Obama spanks Wall Street.

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by classicman

Because you have the right to potentially DEFEND yourself.

Not the point. I have the right to bear arms. Self-defense is not necessary to justify that right.

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by tw

Which is why everyone has the right to own 155 mm howitzers.

Yep. But have you ever tried to clean one? Plus, the neighbors bitch when you plink at stuff behind the house.

TGRR,
Lives in AZ, where we actually CAN (and do) target shoot from the back porch.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by classicman

Because you have the right to potentially DEFEND yourself.

Originally Posted by TGRR

Not the point. I have the right to bear arms. Self-defense is not necessary to justify that right.

Yes it is. Thats the basis of it. If you disagree, then why you have "the right to bear arms."

[classicman]

Back on topic....

Thain ordered to disclose Merrill bonus details

A New York judge has ruled that John Thain, former chief executive of Merrill Lynch, will have to name names in a state probe into bonuses paid out at Merrill in late December, just days before Bank of America acquired the firm.

The ruling is a victory for New York attorney general Andrew Cuomo, who is investigating why Merrill paid out $3.6bn in bonuses during a year in which the firm reported losses of $28bn, and a potential setback to BofA, which had warned Mr Thain not to discuss details of the payments.

Mr Thain, who gave a lengthy deposition to state prosecutors last week about the bonuses, refused to discuss individual pay-outs, according to court filing from Mr Cuomo’s office on Monday. The filing indicated that Mr Thain’s lawyer, Andrew Levander, told prosecutors: “I don’t want to have him sued by the company for their saying he’s violating someone’s privacy.”

New York state supreme court justice Bernard Fried ruled that Mr Thain would have to answer the attorney general’s questions, which he is expected to do on Tuesday, but said specific information about individual bonuses need not be made public.

According to Mr Cuomo’s court filing, Merrill Lynch established its $3.6bn bonus pool on December 8, and did not reduce it during the following weeks, even though Merrill’s pre-tax operating losses turned out to be $7bn more than anticipated at that time. For the fourth quarter, Merrill Lynch recorded $21bn in pre-tax operating losses.

When the Financial Times disclosed the early pay-outs last month, BofA blamed the payments on Mr Thain. But evidence has emerged that Ken Lewis, BofA chief executive, and members of his transition team had a greater degree of knowledge of the matter than they indicated.

According to people at Merrill Lynch, two senior members of BofA’s team were involved in the bonus process. All three BofA executives have been issued subpoenas by Mr Cuomo’s office.

A spokesman for Mr Thain said: “Bank of America directed Mr Thain not to discuss specific bonus details. We continue to co-operate fully.”

In response to the ruling, BofA said, “[The] ruling [is] consistent with company’s position that the information is private and should remain private to protect rights of individuals and the competitive position of company”.

I think the right to privacy went out the window when they used public money to pay out bonuses while posting a huge loss. Is this some sort of new math or something?

(thanks tw, but we do NOT need another Enron accounting wacko-extremist cut and paste post)

[sugarpop]

So you think privacy comes before truth, in the public good? And ethics violations? I'm sorry, but I think Thain should go to prison, and anyone at BOA complicit in this. Those people took public funds, because they had to. They caused this mess. NO, they created it. I'm fucking sick of the greed of rich people. (not that all rich people are greedy. but the ones who aren't wouldn't be hiding.)

[classicman]

What are you talking about?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

So you think privacy comes before truth, in the public good? And ethics violations? I'm sorry, but I think Thain should go to prison, and anyone at BOA complicit in this. Those people took public funds, because they had to. They caused this mess. NO, they created it. I'm fucking sick of the greed of rich people. (not that all rich people are greedy. but the ones who aren't wouldn't be hiding.)

Good God, is that a repeated rant?

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by classicman

What are you talking about?

Sorry, I misread your post. My bad.

[classicman]

Obama's Radicalism Is Killing the Dow

The illusion that Barack Obama will lead from the economic center has quickly come to an end. Instead of combining the best policies of past Democratic presidents -- John Kennedy on taxes, Bill Clinton on welfare reform and a balanced budget, for instance -- President Obama is returning to Jimmy Carter's higher taxes and Mr. Clinton's draconian defense drawdown.

