Fannie and Freddie Execs get 12.79 million in Bonus Pay

[Pony Boy]

Fannie and Freddie, approved $12.79 million in bonus pay
(is this a great country or what?)

The Federal Housing Finance Agency, the government regulator for Fannie and Freddie, approved $12.79 million in bonus pay after 10 executives from the two government-sponsored corporations last year met modest performance targets tied to modifying mortgages in jeopardy of foreclosure.

The executives got the bonuses about two years after the federally backed mortgage giants received nearly $170 billion in taxpayer bailouts — and despite pledges by FHFA, the office tasked with keeping them solvent, that it would adjust the level of CEO-level pay after critics slammed huge compensation packages paid out to former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines and others.

Securities and Exchange Commission documents show that Ed Haldeman, who announced last week that he is stepping down as Freddie Mac’s CEO, received a base salary of $900,000 last year yet took home an additional $2.3 million in bonus pay. Records show other Fannie and Freddie executives got similar Wall Street-style compensation packages; Fannie Mae CEO Michael Williams, for example, got $2.37 million in performance bonuses.

Including Haldeman, the top five officers at Freddie banked a combined $6.46 million in performance pay alone last year, though a second bonus installment for 2010 has yet to be reported to the SEC, according to agency records. Williams and others at Fannie pocketed $6.33 million in incentives for what SEC records describe as meeting the primary goal of providing “liquidity, stability and affordability” to the national market.



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/67292.html

[Garcia Bronco]

I don't have a problem with this. 13 million is nothing compared to the debt we face as a country. Further, these are typically contractual obligations for these bonus and frankly, if you want talent...you have to pay. Given that these two GSE are a financial mess, money is the only way to entice the talent to work there and these are modest payouts compared to other banks.

[Smiling Assassin27]

If this doesn't pi$$ you off, nothing will.

Fannie took $120B in bailout funds, then turned around and gave their execs $13M in bonuses. Odd that the President said nothing about these bonuses but ripped the financial sector when they took less money and did the same thing.

What makes this doubly sad is that Fannie and Freddie just requested another $6B today in bailout money. This is the kind of crap that EVERYONE--OWS, TEA, and all in between--are against.

[Smiling Assassin27]

I don't have a problem with this. 13 million is nothing compared to the debt we face as a country. Further, these are typically contractual obligations for these bonus and frankly, if you want talent...you have to pay. Given that these two GSE are a financial mess, money is the only way to entice the talent to work there and these are modest payouts compared to other banks.

I'd normally agree, but the GSE's have a horrible history of paying bonuses and getting no talent. Frank Raines and Jamie Gorelick come to mind. GSE's have not been where talent goes but have typically been where politicians send their pals to rake in money in thanks for their donations.

If they're gonna play fast and loose with taxpayer money like that, then cut 'em loose and privatize them and treat them like a real lender.

[Pony Boy]

I don't have a problem with this. 13 million is nothing compared to the debt we face as a country. Further, these are typically contractual obligations for these bonus and frankly, if you want talent...you have to pay. Given that these two GSE are a financial mess, money is the only way to entice the talent to work there and these are modest payouts compared to other banks.

Ed Haldeman was only there for two years and is retiring with a 2.3 million dollar bonus. I think we need to entice someone who intends to stick around a little longer, not just to pad their retirement fund with taxpayer dollars.

[Garcia Bronco]

Ed Haldeman was only there for two years and is retiring with a 2.3 million dollar bonus. I think we need to entice someone who intends to stick around a little longer, not just to pad their retirement fund with taxpayer dollars.

Personally I'd work that in the contract, but I agree with you.

[Garcia Bronco]

Remember too that that bonus before loop holes and what not are taxed at around 45 percent by the feds.

[Pony Boy]

John McCain just made this statement,

"It's been proven time and time again that Fannie and Freddie are synonymous with outright corruption and fraud and the federal regulator has the audacity to approve $12 million in bonuses to people who make $900,000 per year," McCain charged, as Freddie Mac on Thursday reported a $4.4 billion loss for the third quarter and announced it is seeking $6 billion from the Treasury Department. "This body should be ashamed if we let this happen, especially in these economic times."

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/11/03/mccain-calls-ouster-regulator-responsible-fannie-freddie-bonuses

[Pony Boy]

Remember too that that bonus before loop holes and what not are taxed at around 45 percent by the feds.

