Hang a few, and if the rest don't straighten up....
"Obama seeks to increase oversight of executive pay; Rules target all financial institutions" by Stephen Labaton, New York Times News | March 22, 2009
WASHINGTON - The Obama administration will call for increased oversight of executive pay at all banks and Wall Street firms as part of a sweeping plan to overhaul financial regulation, government officials said.
The outlines of the plan are expected to be unveiled this week in preparation for President Obama's first foreign summit meeting in early April. Increasing oversight of executive pay has been under consideration for some time, but the decision was made in recent days as public fury over bonuses has spilled into the regulatory effort....
And CUI BONO? The regulations will be rewritten to serve globalist interests. Makes you wonder about the agenda-pushing MSM coverage, doesn't it? AIG the sacrificial lambs for MORE GLOBALISM?
The new rules will cover all financial institutions, including those not now covered by any pay rules because they are not receiving federal bailout money. Officials say the rules could also be applied more broadly to publicly traded companies. Last month, as part of the stimulus package, Congress barred top executives at large banks getting rescue money from receiving bonuses exceeding one-third of their annual pay.
Beyond the pay rules, officials said the regulatory plan is expected to call for a broad new role for the Federal Reserve to oversee large companies, including major hedge funds, whose problems could pose risks to the entire financial system.
It will propose that many kinds of derivatives and other exotic financial instruments that contributed to the crisis be traded on exchanges or through clearinghouses so they are more transparent and can be more tightly regulated.
How about GETTING RID of THEM altogether?
And to protect consumers, it will call for federal standards for mortgage lenders beyond what the Federal Reserve adopted last year, as well as more aggressive enforcement of the mortgage rules.
The plan is being put together in advance of the meeting of the Group of 20 nations in London, an annual event that is expected to be dominated by the global financial crisis and discussions about better oversight of large financial companies whose problems could undermine international markets.
What did I say earlier?
Important parts of the plan remain under debate, including how to regulate the shadow banking system that Wall Street firms use to package and trade mortgage-backed securities, the so-called toxic assets that many banks hold and that are blamed for causing the credit crisis.
Yup, NOTHING is going to "CHANGE" on Wall Street!! They are going to go RIGHT BACK to the WAY THEY WERE DOIN' BIDNESS, folks!!!!
Officials said the plan would also call for increasing the levels of capital that financial institutions need to hold to absorb possible losses. But, in a sign of the fragility of the economic system, officials said the administration would emphasize that those heightened standards should not be imposed now because they could discourage more lending. Rather, they would be put in place after the economy began to rebound.
"The argument some are making is that they don't want to be stepping on the gas pedal and the brake at the same time," said Morris Goldstein, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and former top official at the International Monetary Fund.
Administration officials are also debating how tightly to supervise hedge funds. A broad consensus has emerged among regulators and administration officials that hedge funds must be registered and more closely monitored, probably by the Securities and Exchange Commission. But officials have not decided how much the funds will have to disclose about their investments and trading practices.
A central aspect of the plan, which has already been announced by the administration, would give the government greater authority to take over and resolve problems at large, troubled companies that are now not regulated by Washington, like large insurance companies and hedge funds.
So the TAXPAYER will be acting as the BAILOUT of LAST RESORT, 'eh?
That proposal would, for instance, make it easier for the government to cancel bonus contracts like those given to executives at the
Yeah, this AIG OUTRAGE and SCANDAL is REALLY STARTING to STINK as an AGENDA-PUSHING ITEM, folks! That's why the MSM is all over it!!!! To initiate and inauguarte the fascist Fed takeover of this nation.
Much of the plan would require the approval of Congress, where divisions are already forming over how best to overhaul financial industry oversight.
That's not what I've read or heard!
Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, who heads the House Financial Services Committee, said he believed that giving the government new authority to take over troubled companies could be adopted by the House relatively quickly, particularly after the furor over the AIG bonuses.
These guys! Everything has to be done quickly during this crisis! That is HOW WE GOT INTO THIS MESS, gas bag!!!!!!!!!!
"This would give the government the same powers that you would get as if the company were in bankruptcy," Frank said in an interview.
Then LET 'EM GO BANKRUPT and keep the TAXPAYER OUT!!!!
--more--"
Of course, look at what you get the next day:
"Proposal to tax bailout bonuses draws scrutiny; White House is cool to bill; Could violate constitution" by Farah Stockman, Globe Staff | March 23, 2009
WASHINGTON - Days after President Obama pledged to explore "every single legal avenue" to recover $165 million in bonuses paid to executives at bailed-out insurance company AIG, administration officials yesterday shied away from an effort in Congress to heavily tax the bonuses.
