Thursday, November 13, 2008

Oversight? HA!

I am not surprised at all:

Along the way, the Bush administration has committed $290 billion of the $700 billion rescue package.

Yet for all this activity, no formal action has been taken to fill the independent oversight posts established by Congress when it approved the bailout to prevent corruption and government waste. Nor has the first monitoring report required by lawmakers been completed, though the initial deadline has passed.


JUST SAY NO TO BAILOUTS. Part of capitalism is letting businesses fail. I don't see anyone jumping through hoops to send bailout money to me, the guy working two jobs.

No, let's give that money out in bonuses to those who've proven they can't perform their ONE job correctly:

According to a report from financial news agency Bloomberg, Goldman Sachs, for example, has set aside $6.8 billion for bonuses, and Morgan Stanley, $6.4 billion.

And the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank, isn't happy. "These are people who lost enormous amounts of money," Frank observes. "How do you give a bonus to someone for having failed so badly as many of these people did?"

What's got many on Main Street and Capitol Hill angry, David says, is the possibility that some of the $700 billion government bailout package could go into the pockets of Wall Streeters to pay their bonuses.

"All of the money is to go into new loans," Frank points out. "None of it is to go into compensation of any kind for the employees."


Really, Barney? How do you intend to ensure that with NO OVERSIGHT?

THEY ARE STEALING OUR TAX MONEY BEFORE WE EVEN PAY IT IN TAXES. If there was ever a time to write your reps and senators, it's now.

6 comments:

John in IL said...

Why are you asking Barney? His fingerprints are all over this mess.

North Dallas Thirty said...

I don't see anyone jumping through hoops to send bailout money to me, the guy working two jobs.

That's because, Jamie, the idea is not to make more money to pay your bills, but to make less so that you get your payments cut. You should quit your second job so you can drop your income and thus get the maximum amount cut off your payments.

Oh, but you and Norm probably only bought what you could afford. See, if you had overspent, the government would give you more bailout money.

Brilliant, isn't it?

Wayne said...

A total bunch of crap! And your right! No one would bail out my business if I screwed up!

QuakerJono said...

Well, no, no one would bail out your business if you screwed up. However, you also don't employ major amounts of the American populace and incorporate dealings with ancillary businesses that spread throughout the country and the economy with a pervasiveness usually only enjoyed by Big Tobacco.

You're right, it's crap, but this whole notion people are bandying about as to how "No one's bailing me out" is almost as far off base as Melissa Etheridge's schoolyard protest that a woman richer than God is somehow still a second class citizen and so won't pay her taxes.

John in IL said...

you also don't employ major amounts of the American populace

and your business model is not a failure.

Jamie said...

You're right, it's crap, but this whole notion people are bandying about as to how "No one's bailing me out" is almost as far off base as Melissa Etheridge's schoolyard protest that a woman richer than God is somehow still a second class citizen and so won't pay her taxes.

How so, QJ? No one is bailing us out. We're bailing out banks and major corporations that have bilked the public for as much as they can for decades. Explain to me how that's "off base." I'd love to hear it.