Agreed but it's just really bad timing, Edward DeMarco had to realize he was throwing fuel on the fire.

[Smiling Assassin27]

John McCain just made this statement,

"It's been proven time and time again that Fannie and Freddie are synonymous with outright corruption and fraud and the federal regulator has the audacity to approve $12 million in bonuses to people who make $900,000 per year," McCain charged, as Freddie Mac on Thursday reported a $4.4 billion loss for the third quarter and announced it is seeking $6 billion from the Treasury Department. "This body should be ashamed if we let this happen, especially in these economic times."

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/11/03/mccain-calls-ouster-regulator-responsible-fannie-freddie-bonuses


To his credit, he was ahead of the curve on this issue by 3 years. He even sponsored reform legislation in 06. Pity that Chris Dodd didn't let it get out of committee.

[chadta]

I don't have a problem with this. 13 million is nothing compared to the debt we face as a country. Further, these are typically contractual obligations for these bonus and frankly, if you want talent...you have to pay. Given that these two GSE are a financial mess, money is the only way to entice the talent to work there and these are modest payouts compared to other banks.

so these contracts have to be honored yet the auto workers who also had contracts had to renegotiate if they wanted any bailout money ?

gotcha

this reminds me of a facebook friend, single mom, on welfare, whos alwasy bragging up her new iphone 4s, it pisses me off to no end too.

[pricejj]

One of the reasons I oppose big government. These people produce nothing, yet are treated like royalty siphoning away taxpayer money and throwing this country deeper into the abyss of debt.

[Popcorn Sutton]

To his credit, he was ahead of the curve on this issue by 3 years. He even sponsored reform legislation in 06. Pity that Chris Dodd didn't let it get out of committee.

To Ron Paul's credit, he predicted the entire housing bubble in 2001.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnuoHx9BINc

[Garcia Bronco]

so these contracts have to be honored yet the auto workers who also had contracts had to renegotiate if they wanted any bailout money ?

gotcha

this reminds me of a facebook friend, single mom, on welfare, whos alwasy bragging up her new iphone 4s, it pisses me off to no end too.

We'll these different contracts have different stipulations. All I am saying is if they Governemnt couldn't get them to redo the contracts then they'd have to pay. And if they didn't pay the Gov would get sued...and they'd lose.

The bailout money...wasn't in the contract with the autoworkers...nor was their contract with the governemnt. It was with GM, who was OOBusiness. You think you have a valid comparison, but you don't.

[ant1999e]

If I'm not mistaken I believe fanny/Freddie are asking for more bailout money.

[Pony Boy]

If I'm not mistaken I believe fanny/Freddie are asking for more bailout money.

Freddie Mac on Thursday reported a $4.4 billion loss for the third quarter and announced it is seeking $6 billion from the Treasury Department.

[ghwk]

I find the excessive executive bonuses and salary to be an entitlement of the worst kind.

[ant1999e]

I find the excessive executive bonuses and salary to be an entitlement of the worst kind.

Especially when they're losing money and asking the government for more.

[Mile High Mojoe]

Fannie and Freddie, approved $12.79 million in bonus pay
(is this a great country or what?)

The Federal Housing Finance Agency, the government regulator for Fannie and Freddie, approved $12.79 million in bonus pay after 10 executives from the two government-sponsored corporations last year met modest performance targets tied to modifying mortgages in jeopardy of foreclosure.

The executives got the bonuses about two years after the federally backed mortgage giants received nearly $170 billion in taxpayer bailouts — and despite pledges by FHFA, the office tasked with keeping them solvent, that it would adjust the level of CEO-level pay after critics slammed huge compensation packages paid out to former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines and others.

Securities and Exchange Commission documents show that Ed Haldeman, who announced last week that he is stepping down as Freddie Mac’s CEO, received a base salary of $900,000 last year yet took home an additional $2.3 million in bonus pay. Records show other Fannie and Freddie executives got similar Wall Street-style compensation packages; Fannie Mae CEO Michael Williams, for example, got $2.37 million in performance bonuses.

Including Haldeman, the top five officers at Freddie banked a combined $6.46 million in performance pay alone last year, though a second bonus installment for 2010 has yet to be reported to the SEC, according to agency records. Williams and others at Fannie pocketed $6.33 million in incentives for what SEC records describe as meeting the primary goal of providing “liquidity, stability and affordability” to the national market.



