AIG - Page 12

TheMercenary · 03-20-2009, 12:04 PM

Quote:

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.

03-20-2009, 12:12 PM

Quote:

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.

lookout123 · 03-20-2009, 12:30 PM

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

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

Please.

classicman · 03-20-2009, 12:37 PM

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.

03-20-2009, 12:43 PM

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.

03-20-2009, 12:49 PM

Quote:

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.

lookout123 · 03-20-2009, 12:51 PM

Quote:

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.

lookout123 · 03-20-2009, 12:53 PM

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.

03-20-2009, 01:05 PM

Quote:

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.

lookout123 · 03-20-2009, 01:09 PM

I know your words, now I want to know the math and who it affects in something other than soundbyte friendly terms.

Who deserves to keep less of their own money? Why do they deserve to keep less?

Who deserves to keep more of their own money? Are they actually just keeping more of their own money or are they actually getting refunds in excess of what they paid?

TheMercenary · 03-20-2009, 01:10 PM

Quote:

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.

classicman · 03-20-2009, 01:11 PM

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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.

03-20-2009, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

I know you're words, now I want to know the math and who it affects in something other than soundbyte friendly terms.

Who deserves to keep less of their own money? Why do they deserve to keep less?

Who deserves to keep more of their own money? Are they actually just keeping more of their own money or are they actually getting refunds in excess of what they paid?

I'll say it again.

I want the current law administered as intended when enacted...the 01 and 03 tax cuts returned to pre-2001 levels as stipulated in the legislation.

Those who want it extended should justify it.

lookout123 · 03-20-2009, 01:18 PM

Can you really not read english or are you this big of a fuckstick in verbal communication too?

I have simply asked some questions that you only want to answer with media friendly soundbytes.

03-20-2009, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

Can you really not read english or are you this big of a fuckstick in verbal communication too?

What is so hard to understand about abiding by existing law?

But I wont call you a fuckstick for not understanding such a simple concept.

Ok...we're done.

03-20-2009, 12:30 PM	#168
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	Define the bush tax cuts you'd like to see end. Define the top income earners you'd like this to apply to. Please. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

03-20-2009, 12:37 PM	#169
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	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. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

03-20-2009, 12:53 PM	#173
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	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. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

03-20-2009, 01:09 PM	#175
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	I know your words, now I want to know the math and who it affects in something other than soundbyte friendly terms. Who deserves to keep less of their own money? Why do they deserve to keep less? Who deserves to keep more of their own money? Are they actually just keeping more of their own money or are they actually getting refunds in excess of what they paid? __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

03-20-2009, 01:18 PM	#179
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	Can you really not read english or are you this big of a fuckstick in verbal communication too? I have simply asked some questions that you only want to answer with media friendly soundbytes. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

03-20-2009, 12:43 PM	#170
Redux Guest Posts: n/a	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.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)