Mr. Obama's $3.6 trillion budget blueprint, by his own admission, redefines the role of government in our economy and society. The budget more than doubles the national debt held by the public, adding more to the debt than all previous presidents -- from George Washington to George W. Bush -- combined.

To be fair, specific parts of the president's budget are admirable and deserve support: increased means-testing in agriculture and medical payments; permanent indexing of the alternative minimum tax and other tax reductions; recognizing the need for further financial rescue and likely losses thereon; and bringing spending into the budget that was previously in supplemental appropriations, such as funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The specific problems, however, far outweigh the positives. First are the quite optimistic forecasts, despite the higher taxes and government micromanagement that will harm the economy. The budget projects a much shallower recession and stronger recovery than private forecasters or the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office are projecting. It implies a vast amount of additional spending and higher taxes, above and beyond even these record levels. For example, it calls for a down payment on universal health care, with the additional "resources" needed "TBD" (to be determined).

Mr. Obama has bravely said he will deal with the projected deficits in Medicare and Social Security. While reform of these programs is vital, the president has shown little interest in reining in the growth of real spending per beneficiary, and he has rejected increasing the retirement age. Instead, he's proposed additional taxes on earnings above the current payroll tax cap of $106,800 -- a bad policy that would raise marginal tax rates still further and barely dent the long-run deficit.

Increasing the top tax rates on earnings to 39.6% and on capital gains and dividends to 20% will reduce incentives for our most productive citizens and small businesses to work, save and invest -- with effective rates higher still because of restrictions on itemized deductions and raising the Social Security cap. As every economics student learns, high marginal rates distort economic decisions, the damage from which rises with the square of the rates (doubling the rates quadruples the harm). The president claims he is only hitting 2% of the population, but many more will at some point be in these brackets.

A long, but interesting look from the "other side"

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by classicman

Obama's Radicalism Is Killing the Dow

A long, but interesting look from the "other side"

ho hum. While I agree that Obama may be a little too optimisitic about how long the recession will last and how strong the recovery will be, he gets creamed for not being positive enough and using too much negative languange about where we are now, and now he is getting creamed for being positive. He just can't win. Maybe he should just keep his mouth shut. God forbid we have a president who actually tries to be honest with us.

[Undertoad]

You could have read the article.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

A long, but interesting look from the "other side"

Then add facts to that citation to see it starts with a lie based in a half truth.

The illusion that Barack Obama will lead from the economic center has quickly come to an end. Instead of combining the best policies of past Democratic presidents -- John Kennedy on taxes,

John Kennedy's tax cut created a short term economic gain - followed by a harmful downturn. But again, those who want to spin myths ignore the lessons of history. Any economic boom created by money games means economics takes revenge later. Tax cuts to create economic wealth explains bad economic numbers for the next four years.

Basic knowledge does not come from a political agenda. Had classicman read that first sentence, then he knew the author was flawed. Tax cuts to create economic wealth is only believed by those too niave to learn and too ignorant to see throught extremist propaganda.

Any harm to the Dow today is directly traceable to George Jr and wacko extremists politics. Same people who promoted the Kennedy tax cuts as a solution back then are a major reason for economics taking revenge today.

Yes, Obama is being accused of talking negatively because that is what the economics who have studied these conditions in detail have been warning. Do you want Obama to tell the truth - or lie? If classicman had grasped the citation, then he immediately saw a political agenda that contradicts what this nation's best economist were saying only months ago in San Francisco.

A GDP drop of 9% which takes two years to reach bottom. Unemployment averages 7% and keeps dropping for five years. Housing prices take five years to drop 36%. Government debt rises 86%. Scary part is that America has already surpassed some of these averaging numbers. However statistical variations for 'average' GDP and unemployment numbers are large.

Thank you George Jr for debts we must still pay for such as the $1trillion for "Mission Accomplished".

George Sr was not that dumb. George Sr got the world to pay for Desert Storm. Economics is now taking revenge for wacko extremist economics just like economics did 1975 and 1979 for 1968 and 1970 Vietnam, Nixon's refusal to raise taxes, and numerous economic incentives that created Gerald Ford's stagflation.