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/67292.html

:thumbs: Here's a nice supplement to your post.

http://news.investors.com/Article/589858/201110311638/Housing-Crisis-Obama-Clinton-Subprime.htm

[Arkie]

http://danieljmitchell.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/fannie-freddie.jpg

[Garcia Bronco]

This isn't an entitlement though in the sense that you are using term. This is a contractual obligation that niether party has to enter into. SS, the type of entitlement you are refering too, is a choiceless obligation that any worker must participate in.

[chadta]

We'll these different contracts have different stipulations. All I am saying is if they Governemnt couldn't get them to redo the contracts then they'd have to pay. And if they didn't pay the Gov would get sued...and they'd lose.

Like the auto workers contract that says they have a job bank, which pays them 85% of the regular wages when they dont have work to do, to stay home, no time limit.

I dont blame the union for asking for that at all, hell id like to get paid to stay home too, who the heck in management thought it was a good idea to pay people to stay home ? and how many of them lost jobs while getting bailed out ? Oh thats right just like the bankers, they all got big bonuses.


The bailout money...wasn't in the contract with the autoworkers...nor was their contract with the governemnt. It was with GM, who was OOBusiness. You think you have a valid comparison, but you don't.

Both parties had contracts, the banker with the bank, who had the government bailed out.

The auto worker had a contract with Gm, who the government bailed out.

What about the GM executives, they got big bonuses while being bailed out, or is it only union workers contracts that dont count ?

One contract was honored, the other was not, yup clearly they are not at all the same.

[Garcia Bronco]

Especially when they're losing money and asking the government for more.

They're are losing money because of their existence. The whole idea of these two GSE's is bad, while well placed intentions led to their creation as GSE's to help low income people achieve homeownership, it encourages the greed of banks when these GSE's say they'll buy the loans from private banks. At that point the bank is playing with tax dollars. And the BANK has to underwrite some amount of loans to meet Government criteria to get into the Government loan purchase program.

The only way this could even work is the assumption that housing prices ALWAYS go up. Even then its kind of sketchy.

[Spider]

LMMFAO just to much , and these low lifes are the same ones you guys want to protect from taxes ....... Hilarious! .... funny who politics makes you crawl into bed with when you allow yourself to be tied up to a dogma ...... Now admit it ladies , higher taxes on the rich isnt so bad now is it .... Hilarious!

[Garcia Bronco]

I don't have a problem with higher taxes on higher incomes.


What I know is this Spider, Congress will not spend potential increases revenue on the debt. Its not even on their lips. Like right now...Obama wants to raise taxes to buy votes, not to pay down the debt. And right around Christmas, S&P will downgrade us again. And what the market tank.

[Garcia Bronco]

I explained the difference to you. The situations are inclusive in the sense that they both involve contracts. For the purposes of our discussion, that's where the similarities end.

Had GM not be bailed out those Executives at GM would have not gotten paid either for that year. The company would have been out of business, and those bonus would have been another piece of debt depending the type of bankrupcy that was filed.


Like the auto workers contract that says they have a job bank, which pays them 85% of the regular wages when they dont have work to do, to stay home, no time limit.

I dont blame the union for asking for that at all, hell id like to get paid to stay home too, who the heck in management thought it was a good idea to pay people to stay home ? and how many of them lost jobs while getting bailed out ? Oh thats right just like the bankers, they all got big bonuses.




Both parties had contracts, the banker with the bank, who had the government bailed out.

The auto worker had a contract with Gm, who the government bailed out.

What about the GM executives, they got big bonuses while being bailed out, or is it only union workers contracts that dont count ?

One contract was honored, the other was not, yup clearly they are not at all the same.

[Garcia Bronco]

To your first paragraph Chadta, the is the extortionist nature of a Union in the late 20th and this century. They say they won't work unless they get this or that. The decision is mare by those "Manager" with a gun to their head.

[chadta]

I explained the difference to you. The situations are inclusive in the sense that they both involve contracts. For the purposes of our discussion, that's where the similarities end.

But if the banks didnt get bailed out then who pays the bankers ? i mean if the bank is OOB

both parties had contracts with companies that needed to be bailed out, either a contract is a contract or its not.

Had GM not be bailed out those Executives at GM would have not gotten paid either for that year. The company would have been out of business, and those bonus would have been another piece of debt depending the type of bankrupcy that was filed.

