• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dismay on Wall Street over Obama pay cap

danarhea

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Wall Street is not happy about Obama's pay cap provision in the welfare money that they are receiving from the Government. Says Patrick O'Hare, "The salary limit is "still a hefty sum to be sure, and the spirit of the order certainly has popular appeal, but it's a slippery slope when the government puts restrictions on how much an individual can earn in the private sector".

To this statement, I answer, who said that this is now the private sector? You are begging for and accepting government money, and since that money belongs to the taxpayers, it is now the public sector for all those welfare loafers who choose to ask for it and accept it. And guess what else? When you choose to be a welfare loafer, instead of pulling your own weight in society, you have to abide by the rules of receiving welfare. No lavish parties, no big bonuses, no golden parachutes, and no big salaries. YOU ARE ON WELFARE, and this is not going to be business as usual. You can't have it both ways. Your exorbitant lifestyles are no longer acceptable when you choose going on welfare over being a productive member of society. Live with it.

Article is here.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
Wall Street is not happy about Obama's pay cap provision in the welfare money that they are receiving from the Government. Says Patrick O'Hare, "The salary limit is "still a hefty sum to be sure, and the spirit of the order certainly has popular appeal, but it's a slippery slope when the government puts restrictions on how much an individual can earn in the private sector".

To this statement, I answer, who said that this is now the private sector? You are begging for and accepting government money, and since that money belongs to the taxpayers, it is now the public sector for all those welfare loafers who choose to ask for it and accept it. And guess what else? When you choose to be a welfare loafer, instead of pulling your own weight in society, you have to abide by the rules of receiving welfare. No lavish parties, no big bonuses, no golden parachutes, and no big salaries. YOU ARE ON WELFARE, and this is not going to be business as usual. You can't have it both ways. Your exorbitant lifestyles are no longer acceptable when you choose going on welfare over being a productive member of society. Live with it.

Article is here.
Click to expand...

They are lucky he doesn't make them work for minimum wage.
 
danarhea said:
Wall Street is not happy about Obama's pay cap provision in the welfare money that they are receiving from the Government. Says Patrick O'Hare, "The salary limit is "still a hefty sum to be sure, and the spirit of the order certainly has popular appeal, but it's a slippery slope when the government puts restrictions on how much an individual can earn in the private sector".

To this statement, I answer, who said that this is now the private sector? You are begging for and accepting government money, and since that money belongs to the taxpayers, it is now the public sector for all those welfare loafers who choose to ask for it and accept it. And guess what else? When you choose to be a welfare loafer, instead of pulling your own weight in society, you have to abide by the rules of receiving welfare. No lavish parties, no big bonuses, no golden parachutes, and no big salaries. YOU ARE ON WELFARE, and this is not going to be business as usual. You can't have it both ways. Your exorbitant lifestyles are no longer acceptable when you choose going on welfare over being a productive member of society. Live with it.

Article is here.
Click to expand...

Good thoughts.
 
I doubt they'd have any problems finding competent executives with the cap. Hopefully, the days of living on high the hog are gone, and the disparity of pay between CEO and grunt have closed in. No one should make 20 x or more than anyone in a corporation... not even Steve Jobs.

Kudos to Obama and his admin. for adding these provisions.
 
Middleground said:
I doubt they'd have any problems finding competent executives with the cap. Hopefully, the days of living on high the hog are gone, and the disparity of pay between CEO and grunt have closed in. No one should make 20 x or more than anyone in a corporation... not even Steve Jobs.
Click to expand...

That's not up to you. Not in a world where privacy and freedom mean anything, anyway.
 
Ya know what pisses me off? With all the wall streeters crying free market this and that.I have to keep 25k in my day trading account. How many average people have that much cash on hand. Freemarket? Well only for the rich.
 
Harshaw said:
That's not up to you. Not in a world where privacy and freedom mean anything, anyway.
Click to expand...

When you accept welfare money, you are no longer as free as you want to be. With welfare comes rules. If they don't want curbs placed on their freedoms, all they have to do is quit asking the government to support them.
 
danarhea said:
When you accept welfare money, you are no longer as free as you want to be. With welfare comes rules. If they don't want curbs placed on their freedoms, all they have to do is quit asking the government to support them.
Click to expand...

See my post #5 above. And besides, that's not what Middleground is talking about. She's talking about any corporation.
 
Harshaw said:
See my post #5 above. And besides, that's not what Middleground is talking about. She's talking about any corporation.
Click to expand...

In essence, I agree with you. If a company is doing all the things it should, and is in good financial shape, the government has no business dictating how they should run their business. On the other hand, if the company begs for public money, then as far as I am concerned, the public can bend over and say "if you want the money, then kiss my ass and I will give it to you", and the company officers can then choose to either kiss ass or quit their positions and become door to door vacuum cleaner salesmen.

Ridiculous example, of course, but they still have freedom of choice. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
Apply this to yourself.
X simply blames you. X can get along by destroying you.
Y says you make more money then him. So Y gets the excess you made.
Z thinks you waste money..so Z wil now run your finances.

Obamas college classroom mentality Communism is just as full of crap as Communism in general.


Obama is trying to cash in on the naive view of many at the bottom(usually young college kids) that ripping down the top will benefit them when it will only hurt them more.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
In essence, I agree with you. If a company is doing all the things it should, and is in good financial shape, the government has no business dictating how they should run their business. On the other hand, if the company begs for public money, then as far as I am concerned, the public can bend over and say "if you want the money, then kiss my ass and I will give it to you", and the company officers can then choose to either kiss ass or quit their positions and become door to door vacuum cleaner salesmen.
Click to expand...

If that's what it contracts for by accepting the gov't check, then so be it.

But Barney Frank wants to ride "anger" all the way to dictating to all businesses what they're allowed to pay their execs. That's no world I want to live in.

And that's absolutely not the right way to go about making law in a free society.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom