Maybe Colpy had it right... One, Two, Boom! ... you have a 66.6% chance the rest will rein in. Though, I propose a rubber bullet to the kneecap....
Lawmakers steamed over ritzy AIG retreat after bailout
- Thread starter Praxius
- Start date
Maybe Colpy had it right... One, Two, Boom! ... you have a 66.6% chance the rest will rein in. Though, I propose a rubber bullet to the kneecap....
That depends? Are the Janitors likely to leave to another company? If the Janitors do leave can the Company pay back its money?
Think about this not from the company point, but from the Employee point. You did your job, the failures of others is looking to sink your ship. Do you bail or stay and risk your families well being? Why should you stay?
These employees aren't slaves, they have as much right to quit to protect themselves as anyone.
And if the company bosses want to keep them there they can pay for it. Perhaps congress should have looked at whether the employees were going to stay with the company before bailing them out.
Its a ludicrous Idea that there is some shortage of money out there. Money doesn't "Disappear", if someone loses money then that means someone else got it.
Why there is a need for a bailout at all baffles me. If there is a shortage of credit, don't dump money in and assume that will make banks lend. They will just not lend AND sit on money. Lend the money yourself.
Don't you think that spending well over six figures is going way over the top? Do you think these folks are entitled to THAT type of treatment at tax payer expense. I understand a perk now and then but the company as a whole is kaput and is being bailed out. Heck our boss takes us out from time to time for an employee appreciation night, maybe twice a year but NEVER like this.
8O..............Jeebus, y'all is surprised!!!
They're laughing their heads off on the way to the mattress (bank is broke)
Where's all these guns ya got stashed in yer houses??
Just askin
They're laughing their heads off on the way to the mattress (bank is broke)
Where's all these guns ya got stashed in yer houses??
Just askin
Here is a link I found in the trash can. Use at your own discretion!!!;-)
http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=295
http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=295
The more I read on this the more I like it. Eagle, you wondered if it was communism I was referring to. No...indeed what we are talking about here is true democracy. Unlike the sham we are living under today with the monetary system, which is pure slavery in my mind.
An exerpt from the Venus Project webpage...
"A Resource-Based Economy is a system in which all goods and services are available without the use of money, credits, barter or any other system of debt or servitude. All resources become the common heritage of all of the inhabitants, not just a select few. The premise upon which this system is based is that the Earth is abundant with plentiful resource; our practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter productive to our survival.
Modern society has access to highly advanced technology and can make available food, clothing, housing and medical care; update our educational system; and develop a limitless supply of renewable, non-contaminating energy. By supplying an efficiently designed economy, everyone can enjoy a very high standard of living with all of the amenities of a high technological society.
A resource-based economy would utilize existing resources from the land and sea, physical equipment, industrial plants, etc. to enhance the lives of the total population. In an economy based on resources rather than money, we could easily produce all of the necessities of life and provide a high standard of living for all.
Consider the following examples: At the beginning of World War II the US had a mere 600 or so first-class fighting aircraft. We rapidly overcame this short supply by turning out more than 90,000 planes a year. The question at the start of World War II was: Do we have enough funds to produce the required implements of war? The answer was No, we did not have enough money, nor did we have enough gold; but we did have more than enough resources. It was the available resources that enabled the US to achieve the high production and efficiency required to win the war. Unfortunately this is only considered in times of war.
In a resource-based economy all of the world's resources are held as the common heritage of all of Earth's people, thus eventually outgrowing the need for the artificial boundaries that separate people. This is the unifying imperative.
We must emphasize that this approach to global governance has nothing whatever in common with the present aims of an elite to form a world government with themselves and large corporations at the helm, and the vast majority of the world's population subservient to them. Our vision of globalization empowers each and every person on the planet to be the best they can be, not to live in abject subjugation to a corporate governing body.
Our proposals would not only add to the well being of people, but they would also provide the necessary information that would enable them to participate in any area of their competence. The measure of success would be based on the fulfillment of one's individual pursuits rather than the acquisition of wealth, property and power.
At present, we have enough material resources to provide a very high standard of living for all of Earth's inhabitants. Only when population exceeds the carrying capacity of the land do many problems such as greed, crime and violence emerge. By overcoming scarcity, most of the crimes and even the prisons of today's society would no longer be necessary.
A resource-based world economy would also involve all-out efforts to develop new, clean, and renewable sources of energy: geothermal; controlled fusion; solar; photovoltaic; wind, wave, and tidal power; and even fuel from the oceans. We would eventually be able to have energy in unlimited quantity that could propel civilization for thousands of years. A resource-based economy must also be committed to the redesign of our cities, transportation systems, and industrial plants, allowing them to be energy efficient, clean, and conveniently serve the needs of all people.
What else would a resource-based economy mean? Technology intelligently and efficiently applied, conserves energy, reduces waste, and provides more leisure time. With automated inventory on a global scale, we can maintain a balance between production and distribution. Only nutritious and healthy food would be available and planned obsolescence would be unnecessary and non-existent in a resource-based economy.
As we outgrow the need for professions based on the monetary system, for instance lawyers, bankers, insurance agents, marketing and advertising personnel, salespersons, and stockbrokers, a considerable amount of waste will be eliminated. Considerable amounts of energy would also be saved by eliminating the duplication of competitive products such as tools, eating utensils, pots, pans and vacuum cleaners. Choice is good. But instead of hundreds of different manufacturing plants and all the paperwork and personnel required to turn out similar products, only a few of the highest quality would be needed to serve the entire population. Our only shortage is the lack of creative thought and intelligence in ourselves and our elected leaders to solve these problems. The most valuable, untapped resource today is human ingenuity.
With the elimination of debt, the fear of losing one's job will no longer be a threat This assurance, combined with education on how to relate to one another in a much more meaningful way, could considerably reduce both mental and physical stress and leave us free to explore and develop our abilities.
If the thought of eliminating money still troubles you, consider this: If a group of people with gold, diamonds and money were stranded on an island that had no resources such as food, clean air and water, their wealth would be irrelevant to their survival. It is only when resources are scarce that money can be used to control their distribution. One could not, for example, sell the air we breathe or water abundantly flowing down from a mountain stream. Although air and water are valuable, in abundance they cannot be sold.
Money is only important in a society when certain resources for survival must be rationed and the people accept money as an exchange medium for the scarce resources. Money is a social convention, an agreement if you will. It is neither a natural resource nor does it represent one. It is not necessary for survival unless we have been conditioned to accept it as such."
An exerpt from the Venus Project webpage...
"A Resource-Based Economy is a system in which all goods and services are available without the use of money, credits, barter or any other system of debt or servitude. All resources become the common heritage of all of the inhabitants, not just a select few. The premise upon which this system is based is that the Earth is abundant with plentiful resource; our practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter productive to our survival.
Modern society has access to highly advanced technology and can make available food, clothing, housing and medical care; update our educational system; and develop a limitless supply of renewable, non-contaminating energy. By supplying an efficiently designed economy, everyone can enjoy a very high standard of living with all of the amenities of a high technological society.
A resource-based economy would utilize existing resources from the land and sea, physical equipment, industrial plants, etc. to enhance the lives of the total population. In an economy based on resources rather than money, we could easily produce all of the necessities of life and provide a high standard of living for all.
Consider the following examples: At the beginning of World War II the US had a mere 600 or so first-class fighting aircraft. We rapidly overcame this short supply by turning out more than 90,000 planes a year. The question at the start of World War II was: Do we have enough funds to produce the required implements of war? The answer was No, we did not have enough money, nor did we have enough gold; but we did have more than enough resources. It was the available resources that enabled the US to achieve the high production and efficiency required to win the war. Unfortunately this is only considered in times of war.
In a resource-based economy all of the world's resources are held as the common heritage of all of Earth's people, thus eventually outgrowing the need for the artificial boundaries that separate people. This is the unifying imperative.
We must emphasize that this approach to global governance has nothing whatever in common with the present aims of an elite to form a world government with themselves and large corporations at the helm, and the vast majority of the world's population subservient to them. Our vision of globalization empowers each and every person on the planet to be the best they can be, not to live in abject subjugation to a corporate governing body.
Our proposals would not only add to the well being of people, but they would also provide the necessary information that would enable them to participate in any area of their competence. The measure of success would be based on the fulfillment of one's individual pursuits rather than the acquisition of wealth, property and power.
At present, we have enough material resources to provide a very high standard of living for all of Earth's inhabitants. Only when population exceeds the carrying capacity of the land do many problems such as greed, crime and violence emerge. By overcoming scarcity, most of the crimes and even the prisons of today's society would no longer be necessary.
A resource-based world economy would also involve all-out efforts to develop new, clean, and renewable sources of energy: geothermal; controlled fusion; solar; photovoltaic; wind, wave, and tidal power; and even fuel from the oceans. We would eventually be able to have energy in unlimited quantity that could propel civilization for thousands of years. A resource-based economy must also be committed to the redesign of our cities, transportation systems, and industrial plants, allowing them to be energy efficient, clean, and conveniently serve the needs of all people.
What else would a resource-based economy mean? Technology intelligently and efficiently applied, conserves energy, reduces waste, and provides more leisure time. With automated inventory on a global scale, we can maintain a balance between production and distribution. Only nutritious and healthy food would be available and planned obsolescence would be unnecessary and non-existent in a resource-based economy.
As we outgrow the need for professions based on the monetary system, for instance lawyers, bankers, insurance agents, marketing and advertising personnel, salespersons, and stockbrokers, a considerable amount of waste will be eliminated. Considerable amounts of energy would also be saved by eliminating the duplication of competitive products such as tools, eating utensils, pots, pans and vacuum cleaners. Choice is good. But instead of hundreds of different manufacturing plants and all the paperwork and personnel required to turn out similar products, only a few of the highest quality would be needed to serve the entire population. Our only shortage is the lack of creative thought and intelligence in ourselves and our elected leaders to solve these problems. The most valuable, untapped resource today is human ingenuity.
With the elimination of debt, the fear of losing one's job will no longer be a threat This assurance, combined with education on how to relate to one another in a much more meaningful way, could considerably reduce both mental and physical stress and leave us free to explore and develop our abilities.
If the thought of eliminating money still troubles you, consider this: If a group of people with gold, diamonds and money were stranded on an island that had no resources such as food, clean air and water, their wealth would be irrelevant to their survival. It is only when resources are scarce that money can be used to control their distribution. One could not, for example, sell the air we breathe or water abundantly flowing down from a mountain stream. Although air and water are valuable, in abundance they cannot be sold.
Money is only important in a society when certain resources for survival must be rationed and the people accept money as an exchange medium for the scarce resources. Money is a social convention, an agreement if you will. It is neither a natural resource nor does it represent one. It is not necessary for survival unless we have been conditioned to accept it as such."
Reading through all of this, I have to say that the majority of the reactions here are well justified.
I opposed this whole plan from the start..... bailing out these asspuckers with tax payer's money was the wrong thing to do. Bush didn't do a damn thing about it until the very last minute..... then he comes up with this dumbass plan and tries to pressure and rush everybody to pass it before most could even look at all the small print.
Many complained that there was very little done to help the people who were given these loans..... perhaps it's both the banks and the person who accepted the loan's fault..... but why do you bail out one and not the other? Why do you bail out the idiots who should have known better and not bail out the people who usually rely on the bank's experience and advice who do this for a living?
Many complained that there was no regulation or any form of control on how these banks would use this 700 billion dollars......... clearly I and many others were correct, considering these idiots just got treated like royalty at the middle classes' expense and there seems to be nothing anybody can do about it.
Guess what people...... the markets are still dropping all around the world.... this 700 billion has done nothing..... now all these tax payers are sh*t out of luck, while these banks continue to do what they have been doing.
I oppsed this bailout for many reasons..... the above was a list of the main reasons.
Eagle.... I know I may have come off from time to time as someone who hates the US's guts and I shoot my mouth off about a lot of the things that has ended up at the US's feet...... but I would hope that this might clarify that I don't directly hate the general population of the US..... I hate your government and those in decision making positions for continually d*cking you guys and everybody else over for their own little games of entertainment.