If we are to buy your " its a different kind of contract that isnt effected by bailouts" BS, about the banks vs auto industry, the GM bailout was one bailout, there was not a blue collar bailout and a white collar bailout, yet the blue collar contract was ripped up, and the white collar contract which included bonuses was honored, and you dont see a problem with this ?

[Spider]

I don't have a problem with higher taxes on higher incomes.


What I know is this Spider, Congress will not spend potential increases revenue on the debt. Its not even on their lips. Like right now...Obama wants to raise taxes to buy votes, not to pay down the debt. And right around Christmas, S&P will downgrade us again. And what the market tank.

I am not to sure about all of that , to close to election time , but what I do know is 90% of the people here on this thread was biatching about higher taxes on the job creators Hilarious! I forget who was the one that wanted people like these 2yahoos in the story to be classified as middle class :rofl:
I just find it odd these people in this thread defend the hell out of the rich and taxes , until they see what the rest of us see and get pissed off ... I know it is fanny and freedie , so they went all out blasting away , but it is more then frannie and freddie doing this ......

[Spider]

wow Garcia making sense in this thread ....... ;) you are right except( unless I am misreading what your saying ) when it came to unions , Unions in the late part of the 20 th ( well pre 1988) were all or nothing , now they spend most of the time with give and take neg... I dont have a problem with that , the company has ot make a buck to keep everyone employed , but they have ot be fair also

[ant1999e]

They're are losing money because of their existence. The whole idea of these two GSE's is bad, while well placed intentions led to their creation as GSE's to help low income people achieve homeownership, it encourages the greed of banks when these GSE's say they'll buy the loans from private banks. At that point the bank is playing with tax dollars. And the BANK has to underwrite some amount of loans to meet Government criteria to get into the Government loan purchase program.

The only way this could even work is the assumption that housing prices ALWAYS go up. Even then its kind of sketchy.

And all of these thing have been one of the main causes for the mess we're in now.

[Spider]

And all of these thing have been one of the main causes for the mess we're in now.

how so ? some would say cutting taxes while fighting 2 wars is what did it ......

[ant1999e]

how so ? some would say cutting taxes while fighting 2 wars is what did it ......

The housing crisis was a huge hit. Thus everything in Garcia's post plus bad loan agreements helped bring down the housing industry jobs, value and all.

[Garcia Bronco]

But if the banks didnt get bailed out then who pays the bankers ? i mean if the bank is OOB

both parties had contracts with companies that needed to be bailed out, either a contract is a contract or its not.



If we are to buy your " its a different kind of contract that isnt effected by bailouts" BS, about the banks vs auto industry, the GM bailout was one bailout, there was not a blue collar bailout and a white collar bailout, yet the blue collar contract was ripped up, and the white collar contract which included bonuses was honored, and you dont see a problem with this ?

You aren't making sense. You've got you parties all muddled up.

And for the record the TARP funds bailed out the Banks and GM and the most definately bailed out a large percentage of blue collar workers in the auto-industry and TARP bailed out anyone with a 401(k) or other wise anyone with money in the market, AND it bailed out FDIC because once Glass-Stegall was repealed the formerly seperate investment house and the bank are now the same company. Because it bailed out FDIC in a sense, it bailed out any demand deposit holder.

TARP was absolutely needed.

THE SECOND BAILOUT was a Democrat give away in the half that was not a taxcut. Roughly half the second stimulus, otherwise known as the Recovery Act, was a tax cut for just about every person that files income tax with the Federal Government.

[Garcia Bronco]

how so ? some would say cutting taxes while fighting 2 wars is what did it ......

We didn't cut taxes while fighting two wars. Those taxes were cut before we were even attacked. They went into effect about the time we geared up for both in 02 and 03, but the second set of Bush Tax cuts were passed in June of 2001, two months before we were attacked.

[Spider]

The housing crisis was a huge hit. Thus everything in Garcia's post plus bad loan agreements helped bring down the housing industry jobs, value and all.

so giving tax breaks for companies to outsource under Bush .......

[Spider]

The housing crisis was a huge hit. Thus everything in Garcia's post plus bad loan agreements helped bring down the housing industry jobs, value and all.

so giving tax breaks for companies to outsource under Bush did what to our economy ? .......

[Garcia Bronco]

I am not to sure about all of that , to close to election time , but what I do know is 90% of the people here on this thread was biatching about higher taxes on the job creators Hilarious! I forget who was the one that wanted people like these 2yahoos in the story to be classified as middle class :rofl:
I just find it odd these people in this thread defend the hell out of the rich and taxes , until they see what the rest of us see and get pissed off ... I know it is fanny and freedie , so they went all out blasting away , but it is more then frannie and freddie doing this ......

To be honest; instead of raising taxes I would prefer closing loop holes and that Congress simplify the tax code. I was also not in favor of raising taxes on Business, and I am still not. I was also not in favor of raising taxes on anyone in 2007 and 08.

[Requiem]

To be honest; instead of raising taxes I would prefer closing loop holes and that Congress simplify the tax code. I was also not in favor of raising taxes on Business, and I am still not. I was also not in favor of raising taxes on anyone in 2007 and 08.

Did you ever get my message?

[Spider]

We didn't cut taxes while fighting two wars. Those taxes were cut before we were even attacked. They went into effect about the time we geared up for both in 02 and 03, but the second set of Bush Tax cuts were passed in June of 2001, two months before we were attacked.

So ? .... those taxes were cut WHILE we was fighting a war ....... whats your point ? doesnt matter when they was cut , they was cut while fighting 2 wars ...... Not once was taxes raised WHILE we was at war

[Garcia Bronco]

Did you ever get my message?

I did, and I have not had the time to give it a good look over yet.

[Garcia Bronco]

So ? .... those taxes were cut WHILE we was fighting a war ....... whats your point ? doesnt matter when they was cut , they was cut while fighting 2 wars ...... Not once was taxes raised WHILE we was at war

But the tax cut laws had already passed Congress and the President. It was the law. Now Congress certainly could have repealed it, but I think you understand that repealing the cuts would be view as a liability by members of Congress, and the President certainly wasn't going to push for it in public.

[Requiem]

I did, and I have not had the time to give it a good look over yet.

It's all good! :wave:

[ant1999e]

so giving tax breaks for companies to outsource under Bush did what to our economy ? .......

I said it was one of the main causes. The housing crisis was a huge hit to employment.

[Garcia Bronco]

I said it was one of the main causes. The housing crisis was a huge hit to employment.

The biggest problem we face imo is technology. This is a correction in the market place brought about by technology and technology has replaced jobs the economy should have shed a long time ago. Americans are going to have to re-train themselves going forward.

[ant1999e]

The biggest problem we face imo is technology. This is a correction in the market place brought about by technology and technology has replaced jobs the economy should have shed a long time ago. Americans are going to have to re-train themselves going forward.

Here in Vegas many of the unemployed come from the construction industry. The housing market crashed and their jobs followed. No job, house gets foreclosed.

[Garcia Bronco]

Here in Vegas many of the unemployed come from the construction industry. The housing market crashed and their jobs followed. No job, house gets foreclosed.

Vegas is one of the hardest places hit by the drop in demand and price for housing. That's because people are not getting the loans. 2 years ago you could get a no money down loan. Now you gotta come with 20 percent. 100k home...come with 20. Buddy of mine just bought a 1 mill dollar home and had to bring a check for just under 200k.


Another thing worth pointing out to the group is that low income people aren't the only ones that bought houses they can't afford. Many were buying homes to flip and maxed out their credit (and then some) to make cash and got caught with their pants down leveraged upside down. It's a **** all situation. And we won't get anywhere creating more debt and pushing this thing out further. At some point everybody has to the piper. the sooner this country figures that out, the better off we will be.

[ant1999e]

Vegas is one of the hardest places hit by the drop in demand and price for housing. That's because people are not getting the loans. 2 years ago you could get a no money down loan. Now you gotta come with 20 percent. 100k home...come with 20. Buddy of mine just bought a 1 mill dollar home and had to bring a check for just under 200k.


Another thing worth pointing out to the group is that low income people aren't the only ones that bought houses they can't afford. Many were buying homes to flip and maxed out their credit (and then some) to make cash and got caught with their pants down leveraged upside down. It's a **** all situation. And we won't get anywhere creating more debt and pushing this thing out further. At some point everybody has to the piper. the sooner this country figures that out, the better off we will be.

The guy next door is also Air Force. Bought his house 3-4 years ago. Just got orders. He can't sell it for what he owes. Probably at least 100k in the hole. And can't get enough to cover the mortgage with renting. He's going to try a short sale. Shyt sucks.