Related: Obama Received a $101,332 Bonus from AIG
Jared Bernstein, Vice President Joe Biden's economic adviser, told ABC's "This Week" yesterday, that a bill the House passed overwhelmingly on Thursday may go too far and could be unconstitutional because it uses the tax code "to surgically punish a small group."
Oh, NOW they care about the Constitution and the illegal tax code!
Pfffft!!!
Of course, they can SURGICALLY REWARD FAVORED INTERESTS, can't they?
Pfffft!!!
"That may be a dangerous way to go," he said of the bill, which slaps a 90 percent tax on executives who make more than $200,000 per year at firms that have taken more than $5 billion in government funds. White House chief economic adviser Christina Romer told CNN's State of the Union that a tandem effort in the Senate which broadens the bill to include firms that have not taken federal funds may not be looked upon favorably by the White House....
How's that for CHANGE, huh? INSULTED YET, Amurka?
Populist outrage over bonuses for AIG, which received $170 billion in federal rescue funds and paid out one one-thousandth of that money in retention bonuses required by the employees' contracts, has become a serious political challenge for Obama, who is trying to generate public support for an unprecedented $3.6 trillion budget at a time of rising alarm over federal spending.
In an interview last night on CBS's "60 Minutes," Obama said Wall Street bankers should "get out of New York" and meet people who are happy to make $70,000 a year to understand the populist outrage. But he did not commit to signing any legislation that would retrieve the bonuses.
He's a showman, nothing more.
Obama joked that "the only thing less popular than putting money into banks is putting money into the auto industry," explaining his laughter as "gallows humor."
Oh, he JOKED AGAIN, did he? What an elite scum! You been around the rich and powerful too much yourself, 'bamer!
"If we did nothing you could still have some big problems," he said. "There are certain institutions that are so big that if they fail, they bring a lot of other financial institutions down with them."
FDIC says we need to get away from that kind of thinking. Here's an idea: END the EMPIRE and SHUT DOWN the WAR MACHINE!!!!!
Administration officials said yesterday that Obama sees a distinction between preventing bonuses from being paid in the future and trying to get back money that had already been given out.
Should have NEVER GIVEN IT TO THEM, and NO MORE BAILOUTS!!!!!
Yesterday, Republican Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire said Congress was going too far in its attempts to get the AIG money back through hastily-crafted new taxes.
"People are disgusted and outraged, as they should be," he said on CNN's "State of the Union." "But let's not overreact in a way that basically has the Congress grabbing its pitchforks, and charging up the hill, and abusing what is a core authority of a government, which is the authority to tax its people."
Yeah, this isn't a WAR, TYRANNY, TORTURE, SPYING, or a LOOT JOB, so DON'T ACT HASTY, Congress! These guys are fucking incredible! They DESERVE the TAR, FEATHER, DUNK bit!
Speaking on ABC's "This Week," Senator Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, agreed.
"As angry as I am, I agree with my colleague that we need to be careful," she said. "The problem with the Senate bill is it is so wide in its scope that it would apply to tens of thousands of employees all across this country who had nothing to do with getting us in this mess."
Oh, NOW they need to be careful!! When it comes to GETTING THE LOOT BACK from the CROOKS who STOLE IT they need to BE CAREFUL!!!
See: AIG: Insults and Arrogance
Collins said instead of passing the tax bill, Congress should pressure the employees to voluntarily give the money back by threatening their jobs or future funding for AIG.
But Representative Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who heads the House banking committee, said Washington should consider more steps to recoup the money, including launching a shareholder lawsuit. The government currently owns about 80 percent of the insurer, a position Frank said should be used "to assert our rights."
Yup, the TAXPAYER is going to have to PAY to SUE so THEY can GET THEIR MONEY BACK!! Isn't that precious?
How about RECALLING the BAILOUT $$$ instead?
The controversy over the bonuses comes at a delicate time for Obama's economic team, which is trying to outline bold new priorities as it deals with the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The Congressional Budget Office just issued a report estimating that this year's deficit will surpass $1.8 trillion and leave the nation much deeper in debt than White House budget makers have concluded.
Oh, White House "underestimated" the deficit, did they? Always working for the banks.
Yesterday, Gregg - who backed out of becoming Obama's commerce secretary because of what he described as irreconcilable policy differences - issued some of his strongest criticism yet of Obama's economic policy, saying the president's budget would lead to "bankruptcy for the United States."
We are already there -- and that's not including the impending collapse of the dollar.
"If we maintain the proposals which are in this budget over the 10-year period that this budget covers, this country will go bankrupt," he said. "People will not buy our debt; our dollar will become devalued."
Yup. I just wonder why you guys are only worried about that now.