The rich get richer and the poor lose their homes...... and in the US, it seems like there's very little you guys can do about it.
That is what pisses me off the most..... I have a few things I disagree with in your guy's way of life..... but I simply can not stand this corrupt and inconsiderate governmental power.
Your electorates got plenty of mail and phone calls from their voters voicing how pissed off they were or will be if they vote this bill in...... most of them actually listened to the people who gave them their jobs and voted against it.
Then Bush and the rest of the clown party put more pressure on those electorates and fear mongered their asses into voting it in a second time..... totally ignoring those they are supposed to represent......
..... and this is what resulted in them doing what they did.
Nothing.
If it was me..... I sure as hell wouldn't be waiting to see what the next election would bring..... I'd be organizing big time! I would be completely livid over this government for the last 8 years of continual screw ups and allowing this monkey man as president. I would be using every piece of that constitution to drag his ass out in the town square and let the public have their way with him and his thugs, Rice Crispy, Dickhead Chain Smoker and BamBam McPowell.
I sure as hell wouldn't allow this current form of government to continue on, and I'd enact a new form of government, with more of the public's control over it, with more rights given to the people and not those who currently think they got an easy seat with a big paycheque.
Hell.... I'm just about there for this government of ours in Canada..... one more screw up....... One More! Come on Harper...... Come on Dion..... Come on Layton...... whoever gets into power after next week...... you best god damn do your jobs and do them right, or so help me God (if there is one) If you guys screw us over, I will do everything within my power to make sure you never have a position in government ever again.
I've already laid out the plans for a new form of democracy that can and will work, that gives the power...... All the power back to the people of the nation....... and those elected and put into the government..... you will make very few decisions without the approval of the people of the nation...... you're there to do a job, not play games and play around trying to make us think you're doing your job.
All this Bullsh*t in both the US and Canada..... and elsewhere around the world simply has to stop..... the people of each nation have to make it stop..... because those idiots in power won't stop themselves, that's for damn sure!
Taxpayer money isn't the employees concern.
Either pay up or screw you, they will work for someone who isn't going under and will pay the bill. Then the taxpayers are doubley screwed.
If your boss told you "by the way, you may lose your pension and be fired at any moment, but please stay with us even though we aren't going to do anything for you but we do need you to stay afloat ourselves", would you stay?
Their problems, the problems of the taxpayer money etc, are not your problems.
Another reason a bailout is a stupid and bad idea.
Interesting concepts you have above.
While I do agree with much of what was stated above, many explinations on how to make those things work and come into reality seem to be missing.
Much of the above seems to follow along the same lines as what I have been planning with my New Direct Democracy plan. Perhaps you would like to read up on this and give me your thoughts when you can.
Much of what you said above can be implimented into the plans I have been laying out for the last number of years, can fill in a few gaps and vice versa. My plan has been a work in progress for sometime now..... since I was 21 or so when I first thought about it. I have known that my plan can not nor will not work without additional input and assistence from many other people, such as yourself.
Your plan has many good points and objectives that would help everybody, not just a slect few who has the power and greed to suit their own objectives, but there are a few things that need to be worked on..... very much like my own system.
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/c...3-new-direct-democracy-government-revamp.html
^ When you have the time, it would be nice if you could read through this plan and give me your thoughts. I would like to move forward with this someday and make sure things get better, not stay the same or gradually get worse.
The combination/integration of both your above concept and mine would make a stronger proposal, a system that could function even better and would be more appealing to more people then at present.
Well it should be the concern of the people that run the company. The money that they are handling belongs to the taxpayer and there is going to be over sight. There are plenty of qualified people out there that will be looking for jobs.
No I wouldn't stay if my boss said that and I can assure you that these folks who just got treated to a 5 star luxury vacation weren't told that either.
The taxpayers are already doubly screwed. The common person will not benefit from this bailout and the market is still sliding.
The bailout is looking more and more like a waste.
....and another eighty + billion dollars in this farce/bailout/rescue..
Source: MSNBC this morning
IMO----the hole that they are trying to get out of is just getting deeper.
