AIG

Putting aside the issue of who caused what....there is plenty of blame to go around....

The political reality is that the current Congressional and public obsession with AIG ultimately is likely to play right into the hands of Obama and the Democratic Congress by creating even greater public support for tougher regulations of banking/financial institutions and higher taxes on the top income earners....both of which the Republicans have long opposed but now find themselves either having to continue to defend their "free market/anti-regulation, anti-tax" agenda with no public support or compromising at the expense of one of their core constituencies.

Sounds like a good scenario to me.

[classicman]

Why should we put aside the issue of transparency and holding people accountable? Isn't that what this administration, in part, got elected to do? We now know Geithner & Dodd were responsible, they admitted it. Very clearly they should be held accountable.

Originally Posted by classicman

Why should we put aside the issue of transparency and holding people accountable? Isn't that what this administration, in part, got elected to do? We now know Geithner & Dodd were responsible, they admitted it. Very clearly they should be held accountable.

Who is putting aside the issue of transparency and accountability?

There is more transparency now than when Bush first approved and signed the TARP bill and Paulson administered its implementation.

Accountability?

Do you want Geitner fired for this one small "transgression" rather than judge him on the entirety of his work to date as Treasury Secretary, including his plan to prevent further housing foreclosures by assisting those responsible home owners who are facing financial hardship because they may have lost their job or seen the value of their home decline?

Do you want Dodd to face a Senate ethics inquiring even though the act of inserting the particularly language in the bill does not rise to the level of an ethics investigation. If that is the case, shouldnt we hold the Republicans in Congress accountable as the ones who opposed including any limits on executive compensation in the original legislation.

I stand by what I wrote...the ultimate outcome is likely be what Obama and the Democrats want and the Republicans have fought - tougher regulation of the financial services/banking sector and higher taxes on the top income earners.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

I stand by what I wrote...the ultimate outcome is likely be what Obama and the Democrats want and the Republicans have fought - tougher regulation of the financial services/banking sector and higher taxes on the top income earners.

Sure. Keep telling yourself that. Eventually you will believe it.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Sure. Keep telling yourself that. Eventually you will believe it.

Yep..I absolutely believe we will see tighter regulations of the financial services and banking industries....the American public is demanding it...despite the Republican opposition to more regulation.

And we'll see the end of the Bush tax cuts on the top income earners...with no complaints from that same public, despite the Republican opposition.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Yep..I absolutely believe we will see tighter regulations of the financial services and banking industries....the American public is demanding it...despite the Republican opposition to more regulation.

And we'll see the end of the Bush tax cuts on the top income earners...with no complaints from that same public, despite the Republican opposition.

I read you. You want to ignore Demoncratic responsibility for the mess. Nice try.

[lookout123]

Define the bush tax cuts you'd like to see end.

Define the top income earners you'd like this to apply to.

Please.

Originally Posted by lookout123

Define the bush tax cuts you'd like to see end.

Define the top income earners you'd like this to apply to.

Please.

By Bush tax cuts, I mean the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003.

Both were intended to phase out in 2010.

The Republicans want to extend them in the current form and make them permanent; Obama and the Democrats want to let then expire as was stipulated in the legislation when they were enacted, return the top tax bracket to the pre-2001 level and enact new tax cuts focused primarily on the the middle two tax brackets...the middle class.

[classicman]

The reality is not going to change. transparency ...
It is a good, no a great thing. We seem to have it to some degree.

As far as accountability...

Where is the outcry about Dodd obviously lying? Good grief. Now we have Geithner blaming some unnamed "staffers." Thats BS.
but fine then, whoever it is that was responsible - yes, I want them top be held accountable - R, D, it doesn't matter. After all thats what this administration got elected on - Change. What we have now is the transparency and no one being held accountable. This is the same shit as always.

What should happen to Dodd? I don't know. Should he be stripped of his chair? Maybe - This all happened on his watch.
As far as Geithner - I really don't know that either. It would look really good and go a long way if Obama, who said he was gonna get to the bottom of this, would do something now that he has. HIS guys are responsible. Since then we haven't heard a thing.
Just more diversions like you are doing right now.

What I want is some accountability. An example set and made. Words backed up - I don't care if its a public reprimand a slap on the wrist or public flogging....something.

So you want Geitner fired?

Or you want to change the standards for Senate ethics violations in order to "get" Dodd? That is the only way he could be stripped of his chairmanship.

I honestly dont know what you want.

[lookout123]

Or you want to change the standards for Senate ethics violations in order to "get" Dodd? That is the only way he could be stripped of his chairmanship.

No I certainly don't want that. I don't support changing rules to hose any individual even if I don't like him very much. Of course, our congress doesn't feel that way or they wouldn't have ramrodded a 90% tax on the bonuses that were paid out because of their own incompetence.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by classicman

What I want is some accountability. An example set and made. Words backed up - I don't care if its a public reprimand a slap on the wrist or public flogging....something.

Originally Posted by Redux

So you want Geitner fired?

Or you want to change the standards for Senate ethics violations in order to "get" Dodd? That is the only way he could be stripped of his chairmanship.

I honestly dont know what you want.

WTF? I stated quite clearly that I would like some action taken. Be it symbolic, punitive, criminal, public, personal.... Something, anything. Dock the offenders a months pay, I don't give a shit. Right now it would go a long way.

Originally Posted by classicman

WTF? I stated quite clearly that I would like some action taken. Be it symbolic, punitive, criminal, public, personal.... Something, anything. Dock the offenders a months pay, I don't give a shit. Right now it would go a long way.

IMO...rather than "symbolic slaps on the wrist" against Geitner or Dodd, which is all that can be taken short of firing Geitner and the voters in CT tossing Dodd out in two years, is this type action:

A bill (pdf) to add new compensation/bonus restrictions to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act for financial institutions that receive or have received a capital investment by the Treasury Department under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) or the Housing and Economic Recovery Act (which covers Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks). While such a capital investment is outstanding, recipients will be prohibited from:

* Paying any bonus to any employee, regardless of when any agreement to pay a bonus was entered into;
* Paying any compensation that is “unreasonable or excessive,” as defined in standards set by the Treasury Secretary
* Paying or arranging to pay any retention payment, bonus, or other supplemental payment that is not directly based on performance-based standards set by the Treasury Secretary.

The legislation will be “marked-up” in the Financial Services Committee on Tuesday, March 24th, and the full House of Representatives will be able to consider the legislation the following week.

[lookout123]

OK, Redux, I understand the names for what you are talking about. Now I'm asking you to define what the appropriate tax levels should be and who they should apply to. If you'd care to provide some logic for it that would be cool too, because you know I'll probably ask for it.

Originally Posted by lookout123

OK, Redux, I understand the names for what you are talking about. Now I'm asking you to define what the appropriate tax levels should be and who they should apply to. If you'd care to provide some logic for it that would be cool too, because you know I'll probably ask for it.

I thought I made it clear....return to pre-2001 tax levels as is currently mandated in the 01 and 03 laws and re-focus tax cuts on those most facing financial hardship....that would not be the top tax bracket who did pretty well in the 90s under the old tax rate.