Any economic pain today is directly traceable to eight year of wacko extremists who even said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter". Guess what. Deficits do matter. But Cheney was preaching to those who never learned from history. Deja vue for those who would again deny these lessons and again promote Kennedy tax cuts. Economics again taking revenge. Only the ignorant and naive would blame Obama. And yet that is what wacko extremists (Palin supporters) are doing.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

add facts Kennedy's tax cut economic gain - harmful downturn spin myths ignore lessons money games revenge later Tax cuts bad numbers
Basic knowledge political agenda. Tax cuts economic wealth niave ignorant extremist propaganda.
directly traceable George Jr wacko extremists . Kennedy tax cuts revenge.
Obama talking truth lie? political agenda contradicts
GDP drop reach bottom keeps dropping Housing prices drop debt rises. Scary part
George Jr "Mission Accomplished" George Sr not dumb
Desert Storm taking revenge wacko extremist Vietnam, raise taxes, and economic incentives created stagflation.
economic pain directly traceable wacko extremists "Reagan proved deficits don't matter" Cheney preaching never learned Deja vue deny lessons tax cuts. taking revenge. ignorant naive bblame Obama. wacko extremists.

Maybe just maybe we need a little short term help to stem the tide of rising unemployment, reduced monetarycirculation, lowered production and falling housing prices. Maybe tax cuts do help - even if its in only for the short term to keep more people working and to buy some time. Just for the short term till the long term plan kicks in... Maybe?

China February Auto Sales Rise 25% After Tax Cuts

March 10 (Bloomberg) -- China vehicle sales surged 25 percent in February, the first gain in four months, after the government cut taxes on some models, helping the country extend its lead as the world’s largest auto market this year.

Sales of passenger cars, buses and trucks climbed to 827,600. The tally in the first two months rose 2.7 percent to 1.56 million, compared with a 39 percent decline to 1.35 million in the U.S.

China has halved retail taxes on small cars and drawn up plans to give out vehicle subsidies in rural areas to revive demand after auto sales rose at the slowest pace in a decade last year. Combined with the country’s wider 4 trillion yuan ($585 billion) economic stimulus package, the policies have caused General Motors Corp. to roughly double its forecast for China’s nationwide auto market growth this year.

“Consumers are regaining confidence because of the government’s stimulus policies,” said Ricon Xia, an analyst at Daiwa Research Institute in Shanghai. “Still, vehicle sales may fluctuate in the coming months.”

Passenger-car sales, including sport-utility and multipurpose vehicles, rose 24 percent last month to 607,300, the association said. In the first two months, the tally climbed 5.8 percent to 1.22 million.

Sales of cars with engines or 1.6 liters or less jumped 19 percent in the first two months. Their market share gained by 7.71 percentage points.

Rising sales and production cuts by automakers has caused the nation’s stockpile of unsold vehicles to fall to the lowest in two years last month, the grouping said.

Commercial-vehicle sales fell 6.9 percent in first two months as the sector received less government support than passenger cars, the group said. Truckmakers are now seeking similar stimulus plans, it added.

Originally Posted by classicman

Maybe just maybe we need a little short term help to stem the tide of rising unemployment, reduced monetarycirculation, lowered production and falling housing prices. Maybe tax cuts do help - even if its in only for the short term to keep more people working and to buy some time. Just for the short term till the long term plan kicks in... Maybe?

China February Auto Sales Rise 25% After Tax Cuts

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act includes such a short-term tax cut:

Sales Tax Deduction for Vehicle Purchases. The bill provides all taxpayers with a deduction for State and local sales and excise taxes paid on the purchase of new cars, light truck, recreational vehicles, and motorcycles through 2009. This deduction is subject to a phase-out for
taxpayers with adjusted gross income in excess of $125,000 ($250,000 in the case of a joint return). This proposal is estimated to cost $1.684 billion over 10 years

In fact, overall, about 1/3 of the provisions (and costs) of the bill are tax cuts and other tax relief/incentives.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

You could have read the article.

ummm, I did.