|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Newsie, Registered User, Server Admin
Joined: 11/6/2007
Posts: 987
Points: 783
|
Business wrote:I'm not as convinced that the rich are getting pummeled.
Just keep submitting news stories, we can create a map of whats happening. Give the government the ability to bailout companies and it's going to happen, and as we're seeing now, unequally and in a cronyistic way. Conversely, if the government didn't have the power to interfere in the private sector like this, businesses would be forced to account for their mistakes (as Lehman now is), our taxes wouldn't have to go to provide a safety net to certain groups of people (rich and poor), and we wouldn't have lobbyists crawling all over Washington fighting for their piece of the pie. HolyJaw wrote:In the end, everything Endyss said.
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: {pDs} Member, Registered User, Server Admin, Administration
Joined: 3/27/2008
Posts: 1,793
Points: 3,380
Location: Arizona
|
endyss wrote:All of these bailouts and entitlements are one place I really wish our Supreme Court would step in and illuminate the other branches of our government on exactly what the Constitution means by "No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Are you kidding? Who puts people on the Supreme Court? Yup. Politicians. Democrats and (mostly) Republicans. Four of the sitting justices were put there by a Bush! And seven of the nine by Republicans in general. And while politicians might not have an active, official influence over them once they're placed, who knows what level of "preparing" they underwent before being placed. Our rights are being "protected" by a bunch of judges empowered by Republicans. God bless America
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Newsie, Registered User, Server Admin
Joined: 11/6/2007
Posts: 987
Points: 783
|
Rikaelus wrote:Are you kidding? Who puts people on the Supreme Court? Yup. Politicians. Democrats and (mostly) Republicans. Four of the sitting justices were put there by a Bush! And seven of the nine by Republicans in general. And while politicians might not have an active, official influence over them once they're placed, who knows what level of "preparing" they underwent before being placed.
Our rights are being "protected" by a bunch of judges empowered by Republicans.
God bless America
No, I'm not kidding. That's what the judicial branch of our government was designed to do. They aren't elected so they don't have to campaign and make promises for when they're elected, and they have lifetime appointment to insulate them from day-to-day political pressures. Their function is as a check on overreaching power of the other two branches and interpret the Constitution and laws as applied to specific cases.
They've always been appointed by the President (with the advice and consent of the Senate), so marginalizing the current Court because you don't like who picked them doesn't make much sense. They're still the primary check on executive and legislative abuses, which IMO these bailouts clearly are. If you don't like the politicians who appoint them, elect new politicians
Although, for my money, you can have Justice Souter back if you'd like. ;-) HolyJaw wrote:In the end, everything Endyss said.
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: {pDs} Member, Registered User, Server Admin, Administration
Joined: 3/27/2008
Posts: 1,793
Points: 3,380
Location: Arizona
|
endyss wrote:Rikaelus wrote:Are you kidding? Who puts people on the Supreme Court? Yup. Politicians. Democrats and (mostly) Republicans. Four of the sitting justices were put there by a Bush! And seven of the nine by Republicans in general. And while politicians might not have an active, official influence over them once they're placed, who knows what level of "preparing" they underwent before being placed.
Our rights are being "protected" by a bunch of judges empowered by Republicans.
God bless America
No, I'm not kidding. That's what the judicial branch of our government was designed to do. They aren't elected so they don't have to campaign and make promises for when they're elected, and they have lifetime appointment to insulate them from day-to-day political pressures. Their function is as a check on overreaching power of the other two branches and interpret the Constitution and laws as applied to specific cases.
They've always been appointed by the President (with the advice and consent of the Senate), so marginalizing the current Court because you don't like who picked them doesn't make much sense. They're still the primary check on executive and legislative abuses, which IMO these bailouts clearly are. If you don't like the politicians who appoint them, elect new politicians
Although, for my money, you can have Justice Souter back if you'd like. ;-)
Sure they're elected - by the president. They could make as many promises to the president and his party as any politician does to big business. And lifetime appointment holds very little value when the majority of those currently sitting were elected within the last 20 years. Not to mention, again, that SEVEN of them were placed by Republicans. You don't see the potential for a problem there? And I doubt any conservative judge would retire these days unless there's a Republican president and a good chance of another conservative candidate taking their place. This is where their life terms actually support a problem - they can retire and time things however they want or whatever is in their party's best interest. It's an incredibly flawed system and one easily taken advantage of by politicians and political parties.
|
|
|
Rank: Fecal Impaction For the Win!
Groups: Registered User, Server Admin
Joined: 1/13/2008
Posts: 1,509
Points: 2,004
|
Dick Cheney's Mechanical Heart wrote:Business wrote:
And then when you think about how banks gave people loans even though they couldn't afford them...is this loan to AIG so different? I think this needs a serious overview. All of this stuff is done with no oversight at all. I mean we are reading about secret meetings between the bankers and the Feds, negotiations done after hours...does anybody really understand what we are doing here?
Give me your thoughts.
This is all backroom deals between aristocrats. No one understands what exactly they are doing besides what the PR flacks spin. I doubt they even really know fully what they are doing. Re: AIG, my understanding is that most of the company is extremely profitable so you may very well be right about the Fed's backers wanting to chop it up and eat it. It's a fucking insurance company, not a bank - so wtf is the Fed even involved for? It's funny how all these fuckers suddenly become a bunch of socialist pinkos as soon as the shit hits the fan.
They are bailing out AIG because of the significant effect its downfall would have on money market funds.. These are traditionally very safe investments and if they just let them fail....all confidence in the market would evaporate overnight. Bad, very bad for all of us. Recession full steam, perhaps even depression.
Quote:
"Who the fuck is Leon Switch and why does he know we have a dog?" - Mrs. Giller
|
|
|
Rank: Dutchess of Doodoo
Groups: Registered User, Server Admin, WDFNews.com Official Mapper
Joined: 6/3/2006
Posts: 2,239
Points: 330
Location: $L
|
Some interesting stuff today. Taxpayers may be on the hook for up to 800 billion according to CNNMoney. (see first post) The Russian stock market is frozen, every time they open it it drops. Also some photos of past financial problems from the Guardian UK Interesting to note: the caption for one of the pictures says in '87 the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped into the 1,000's. A few days ago it was over 11,000. Does this show really how inflated we have become in 20 years? You wanna take this to Fuck Town?
Oh gadzooks, yes!
|
|
|
Rank: Dutchess of Doodoo
Groups: Registered User, Server Admin, WDFNews.com Official Mapper
Joined: 6/3/2006
Posts: 2,239
Points: 330
Location: $L
|
There is talk of an RTC... Making the profits private and the losses public. You wanna take this to Fuck Town?
Oh gadzooks, yes!
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Newsie, Registered User, Server Admin
Joined: 11/6/2007
Posts: 987
Points: 783
|
My anti-government-intervention heart cries out in agony............. HolyJaw wrote:In the end, everything Endyss said.
|
|
|
Rank: Coathanger Abortion
Groups: {pDs} Member, Server Admin
Joined: 5/17/2006
Posts: 3,487
Points: 1,990
Location: Undisclosed Location
|
endyss wrote:My anti-government-intervention heart cries out in agony............. More proof that we have lost the class war: The government is saying now that it's going to do a full bailout of Wall Street costing "hundreds of billions of dollars" Razor wrote:Killing people is good therapy.  
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: {pDs} Member, Registered User, Server Admin, Administration
Joined: 3/27/2008
Posts: 1,793
Points: 3,380
Location: Arizona
|
Dick Cheney's Mechanical Heart wrote:endyss wrote:My anti-government-intervention heart cries out in agony............. More proof that we have lost the class war: The government is saying now that it's going to do a full bailout of Wall Street costing "hundreds of billions of dollars" Who's "the government" in this case? The administration or Congress? As much as I believe we're poorly represented by our senators and congressmen even I can't believe they'd approve this. There's not a snowball's chance in hell that even close to the majority of Americans would want this.
|
|
|
Rank: Jimmy Hat Jester
Groups: {pDs} Member, Newsie, Server Admin
Joined: 5/16/2006
Posts: 1,796
Points: 81
Location: Dallas
|
We're so fucked. Switzerland sounds mighty good right now. get your ass to mars
|
|
|
Rank: Taco Technician
Groups: Registered User, {pDs} Member
Joined: 5/9/2006
Posts: 3,948
Points: 3,636
Location: Hi-Five City
|
Sorry to be retroactive on this thread but am I the only one who thinks appointing people to appoint people is a little backwards?
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: {pDs} Member, Registered User, Server Admin, Administration
Joined: 3/27/2008
Posts: 1,793
Points: 3,380
Location: Arizona
|
Lead Salad wrote:Sorry to be retroactive on this thread but am I the only one who thinks appointing people to appoint people is a little backwards? Depends which you value more, our "republic" or our "democracy". Valuing the latter more than the former, myself... then no.. you're not the only one.
|
|
|
Rank: Dutchess of Doodoo
Groups: Registered User, Server Admin, WDFNews.com Official Mapper
Joined: 6/3/2006
Posts: 2,239
Points: 330
Location: $L
|
A second stimulus package is in the works http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0908/Pelosi_throws_stimulus_into_the_mix.html Thoughts? You wanna take this to Fuck Town?
Oh gadzooks, yes!
|
|
|
Rank: Coathanger Abortion
Groups: {pDs} Member, Server Admin
Joined: 5/17/2006
Posts: 3,487
Points: 1,990
Location: Undisclosed Location
|
Weirdness. So they had a deal worked out starting off with 250billion with an oversight system and method of recovering the money down the road and went to the big meeting with Bush where everything was supposed to be finalized, except McCain and a bunch of the Republicans from the House suddenly backed out of the whole thing and are suddenly saying NO DEAL. Now no one knows wtf is going on and the whole process is in chaos. I think McCain has lost his fucking mind. The original bailout idea was fucking stupid but amazingly both parties managed to come together and make something a little less unreasonable, now the whole thing is in shambles because of McCain's theatrics and what would of been a stupid bipartisan bailout is gonna have to have his name all over it. Is he trying to throw the election? Razor wrote:Killing people is good therapy.
|
|
|
| Users browsing this topic |
|
Guest
|