Praxius, I wish I could lay claim to Jacque Fresco's plans for the future but unfortunately I'm not that visionary. As you can see in my posting above, I am quoting from the Venus Project webpage. I take no responsibility for the quote above, other than to say I support his ideas. It is refreshing to listen to people talk about fixing our messed up world rather than the usual finger pointing and blame being tossed around.
By the way, I read your posting on revising the system some time back. Some of your ideas are sound.
It's difficult for most to think outside the box. I think Fresco's plan could revolutionize society and make a much better world for all of us.
As for the CEO's, let them eat cake...or drink wine...or whatever it is they do for enjoyment. Their time is at hand. Time to pay the piper.
By the way, I read your posting on revising the system some time back. Some of your ideas are sound.
It's difficult for most to think outside the box. I think Fresco's plan could revolutionize society and make a much better world for all of us.
As for the CEO's, let them eat cake...or drink wine...or whatever it is they do for enjoyment. Their time is at hand. Time to pay the piper.
So would a French-Style Revolution..... which would also explain why the French have been villianized in the US by Bush.... keep their ideas far away from the public.
Just making some talking points here and want to respond. I was unsure of the bailout. I felt something needed to be done but then reading of the massive CEO Golden Parachutes, how the govt. will take the benefits of a market up turn and the money does not go back to the people even though the people will fund it.
Now seeing that even though the bail out is approved we are still seeing losses in the market. What is the bailout doing? How does it help?
The question is... Why were they given these loans to begin with?
Not everyone can own a house. Not everyone is responsible enough to do so. Loans were given to people with bad credit and no credit because of a threat from the govt. to do so. Start giving loans to poorer folks or we, the government, will start regulating and coming down on you. That was idiotic.
Nope. No regulation whatsoever. No plan on how the money will be distributed. I would imagine that these companies now have to apply for a govt. loan to get their piece and it seemed as if AIG did just that and got a multi billion dollar boost.
So naturally the most logical thing to do was take the folks to a resort for spa treatments, expensive banquets and golf to "discuss" their next strategy.
Yes. Everywhere is sliding. I still have hope that some good will come out of it. What else can we do.
I still think you don't like Americans in general.
For the first time though we did see the rich lose a little more. However when you are worth millions of dollars it won't matter too much for them.
Hey, it is our way of life. If we hold our heads high through all of this that is just how we are here. There are plenty of Americans that do nothing but complain and say how bad things are with no real solutions.
My Rep was one of them. He is a former union iron worker, turned State Rep, then Democrat Congressman. One of the only Democrats I proudly vote for every time he is up for reelection. He listens because he has been where we are.
Bush and the GOP are responsible but no more responsible than the Democrat Party. They have been in power for two years and did nothing to stop this. They did not regulate or take any action to regulate when there were warning signs awhile back. In fact it was the Dems that pushed to have these loans given to people who could not afford them.
Both parties are responsible...nobody has clean hands here.
The next President is going to have a tough time and if things do not get better he is going to be a 1 term President.
Well that isn't going to happen. The people do have control over the govt. but they never exersize that control. We can vote these folks out every few years but the same folks go back to congress each and every time. Even at the local level. The same people get voted in no matter how incompetent.
You know, when this bailout was passed they were saying how much the country, the world needed for this to go through. But even though we were looing at an economic Armegedon it was business as usual. Along with the bill were sweeteners and pork. Grants for ridiculous things like "Wool Research" and "Children's Wooden Arrows". More perks for individual constituents on the taxpayers dime. A talk show host said that there is always room for government waste no matter how dire things are.
The concepts may not be your idea origninally, but much of mine arn't not completely original either..... what is original is how one puts it all together in a way that actually works. You seem to understand the principles well enough..... just because you and I are just the average citizen, doesn't mean we or many others do not have the potiential of making something great.
People have to give themselves more credit then they do.
(Added: Something that our governments have placed in our minds for quite a long time)
I bet they feel that it was owed to them as well. I bet they did not feel one iota of regret taking full advantage of massages, golf, etc.
Freaking Corporate Welfare.
I should point it is unlikely most of those people receiving the spas received any corporate welfare.
Stockholders do, not employees. If the spa had been for Janitors and Clerks, would you object to the practice?
