee Chairman Henry Waxman.
    http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/P1-AN448A_EXECP_NS_20081030220504.gif


    Among the payouts AIG agreed not to make are disbursements from a $600 million bonus pool for executives of a unit that ran up huge losses with complex financial products. AIG also is suspending $19 million of deferred compensation for Martin Sullivan, whom AIG ousted as chief executive in June. His successor as CEO, Robert Willumstad, who left when the U.S. stepped in to rescue AIG in September, has said he's forgoing $22 million in severance because he wasn't there long enough to execute his strategy for AIG.
    However, the giant insurer -- whose total liability for its executives' deferred pay couldn't be calculated -- says most of the managers will receive the compensation. "Of course, we'll be looking at all these to make sure they're consistent with the requirement of the program," said spokesman Nicholas Ashooh.
    AIG isn't eligible for the government's capital-injection plan, since it's not a bank, but it's getting plenty of U.S. aid of another sort. The Treasury has made $123 billion of credit available, a little more than two-thirds of which AIG has borrowed so far.
    Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac also don't get in on the capital-injection plan for banks. But under a federal "conservatorship," the Treasury agreed to provide each with up to $100 billion of capital if needed. In return, the government got preferred shares in the firms and the right to acquire nearly 80% of them.
    Their regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, says it will bar golden-parachute severance payouts to the mortgage buyers' ousted chief executives. The executives remain eligible for their pensions.
    Fannie Mae had a liability of roughly $500 million for executive pensions and deferred compensation at the end of 2007, judging by the size of its deferred tax assets. A spokesman for the firm wouldn't discuss the estimate or whether the executives would get the assets.
    At Freddie Mac, most will. "Deferred compensation belongs to the officers who earned it," said Shawn Flaherty, a spokeswoman.
    Indeed, in September Freddie Mac made its deferred-compensation plan more flexible, allowing executives to receive their money earlier than initially spelled out. "Officers were nervous about market changes," said Ms. Flaherty. "We wanted a retention tool for top talent."
     
  29. b.c.

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Posts:
    20,538
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    21,664
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    Verified:
    Photo
    The purpose of this guy's post is was not necessarily to disseminate information or facts. And he undoubtedly knew he would get caught in lies. But if we start debating the validity of his bullshit we forget the original topic of the thread:

    ...which was the fact that McCain has made great use of terms like "redistribution of wealth" and other code words to place groundless fears in the mindless about Obama's tax proposals, groundless primarily because they are a complete distortion of what was really being said - all of this while Treasury Secretary Paulson fought to insure that CEO's of failing Savings and Loans would still rake in millions while middle class America (that US, folks) foots the bill.

    Sounds like a redistribution of OUR fuckin' money... to those who need it the least. But, hey, gotta protect their yachts and vacation paradise 2nd and 3rd estates, eh?

    And McCain and company sure don't mind that.
     
  30. SpeedoGuy

    SpeedoGuy Sexy Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Posts:
    4,168
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Now Nick, that just can't be true. The WSJ must be lying.

    In fact, one of the smug Republican apologists in http://www.lpsg.org/107615-redistribution-of-wealth-3.html#post1779829in was recently claiming CEOs never take any government handouts.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice