I heard Neil Cavuto explaining to Bill O’reilly why Tarp CEO salary caps are a bad thing. He said that it would be the first step toward lowering pay for non-tarp execs. Good! Unless you are curing cancer or deciphering the meaning of life, you don’t deserve to make 20 million a year. He also said brain drain would be a side effect. Where are they gonna go to get more favorable treatment and compensation? If they do leave, fine. Just don’t let the door hit you in the wallet on the way out!

I love hearing wealthy guys tell me why other wealthy guys need to keep their wealth. Keeps me regular.

On-point don’t forget the anti-rape bill amendment attached that got voted on where 30 republicans voted no on. Where the government would not work with a company whose victims are raped and cannot being suit against the company or its employees that did it.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-14-2009/rape-nuts

Here a republican defending why it’s none of our business and the government to expect defense contractors to not work with contractors who let women get raped.Guess what company this was? (haliburton)

Many of the same republicans where outraged by Acorn giving advice to the fake pimp, but fine when the company is actually doing it.

Also about Exc Pay, should be shifted to stocks and long term gains instead of short-term quartly gains. Don’t buy the brain drain argument since this are the guys who ran the company to the ground. (Guess the private market is not always better than the government on running things).

When they say such they are saying the people who came up with with short term ways to game the system, cheat the system may leave, leaving people who may not make the company massive amounts money in the short term.

Also don’t we have a employment crisis where people are looking for jobs? I bet there many people who could step in the place of this people who left there companies. My company paid back the money a week before the rules kicked in and is back to what it was in 2007, making risky bets, expecting to capture another 13% of the market, outsource(offshore) even more jobs to India. My fathers a CEO in Cali and he tells me about how CEO’s and top brass sit on each others boards and nearly impossible for one to vote on the others salary being lower even if the performance is horrendous .

We should tax the crap out of these greedy bastards of the top brass. But funny that the rich has made a media blitz against this, special interest at its best.

CEO pay … In any list it is as interesting what is missing as what is included.
Golden Sacks (pun) I couldn’t find them mentioned anywhere.
It couldn’t be that BO is surrounded by GS ex’s.
Conspiracy? Don’t need it – ’sui generis’.
Little historical fact – in the hearings after the ‘29 crash all the bankers and wall street mucky mucks were hauled in front of congressional committees except one – Goldman Sachs. They had a man next to FDR pulling strings.
My girl friend wants me to say that you have a great show, which is true.
Good luck
Jim

Someone said the human animal was born with a sense of fairness, to wit, Cory, Michael, minding the store for us. I woke up to hear the House Minority leader (oh, my memory, the senior black representative from I think South Carolina) saying the House will have a Public Option, Medicare-E (for everybody) and that private insurers can offer competitive plans and/or gap insurance to cover what the public plan lacks. That makes my day. They “dither,” he says, over the form, not the fact.

Tom,

Can you ask your panel what they think the chances are that the Immigration reform promised by the Obama campaign will even get off the ground in his first term? Do you see the debate even getting started after this brutal health care stand-off?

What’s up with Obama dithering on Afghanistan? Why has he already abandoned his original strategy? Why is it taking so long to come up with a new one? How many more American soldiers have to die before he gets serious?

If you took money from the government and haven’t paid it all back, then you get what you deserve. Don’t like it, get a job somewhere else. Where would have been after a bankruptcy?

The leader of this great country seems to be napping as well. He only wakes up for fundraisers for guys like Dodd who get sweetheart deals on their mortgages. How can I get one of them?

James Clyburn, House Whip (see whip’s office!), was telling Tell Me More (Michel sp? Martin) about the progress of health reform. He’s Democrat, not minority. (To fix my previous post.)

Due to dithering remarks by Cheney, The young Turk said it all,

Cheney failed, Cheney didn’t do jack, don’t forget the 26k troops in afgan during the Bush Admin.

Top General in afghan General David M. during the time nailed Cheney, and Retire General Paul Eddin Slaps Cheney around as well

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYCFjgV6fKo

Gotta watch

AIG and other bonuses have been defended as contractually obligated before the bail-out. But an early move by ailing auto makers was to demand relief from union contracts. Why cannot the government simply void these agreements as a condition of support?

This is simple! Tax the financial sector! The financial sector is a secondary market in the economy, they don’t directly build or produce a tangible product. So having a large financial sector is not healthy. Tax them, tax financial transactions and reduce the size of the financial sector.

I wonder if the Northwest pilots “did it for the show.”
They would have known that the voice recorder is going to be looked at by the FAA and most likely released to the public. If they have something they wanted to go public, maybe they are willing to risk their jobs to get it out.

If they were asleep then their explanation of being in an intense discussion is pretty lame and easily debunked.
Ray Tucker
Kentucky

Wealthy Germans petition for higher taxes:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8321967.stm

In listening to your show today (and the interview with US Chamber VP yesterday) I came to the a realization that reform (in our current climate) would actually create greater entrepanurialism (and better productive business models) than the ones currently in place…

For example with the salary discussion – share holders should embrace reform as well – when major compensation is not tied to performance then clearly you don’t have great performance (why would you?).

But when you tie compensation to performance you will see greater performance (and return to CEO and Shareholders) which is a much sounder business model…)

Therefor reform in this case will lead to the CEO and team working on businessmodels that return results that DO have significant consequences to that CEO

Promote reform as a tool that leads to great business models in our current time….

Peter

I think the comments by Cheney reflect a more profound problem in the Republican opposition to Obama and the Democrats: there is no standard bearer, no one with credibility to make their arguments. They are having to dig up the pit bull that should have been dead and buried because they cannot identify anyone willing to carry the standard at the moment. It is politically too risky.

Myra

Two words for Cheney: WAR CRIMINAL

A public option doesn’t really go far enough: we need a single-payer system. Let’s start with every pregnancy: full government-provided care, and the resulting infant would be covered for the rest of his/her life. Pregnancy is easy to diagnose, and cheating would be difficult.

Such a plan would cover increasing numbers of Americans–but also allow the insurance companies plenty of time to get their act together and prove they can do better!

Having read the careless and foolish way the US blundered in Afghanistan in the masterful piece “The Mind of the Taliban” 10/5 newsweek, I want the US to take time deciding to send in troops. Even people on the right (George will and others) have concerns about a expanding our role). Also, Obama should get HUGE KUDOS for the fantastic GI Bill that helps our forces. Cheny/Bush ignored VA hospitals, underarmed our forces in Iraq etc. Obama is supporting US troops more than prior administration w/thought and money.

At a minimum it is apparent that Obama has learned nothing from the US experience in Afghanistan the last 8 years. How could anyone say anything different given that he has only made the situation there worse, much worse? This guy is not ready for prime time and he proves it everyday. I am no longer proud of my country.

Congress gets a hate crime law passed, yet the criminals in Congree run free. Under reported income and assets, quid pro quo property deals in their districts, cash in their freezers, back-deals with hedge funds, unpaid taxes, discounted loans, PAC graft, special interest funding, junkets with lobbyists, …

When are we going to wake up to this stuff?

I’m detecting a little pusillanimity in the panel this ayem:

Unregulated Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (Predator drones) assassination programs by CIA operators with their joysticks in Virginia.

Uncertainty among many that the “casus belli” of 9/11/01 is anything other than a fraud.

A general, McChrystal, running the Afghan war, who was involved in the Pvt. jessica Lynch fraud AND the coverup of Cpl. Pat Tillman’s “non-judicial execution.” I wouldn’t give credence to a word the man says. I’ve served a bit in Vietnam for the US Draft, was an officer records clerk, and know that many of our officers, certainly then and definitely now, are not fit to lead.