Its not the employees fault or responsability (so long as they did their job well) what is going on. They owe the Taxpayers nothing because the Taxpayers havent' given then ****. In fact, AS taxpayers they are in essence now paying for their annoying co-workers who didn't do their job to keep working and bailing out the stockholders who decided to invest in get rich quick schemes.
@ Eaglesmack
The Democrats have not been in power for 2 years, They do not have the power to overturn a presidential Veto. Hence they are in the end still powerless.
@ Mt_Pockets1000
It is a fallacy that a "resource economy" is any different than a currency economy. Currency is merely a way to facilitate the exchange of resources.
Historical resource economies are just as much, in fact more so, profit driven. The need to control resources is greated than in a currency economy because of the lack of easy exchange.
Greed for resources and using them for power operates exactly the same way as greed for currency and using it for power.
The Democrats have not been in power for 2 years, They do not have the power to overturn a presidential Veto. Hence they are in the end still powerless.
@ Mt_Pockets1000
It is a fallacy that a "resource economy" is any different than a currency economy. Currency is merely a way to facilitate the exchange of resources.
Historical resource economies are just as much, in fact more so, profit driven. The need to control resources is greated than in a currency economy because of the lack of easy exchange.
Greed for resources and using them for power operates exactly the same way as greed for currency and using it for power.
Fair enough.... to clarify, when I have issues with the general public in the US, it's usually in reference to them allowing these things to continue, allowing themselves to be screwed over by their government, allowing someone like Bush to continue uninterupted in his screwed up plans...... to me, a level of blame should be placed.... but overalll it's the government I put direct blame on for 90% of the issues happening in the US and around the world.
As it goes for things like gun control, health care, certain laws, concepts etc..... those are debates for another time, as I imagine you have similar stances on Canada..... which I try not to hold against you or others in the US..... you're used to your way of life, as I am used to mine.
But that doesn't mean I hate yer guts.
I would love to see you guys take action and drag these arseholes through the alleys for what they did and to enact a stronger, more supportive and more controled government then what currently seems to be in place..... but as I said a few times in the past..... that's for you guys to do.... it's your country not mine.
So in regards to the above, I'll ask you directly for a personal opinion.... if you had the opportunity and the means to change your current form of government, would you?
Agreed, however I still believe the Republicans have more responsibility in this issue then the Democrats..... sure the Dems have been in Congressional Power for two years now...... but Bush as president and the Republicans have been in C.Power for much longer and have had more arm wrestling strength then the Democrats to make the right decisions.
In most of the news I have been following, there have been many bills and such passed in Congress that Bush vetoed when it corssed his desk because it didn't suit his desires for one reason or another. When you have one government organization work and pass something, only to have one guy come along and cancel all that work for whatever reason, that doesn't sound right to me..... in any government/country.
I don't really like either party, but when it comes to the lesser of two evils and when it comes to placing direct blame on those who have had a part in something, I see the republicans more responsible then the Dems overall.
Very much like how I hate the Liberals and Conservatives in our government.... they are pretty much the same thing, just playing the good cop/bad cop routine for the public.
During the Conservative's run in our government in the last couple of years, I hold them responsible for a few chunks of things currently happening here in our country...... however, I have some big issues with the Liberals during that same government, such as them walking out on votes on numerous occasions and not doing their damn jobs because it would have ended up in an election call if they did...... they wern't ready, so instead of doing their jobs as they should, they played political games for their own benifit.
Both are to blame for certain situations, just as in the US.... as I see it anyways.
That very well could be true...... but as a citizen of your nation, when things don't get better, but get worse, or at the least, stay the same as they are now...... how long will you or others put up with it before you demand some form of change from the current system?
4 more years? 8 more years? 12 more years? 16?
When is enough enough..... or is that a question that can be easily answered?
And that's something that bugs me..... to me, that seems like a flaw in the system.
Indeed.
I am not sure if Canada has the same system where things can be added onto a bill like the above before it is passed. I haven't heard of any situations before... or perhaps nobody talks about it......
But if this does occur here, I'll be one pissed citizen..... more so then normal.