[barryr]

What amazes is the bonuses these people get when their company LOSES money. Fannie and Freddie were a disaster who played a big part in the housing mess. But as much as people got irate when CEO's of private companies got huge bonuses, the outrage about this seems mild.

[pricejj]

LMMFAO just to much , and these low lifes are the same ones you guys want to protect from taxes ....... Hilarious! .... funny who politics makes you crawl into bed with when you allow yourself to be tied up to a dogma ...... Now admit it ladies , higher taxes on the rich isnt so bad now is it .... Hilarious!

How long do you Democrat's think the U.S. will last with $1.4T spending deficits? Obama and the Democrat's plan is to keep spending deficits above $1T at least until 2020? You really aren't serious are you?

:thumbs:

:rofl:

...you think that's all gravy right? It would be laughable if it wasn't so horrific.

[pricejj]

So ? .... those taxes were cut WHILE we was fighting a war ....... whats your point ? doesnt matter when they was cut , they was cut while fighting 2 wars ...... Not once was taxes raised WHILE we was at war

...you must be a government worker.

[Garcia Bronco]

In 2006 our yearly deficit was roughly 300 billion dollars. Since then Obama and the Democrats have exploded spending to almost 1.4 trillion in deficits per year.

[Spider]

...you must be a government worker.

LMAO yeah you got me genius ....... :rofl: ......

[pricejj]

LMAO yeah you got me genius ....... :rofl: ......

Seriously dude...I am no Republican or Democrat...but you, LABF, TonyR, Requiem, Wigs, and Rigs...you guys must be crazy if you think that just carrying $1T deficits every single year is gonna last.

You keep screaming to raise taxes. Don't you think getting the spending and costs (entitlements, defense) under control would be a good first step? There has been a rapid expansion in government largess for the past 100 years...you really think that can continue?

It's not all about what party Democrat or Republican you are affiliated with...it's about preventing bankruptcy at this point.

You guy's try to act like everyone who wants to try to balance the budget is crazy and lives in a cave...what? How the can any country survive if they don't balance the budget?

[Spider]

Seriously dude...I am no Republican or Democrat...but you, LABF, TonyR, Requiem, Wigs, and Rigs...you guys must be crazy if you think that just carrying $1T deficits every single year is gonna last.

You keep screaming to raise taxes. Don't you think getting the spending and costs (entitlements, defense) under control would be a good first step? There has been a rapid expansion in government largess for the past 100 years...you really think that can continue?

It's not all about what party Democrat or Republican you are affiliated with...it's about preventing bankruptcy at this point.

You guy's try to act like everyone who wants to try to balance the budget is crazy and lives in a cave...what? How the can any country survive if they don't balance the budget?

i didnt call you out on being anything but stupid ...... your afghanistan take you idiot . as for higher taxes , take your punk ass to the frannie and freddie thread and explain why People like that deserve a tax break ........ I susspect you wont , cause your little sound bite post wont go over in that thread , but then you just might be dense enough to try

[pricejj]

Europe's way doesn't work. It's why the U.S. was established to begin with, the first American's were sick and tired of the class system and being slaves to the upper class.

How much persecution, inequality, mass-killings, wars, and poverty have existed in Europe since the U.S. was established? Look at what we see is going on over there today. European citizens are the highest taxed in the world. The governments continue to expand and deficit spend. The only countries in Europe that aren't totally screwed are England and Germany... It is going to be a long economic death spiral for them...is that something you really want to be a part of? Or would you rather do something about it while you still can?

All this bickering is crap. Everyone in throughout the world is saving and being thrifty...it's time for the U.S. government to do the same.

[pricejj]

i didnt call you out on being anything but stupid ...... your afghanistan take you idiot . as for higher taxes , take your punk ass to the frannie and freddie thread and explain why People like that deserve a tax break ........ I susspect you wont , cause your little sound bite post wont go over in that thread , but then you just might be dense enough to try

Your insults are funny. :rofl:

Since your only solution is to "tax the rich"...why not confiscate everything they own? You would still have an enormous deficit. Have the highest individual income tax rates in the world helped Europe remain solvent? No they haven't.

You have no solution. I could care less about how much taxes millionaires pay. I do know one thing, raising taxes on everybody isn't going to solve anything.

[pricejj]

Ever heard of "Live, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness"? Do you believe in that?

[Rohirrim]

In 2006 our yearly deficit was roughly 300 billion dollars. Since then Obama and the Democrats have exploded spending to almost 1.4 trillion in deficits per year.

<object width="640" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/P1bZ-TiX8rA&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/P1bZ-TiX8rA&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></embed></object>


And why has the Right done this? To accomplish the same goal they've had for 75 years: To kill Social Security.

[elsid13]

Europe's way doesn't work. It's why the U.S. was established to begin with, the first American's were sick and tired of the class system and being slaves to the upper class.

How much persecution, inequality, mass-killings, wars, and poverty have existed in Europe since the U.S. was established? Look at what we see is going on over there today. European citizens are the highest taxed in the world. The governments continue to expand and deficit spend. The only countries in Europe that aren't totally screwed are England and Germany... It is going to be a long economic death spiral for them...is that something you really want to be a part of? Or would you rather do something about it while you still can?

All this bickering is crap. Everyone in throughout the world is saving and being thrifty...it's time for the U.S. government to do the same.

Well that interesting rewrite of history and the current European debt crisis.

[pricejj]

Well that interesting rewrite of history and the current European debt crisis.

You would like to live in Greece? Or do you think everything is just grand in Athens? You do know how that situation came about right?

...the government has been writing checks that the taxpayer's can't back.


No re-write bro. Socialism, although having the intention of creating, "equality", in practice, produces the exact opposite.

[pricejj]

And why has the Right done this? To accomplish the same goal they've had for 75 years: To kill Social Security.

You do realize that the only way for a program like Social Security to remain solvent in the long-term is to have an exponentially increasing population (all of whom join the work force) right?

Do the math.

Retirement insurance is fine and it has noble intent...but not the way it is currently constructed.

No one is against Social Security per se...it just mathematically doesn't work.

[Rohirrim]

You do realize that the only way for a program like Social Security to remain solvent in the long-term is to have an exponentially increasing population (all of whom join the work force) right?

Do the math.

Retirement insurance is fine and it has noble intent...but not the way it is currently constructed.

No one is against Social Security per se...it just mathematically doesn't work.

Especially when the politicians break into the bank and blow all the reserves in order to give tax cuts to the rich.

This is the one thing I keep hearing over and over again: The world needs to go on an austerity program...

except for the rich. They can go ahead and keep giving each other billions in bonuses.

[Garcia Bronco]

Especially when the politicians break into the bank and blow all the reserves in order to give tax cuts to the rich.



This is nonsense and not what happened.

[Spider]

Your insults are funny. :rofl:

Since your only solution is to "tax the rich"...why not confiscate everything they own? You would still have an enormous deficit. Have the highest individual income tax rates in the world helped Europe remain solvent? No they haven't.

You have no solution. I could care less about how much taxes millionaires pay. I do know one thing, raising taxes on everybody isn't going to solve anything.

LMAO yo uare an Idiot ......... I see so taxing them a few % is taking everything they own ....... Drama queen much ???

[pricejj]

Especially when the politicians break into the bank and blow all the reserves in order to give tax cuts to the rich.

This is the one thing I keep hearing over and over again: The world needs to go on an austerity program...

except for the rich. They can go ahead and keep giving each other billions in bonuses.

European "austerity" and what the U.S. needs are two entirely differerent things. I don't recall anybody being in fans of Fannie and Freddie execs getting millions in taxpayer money...

You do realize the "Bush" tax cuts were tax cuts for everyone right? And you think it's a great idea to raise taxes on everyone right now, because you think it will decrease the spending deficit from what $1.4T to...$1T. Unfortunately, it is a MUCH bigger problem than that. If raising taxes a little bit was going to solve anything, it would have been done by now.

[TonyR]

Fyi, great read linked below for those still blaming Fannie and Freddie for the collapse.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/11/dish-check-who-caused-the-financial-collapse-not-fannie-and-freddie.html

Fannie and Freddie were very late to the party. They were followers (seeking the windfall profits being enjoyed by the private investment banks) and wannabes, not leaders. The Republicans would like this to be because they were "forced" into it by congress, but really, they were forced into it by their executive's greed. What's clear from the data is that Fannie and Freddie's government leashes didn't start to get loosened until 2006. They were more like the sucker investors who joined the real estate boom late and got screwed out of their money while Goldman/Paulson were placing desperate counter-bets on what they knew to be a bubble by 2006/2007.

[pricejj]

House Panel Moves to Cut Pay at Fannie, Freddie.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204190504577040273577936462.html