A former vice president attacking the current administration when that veep, Cheney, should be in the dock, facing prosecution for violations of the FISA law, facing prosecution, subject to the death penalty, for the torture program which apparently killed about 170 US-held prisoners of war. You’ve had Bruce Fein and others on the program discussing these measures of “nation of laws, not men,” accountability, etc. See 18 USCode §2441, the US War Crimes act.

Sickness insurance: Listening to the NPR/This American Life Money Team on the topic of health insurance. The most interesting fact that I did not know before–Maryland has a program that sets ALL the medical reimbursement rates. And, the counter-intuitive note that competition actually does NOT force health insurance premium/prices down. That takes me back to a single-payer, bigger VA hospital, bigger Medicare, bigger Federal Employees’ Insurance programs, which our intrepid 537 Elected Public Servants–Pres, veep, 100 Senators, 435 Reps–have the benefit of.

(And, oh by the way, there’s the proposal in Jack Beatty’s Atlantic magazine, under the headline: How the American Health Care System Killed My Father. The approach suggested therein seems to me to be very promising–and I’ve not heard it discussed, whether by “MoveOn” and other ‘populist’ outfits, or MOCs, or lobbyists… (wassup widdat?)). I expect more from OnPoint’s Friday recap.

bw

I keep an eye out for what I consider Democratic National Committee posts here that flaunt/tout something like a cheap Republican position. By “cheap” I mean one that’s easy to diss, easy to break, easy to best. And then someone here (Democrat, Independent, or Republican with better perspective) will be glad to come out and smack down the cheap punch, providing the DNC fodder for the next time they need to counter such points.
“I’m not proud of my country,” because of “Obama.” Okay you win. (No free punch-back from me.)
As to the Cheney pieces played this hour, it sounds like someone carefully intoning creed, things to be re-tailed, repeated at large. But creed is belief, not truth. Is it his way of speaking? Why does he need to declaim? I can be very dismissive.

I expect more from a Nobel prize winner, but the rest of America seems to want to give him a pass. Rising unemployment, debt, deficit, deaths … At some point it’s Obama’s problem. How much more time are you going to give him so he can get up to speed. Hillary was ready day one! And she’ll be even more ready in 2012!! This guy can only find his way to the Rose Garden to read some teleprompter. I’ve learned my lesson quicker than he’s learned anything.

Address correction and minor edits to previous post:

President Obama is not dithering…quite the contrary; he is doing what he said he would do: work with multinational forces on a global problem. While 9/11 was a defining moment for Americans (much as Pearl Harbor was for WWII), major cities across the world have been sustaining attacks by terrorist groups for years. Working with our allies and with Pakistan is what we ought to be doing…a failure to snuff terrorist activities in that region will be a failure for all of the countries involved.

As for Cheney’s public comment: there would be nothing more juicy from a partisan standpoint than to turn this into Obama’s war…I suggest that you get back to your target practice as your shots have historically been way off.

Delaney, are you listening right now to Cornel West, pointing out that Lincoln came to office as a politician, but became a statesman thanks to the Abolitionist movement and people pressuring him to greatness? And he wishes Obama were not being pressured by “oligarchs — and corporate elites and plutocrats”? West had me laughing, but how to change that situation?
In the last analysis, it is not “Obama’s problem,” and it is a mistake to sit back and wait to see something to regret. It is our problem.
I endorse all Katharine Layton’s points.
And if Pakistan has to switch from organizing against India as Primary Enemy to seeing its extremists as their problem (as well as ours), whew! It’s almost as good as Iraqis turning against al Kaida. With Pakistan’s military FINALLY going into Waziristan, which brought out the Pakistani Taliban to such an extent, bombing a school, military headquarters, in cities — Pakistan will likely come to see success through a lens we can share. It may happen. A turning point for us all. But last time they tried to purge the Taliban in that territory (about a year ago?) they were defeated. Where is my rosary.

Obama has had one great success. His program that encourages families to spend more time together is working wonders. Parents and their children are really getting the chance to be together as a family. It’s a huge success by any measure. I’m not sure what the Democrats are calling this government program, but Republicans call it unemployment. They just don’t get it!

The decline in Barack Obama’s popularity since July has been the steepest of any president at the same stage of his first term for more than 50 years. The American people have come to their senses.

Cory, your first post (about “keeping regular”) cracked me up.

O.M. Hubbard, two words (WAR CRIMINAL) for Cheney doesn’t do it for me. I would prefer DRAFT-DODGING DEFERMENT-LOVING CHICKENHAWK NEOCON NAPOLEAN-COMPLEX NITWIT. You can add WAR CRIMINAL if you want, probably at the end.

Doggone it all! I forgot REVOLTING. Next trip…

Clearly, Cheney’s speech about Afghanistan, at the republican lovefest this past Wednesday (where he and Scooter Libby got awards), was intellectual dishonesty to the power of ten. Not only was it grand hypocrisy (his own policies toward Afghanistan showed lack of concern for what was happening there and escalated the problems), but it also shows disingenuousness in what he supposedly fears. Cheney is no idiot, and if he is so concerned about the lives of US Service men and women, and ‘hurting our allies and enbolden[ing] our adversaries,’ etc., then why publicly brand Obama’s approach as ‘dithering,’ ‘waffling,’ being ‘afraid,’ ‘unable to supply the commander on the ground with the troops he needs to complete his mission,’ ‘…easier to blame the Bush Administration than support our troops,’ that Obama’s approach ‘…endangers troops and hurts our cause.’ Wouldn’t this kind of rhetoric fan the flames of our enemies and ‘embolden’ them?

Arbitrage just lets very wealthy people sap money from the economy without contributing or producing anything. Who cares if Wall Street doesn’t get paid as much it thinks it deserves? I certainly don’t.

Jay Newton-Small spoke in error when she said that ‘Pelosi said” she did not have support for the strongest form of the public option.

In fact, anonymous sources told Politico that she did not have the votes for it, which people in her office quickly refuted, saying they are still counting. There is currently a ton of grassroots work trying to deluge the few relevant members of Congress who are still undecided.

Meanwhile, Politico has been forced to keep correcting their story throughout the day. For instance:
http://www.politico.com/livepulse/1009/HAPPENING_NOW__Pelosi_publicly_whipping_on_robust_public_option.html?showall

I find it quite disconcerting that no one raised any questions, let alone furor, when congress demanded that workers at the big 3 auto companies take significant pay cuts before they would bail the car makers out. Ultimately the car makers got a fraction of the bail out the banks did. The banks got hundreds of billions and only the very highest paid will have to take cuts??

It’s interesting to see the same old “reliable” liberals only want to talk about the Republicans when Democrats control the White House, Senate, and the House. Given the terrible performance the Democrats have displayed at effectively running the country, it’s no wonder liberals don’t want to be indentified with their own Democrat party.

What does the American auto industry, the health care industry, wall street firms and the banking industry all have in common; other than they were all on the brink of failure?

These are industries where the production side of the industry is no longer a free market where there are many producers competing head-to head to earn the business of consumers, or customers, of the industry. Instead each of these industries are controlled by a relatively small number of very large corporations that have transformed these markets into oligopolies.

Adam Smith when he discussed “rational self interest” and competitive markets in his book Wealth of Nations, envisioned many consumers buying goods and services from many producers with everyone looking out for their self-interest. By keeping markets “free”, producers pursue rational self-interest and this will best meet the needs of the consumers and the citizens of our country. Under this system of free markets, what is in the producers self interest is to provide the best product possible to the consumer, while striving to be a low cost producer for their niche.

This consolidation of markets began in the late 1960’s early 1970’s in the auto industry when it was transformed from a free market to an industry that was controlled by three giant corporations and one union. As this transformation was occurring the auto company’s and auto union’s self-interest became separated from what the consumer wanted and/or needed. Competition between the companies broke down and this gave an opening for foreign competition to enter our markets and the beginning of the end of the American auto industry as we knew it.

Other industries saw what was happening in the auto industry and saw that government was not objecting so naturally they followed the same path with little concern on any ones part that we were losing our free market system to a more centralized market system of oligopolies. As a result we now have major markets where the producing entities self-interest is not always in line with the self-interest of the consumer. What is in the self-interest of the entities in these industries is to keep the oligopoly alive. Thus the creation of special interests and lobbyists.

These oligopolies have bought the protection of our representatives in Washington and state capitals. I am always baffled by the fact that corporations and unions cannot vote in this country, however they are allowed to buy votes with their contributions.

We lost track of a key ingredient that Adam Smith identified as necessary in order for “rational self interest” to work. There must be many producers. In too many industries, the number of producers has shrunk and the ones remaining have gotten “too big to fail”. This is true in the auto industry, the banking industry, wall street, health care and will soon be true in the computer software industry.

When discussing the health insurance industry proponents for this specific oligopoly site the fact that the bigger the insured pool, the lower insurance premiums can be. However, I submit that this “bigger pool savings” is more than offset by the fact that the rational self-interest of the companies is not totally aligned with the rational self interest of the insured. The insurance industries self-interest is to keep the oligopoly alive. The self-interest of the insured is to have as many insurance companies as possible clawing to get his business and thus ringing out all excessive cost, including unconscionable salaries for top executives, to earn the consumers business.

The liberals are right that regulation is required and conservatives are right that a free market is the best way to meet the needs and wants of our citizens. The common ground is that regulation is essential to make our markets more free. We have too many industries where companies have too much power, their self interest is not aligned with the citizens of this country and they are too big to fail.

It is time that our politicians breakaway from the shackles of oligopolies, special interests groups and lobbyists. Use antitrust legislation to bring back free markets.

I am glad to see Steve’s post. I only would add that in health insurance, the insurers practice cherry-picking so that the “business” of an individual with costly medical needs is not competed for — at all. The model of rational self-interest is all off there.
I would like to add that I was distressed yesterday to hear that the Wall Street bonuses have to be high or those individual will leave that bank; they will see “no future” where they are. I have to ask what “future” requires something like $120 million as a retirement gift? Is that money for bribing elected officials, for “buying influence”? If they want “financial advice” on how to live on far less, I will offer it — for free.
But beyond that, we need, in a rather crucial way, both internationally and nationally, to use less nonrenewable energy, the kind we get into irrational international entanglements in order to protect access to. We need to go green fast, something that could start a whole new set of jobs and profits.
So what do we do? We give people $8,000 to buy old-style homes, homes that are heated in 20th century ways. We give people tax rebates if they will buy cars — cars that use less gas, yes, but cars that will be extinct soon if we open our eyes to what is really needed. We need to stay off those roads, actually. And for food? We need to be eating home-grown food, food that is not shipped thousands of miles, food that is not more or less poisoned by what I call Big Farma, agriculture that thinks less of the consumers than of bottom line. So we subsidize agriculture — do we do that right?
I’m getting cynical. Real cynical.

I forgot to say: A lot of us complain a lot about the power of big corporations, their influence in swaying elections and then lobbying for legislation.
HOWEVER, more or less the same lot of us are probably angling for the benefits and security that “good” jobs with those corporations provide. And the government, in defending those corporations, is helping us in our angling for those jobs.
I think the solution lies in what’s probably happening anyway, with much grinding of teeth and clenching of the economic and legislative gears. A lot of people of necessity are launching their own projects, and some will become corporations in their own right. Or maybe we will redefine ourselves into smaller units: buy your food locally; you have better control, the middleman costs are less. Jobwise, likewise, beware of any employer whose address is a PO box in the Caribbean. (Excuse the sarcasm.)

Ellen, the big corporations are doing what they are supposed to do; looking out for their self-interest. The problem is the government is not doing what it is suppose to do; look out for our self interest and making sure that free markets are truly free.