fantastic_jackie | How far will YOU go?

Do y'all remember when crazy cons like me were all outraged at the idea that the government would be controlling the salaries of corporations and the liberals were all like, "Oh, you fearmongers. It's only for companies that took the bailouts. It won't ever go any farther than that. You conspiracy therorists..."

Of course, they conveinently ignored the quote from... Barney Frank, was it? Who said that he wanted Congress to have oversight over all executive salaries and bonuses.

Well, the Fed - oh geez, I think I have libertarian-like knee jerks to just mentioning the Fed now... - is now stepping up to the plate with a plan...

Fed Outlines Plan to Police Bank Pay

The Federal Reserve would police banks' pay policies to ensure they don't encourage employees to take reckless gambles like those that contributed to the financial crisis, according to a proposal unveiled Thursday.

Unlike a Treasury plan to slash pay at certain companies that were bailed out with large sums of taxpayer money, the Fed proposal would cover thousands of banks, including many that never received a bailout.

The Fed would not actually set compensation. Instead, the central bank would review — and could veto — pay policies that could cause too much risk-taking by executives, traders or loan officers.

Okay. Exactly how FAR does this administration have to go before liberals finally say, "Uh... Hey... What? Now wait a second..."

You're going to tell me the only way you can ensure that this kind of economic recession won't happen again is for the federal government to control how much executives are paid?! You're going to tell me that such will even have an effect on preventing recessions?!

And it has to be the FED??!!

I thought we believed in freedom in this country!!

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CONSTITUTION?!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Eh. Truth is Democrats screw themselves over. I've been joking that whether I agree with Republicans or not, they know how to get things done.

Say the goal is to pass a bill to give all Americans a red balloon. Americans have been polled and say 57-71% agree that every American needs a red balloon, despite their ideology.

You put 3 Dems in a room:

1. Will think the red balloon idea is great.
2. Will think that Americans really need blue balloons.
3. Will argue whether or not Americans even need balloons.

They'll all vote differently. Nothing will pass. Or if it does it won't resemble the original red balloon for all Americans idea.

Republicans in a room:

All of them might disagree but if it's settled that Americans (even if there are a sizable number that disagree) need red balloons they are going to vote for red balloons, dang it!

And there is no way there were 1.6 million people during the tea parties in D.C. I watched most of Fox's coverage and C-Span's and Fox New's own Glenn Beck put it at tens of thousands.

Nah. The republicans would agree to the balloons, but they would hem and haw over the budget costs of air to blow them up, let alone including string! They would make the case that they're willing to give the American populace what they need, but they're certainly not going to blow them up like the democrats! Fringe elements in the party would agonize and pontificate over the effects of helium as an inhalent, and Conservatives in the party would staunchly point to the Constitution asking for the clause. The whole lot of them would be labeled selfish, heartless scoundrels who hate smiles - and ribbon. ;)

And as for the 912 March, 1.6-1.7 million is actually the number Glenn Beck stands by. On the day of the march, he did say thousands - tens of, hundreds of. The numbers for these events always come out hours to days later, and he revised his quote over that time period. The estimate is actually between 1.2 and 2 million...

"Police agencies estimates the crowd at 1.2 million. ABC News, however, reported this afternoon that the crowd was estimated at 2 million." LINK (http://www.examiner.com/x-3704-Columbia-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m9d12-March-on-DC-draws-2-million)

But maybe pictures will help... This is, ah, "tens of thousands..."

Panoramic Full View of 912 March (http://romanticpoet.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/capitol-view-lo-res.jpg)

Heh heh. Tens of thousands. I've been in 15,000 in San Antonio and 30,000 in Dallas. That ain't tens of thousands.

I watched the protests live. Don't believe for a second that there were 1.6 million people, but that's cool. There were a lot of people, mind you, but I compared them to the crowds I saw during Obama's inauguration which was around 2 million and nope.

Nah. The republicans would agree to the balloons, but they would hem and haw over the budget costs of air to blow them up, let alone including string! They would make the case that they're willing to give the American populace what they need, but they're certainly not going to blow them up like the democrats! Fringe elements in the party would agonize and pontificate over the effects of helium as an inhalent, and Conservatives in the party would staunchly point to the Constitution asking for the clause. The whole lot of them would be labeled selfish, heartless scoundrels who hate smiles - and ribbon. ;)

ROTFL! So true. I get in debates on facebook with a group of Conservative friends and there is always one person who agonizes over the cost of a bill and one person who states that what's proposed in the bill can't be validated by the Constitution.

That said, I still think the Republicans would pass a bill quicker than the Dems. if they were working with a majority and polling of the American people was relatively high for something. A John McCain or Lindsey Graham type would just come out and say, "We need to get the American people their red balloons" and the votes would materialize.

Oh, I agree. I don't believe that there were 2 million. 1.6 is my highest that I'll believe, thus the reason I use it. 1.7 maybe if you count all the people that came and went throughout.

LOL It's funny the idea you have of the Republican party. I've left it, but I was heavily involved before, even as a delegate. There are deep, deep divisions, and if Lindsey Graham hadn't just been re-elected, he would be in serious danger of losing his seat for the things he's said to his constiuents lately.

Well, Lindsey comes from a very, very red state. But truth is he's pretty moderate. Throughout the country and the entire Senate, Lindsey has a lot of influence.

Also, I've seen video of some of those exchanges between the Senator and his constituents and he is a better Senator than I could ever be not to just roll his eyes and walk off the stage. The stuff people have been bold enough to say at these Town Hall meetings is....special.

There are deep divisions within the Republican party. Mostly, it's struggling to find itself again. It really needs to connect to its earliest roots. That said, I still think they'd vote a bill in quicker than the Democrats. I really believe that. I think the Dems don't have the identity crisis Republicans are having, but they worry too much on pleasing every single person in their party.

I don't think Republicans do that. They come to a rough consensus and then go for it.

How far will YOU go?

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject