What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
433 Comments
- DanielThePoet, on 02/11/2009, -8/+533good. that's how it SHOULD be. return the money fast, so we're not a lending government. sheesh.
- jsdratm, on 02/11/2009, -14/+333Good job Obama, they shouldn't be encouraged to borrow money to blow on million dollar office renovations and foreign luxury jets.
- lordwow, on 02/11/2009, -3/+272With Interest!
- AngryAngryBrian, on 02/11/2009, -4/+238Boo ***** hoo. While you live under our roof, you play by our rules (as my parents use to say). If you don't like it you can GTFO!
- TruckStuff, on 02/11/2009, -8/+202Here's $10B.
Great thanks!
BTW, I also need you to agree to this.
Wait, you want me to actually *change* something because of this?? GTFO!
Dumbasses... - woodsjransom, on 02/11/2009, -2/+185Fine with me
- Chompy, on 02/11/2009, -1/+166What the *****, there's *conditions* when you take billions from the govt? What kind of crazy world has this become?
- demonicaardvark, on 02/11/2009, -5/+158I bet the same people in those companies who are deciding to give back the money are the ones who will be effected by the salary cap. They probably care more about their personal income than the health of the company they work for.
- InorganicMatter, on 02/11/2009, -3/+104They can deposit my $22,000 directly into my checking account, kthnx.
- BlueAyez, on 02/11/2009, -2/+103if they didn't need the friggin money, why the hell did they take it?
The only reason they want to give it back is because the government is limiting the pay and benefits of the top people, limiting their H1B workers and regulating the banks so they can't pull the kinds of underhanded ***** they've been pulling for the last 16 years.
They are all bald faced liars thieves and embezzlers. I opposed the bailout then and I oppose it now. Take all the money back and let them fall on their big fat asses. - chuckDontSurf, on 02/11/2009, -1/+97"Good grief, can we have your president? "
Wow, I never thought I'd hear that. - bcomeaux, on 02/11/2009, -6/+97Goldman Sachs can't afford to repay TARP without violating capital requirements. Hmmm ... just how bad off are they? That raises a ton of questions.
- inactive, on 02/11/2009, -1/+86There really needs to be a Schoolhouse Rock video to explain all this.
- publiclurker, on 02/11/2009, -0/+78A low, low introductory interest rate of only 4.5%*
* introductory rate is subject to increase to our normal rate of 24.7% whenever we damn well feel like it. - WafflePirate, on 02/11/2009, -9/+85It's not the government that lends the money, it's the Federal Reserve which is not owned by the government and is a private entity.
The government asks the Federal Reserve for money in exchange for government bonds (pieces of paper which are basically contracts or agreements that stipulate debt). In exchange for the bonds, the Federal Reserve prints some paper which they then define as a currency and send it on over to the government.
The notes are then banked, thus adding money to the governments supply and putting them into debt. How do you think the Federal Reserve controls things? The government is in debt to the Federal Reserve because they borrowed money and due to smoke and mirror tricks, it's basically impossible for the government to pay it back or be debt free.
All money in circulation is actually debt. Every single dollar in circulation is owed to someone by someone. If everyone were to pay off their debts, there would be no money in circulation. And an interesting trivia fact: There isn't enough money in circulation for everyone to pay their debts.
Because most currency doesn't actually exist in physical form, it's simply numbers in a computer. I think the percentage of actual money in circulation is a low number like 1 or 2%. - Talphin, on 02/11/2009, -2/+72Hell no! Go get your own Obama. This one is ours! :P
- rhysboy84, on 02/11/2009, -4/+72Good grief, can we have your president? UK banks at the moment seem to be "We'll take your money and use it how we want" at the moment!
- inactive, on 02/11/2009, -1/+66I'll take it in cash please.
- chanop, on 02/11/2009, -2/+65They only want Obama to meddle in their buisness if they can continue to live like kings on taxpayer money
- inactive, on 02/11/2009, -0/+62we don't appreciate you selling us a lemon.
- stayputnik, on 02/11/2009, -3/+63You can have our old one if you want... he needs a job. We're rather fond of the new one though...
- Nimsim, on 02/11/2009, -3/+55and coke, don't forget coke.
- MJPana, on 02/11/2009, -4/+52FTA: “We just think that operating our business without the government capital would be an easier thing to do,” said David A. Viniar, the chief financial officer of Goldman. “We’d be under less scrutiny, and under less pressure. Not that we’d be out of the public eye; we’re still going to be in the public eye.”
Ok, so let me get this straight. they beg for a bailout, use it to purchase office decor, extravagant resort parties, etc...and then say they can run their business BETTER without the governments money...
Someone PLEASE throw these guys in jail for FRAUD! - kingmanic, on 02/11/2009, -2/+49Do onto them as those ***** would do onto you.
- nomadxx7, on 02/11/2009, -2/+45Yeah because the banks getting us into this pickle with the toxic debt are so much more trustworthy and logical with their money. They are so morally just and right that they stopped going on their junkets at the taxpayer expense (wait they didn't do that one - AIG actually told the hotel to not mention them by name). Well they did a good job cutting the executive bonuses while they were taking taxpayer money (nope didn't do that either - supposedly a few billions have been syphoned off to pay bonuses). They have a clear cut plan on how to turn themselves around without taxpayer dollars (not that I've seen - most of this ***** is they don't want caps or stipulations on how the money is spent).
The biggest problem is you have businesses coming up for the government's free handout and now that they may be under more scrutiny they don't want the help. This to me makes me question their motives and also their business practices in general. I'm all for keeping our economy going but not wasting my money on people who feel entitled to more; people that feel that F-ing their business into the ground is solid job performance and worthy of a raise. ***** all of them. Also wasn't the first round of government money supposed to help free the credit markets to allow the average borrower to borrow/lend? What happened to that? I see the tops get their golden parachutes and the only people that can save this country are getting stuck with the bill. - treehugger87, on 02/11/2009, -0/+42But, that would be totally shocking. I thought executives were so well paid because they always kept the interests of their shareholders in mind.
/s - specter13, on 02/11/2009, -9/+50I think that the banks would be fine with this money if it was the Bush Admin mainly because the last administration would not care.
With Obama in place he is actually trying to make a difference and the banks don't like that they actually have to play by somebody else rules now instead of just making the rules. - publiclurker, on 02/11/2009, -4/+45While they were losing billions you ignorant embarrassment.
- twiztidsinz, on 02/11/2009, -2/+43It's refreshing after 8 years of Bush..
- treehugger87, on 02/11/2009, -1/+38Indeed, when you get your own job and your own apartment then you can do whatever you want with your drugged up friends. Just don't come crying back to me when it all falls apart and you need some more money.
- chuckDontSurf, on 02/11/2009, -0/+36Exactly. I'm all for government intervention in companies that receive bailout money, for precisely this reason. Imagine having all these politicians (most of whom know little about running a business) poking through your business and telling you how to run your company. It's the perfect disincentive for companies to accept bailout money in the first place, and get their ***** together on their own or go under.
- Hillsfar, on 02/11/2009, -5/+41If these banks are strong enough and healthy enough to consider RETURNING the money, then obviously they didn't need it in the first place. So why did then-Treasury Secretary Paulson give bail-out to these banks? After threatening Congress with doom and gloom if they didn't pass the $700 billion bailout? Someone should arrest him.
- badenglishihave, on 02/11/2009, -0/+36Which should go to taxpayers as a tax rebate!
- redcodenl, on 02/11/2009, -1/+37I've heard Goldman Sachs prefers Pepsi though...
- Sean42, on 02/11/2009, -2/+35***** parasites.
Rich, spoiled parasites. - inactive, on 02/11/2009, -0/+30* $50k late fee, $100k bounce-check fee
----
$30k Congress ATM fee - locondcoco, on 02/11/2009, -1/+29i'm sorry, and losing billions on top of billions is competent?
- Thumper13, on 02/11/2009, -1/+28Yeah, screw the people! I don't care where my money goes!
Give these corporate kings a blank check!
Clearly these banks and their CEO's are victims of oversight.
Set them free!
um, sarcasm. - JDanner3, on 02/11/2009, -0/+24This is turning out quite well. People make choices based on money. Wow imagine that, you get other peoples money then they want to advise you how to use it! Amazing. Bankers, you can't expect to get more money and keep conducting business as usual. That is the definition of insanity. Fix your companies and earn your bonuses, earn a lot of other people money then nobody can say a word. How about some integrity for starters.
- Fustigations, on 02/11/2009, -1/+25I'm so happy right now. Who wants a hug?
- vat0r, on 02/11/2009, -1/+25You're correct but the Fed exists at the pleasure of the Government. The Government could do away with the Fed over night if they wished to do so. It is the Government after all that mandates which currency or currencies are used in any given country. I'm not saying it would be a good thing but it could be done.
To make a further point though. The whole of modern civilization is basically reliant on a fiat money system. When the American economy suffers it has the interesting side effect of weakening the economies of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and many other countries. America for better or for worse is the keystone of modernity and in my opinion that is why they allowed the Fed to exist. - ell0bo, on 02/11/2009, -1/+23No hug, but I'll give you a high five.
- DreKor, on 02/11/2009, -3/+25they prefer pepsi... and hookers
- atomicwedgie, on 02/11/2009, -1/+21This quote says it all... David A. Viniar, the chief financial officer of Goldman. said “We’d be under less scrutiny...." In other words, we don't want anyone checking on how we blow loot.
- FyreGoddess, on 02/11/2009, -1/+20Agreed. What the government is doing here has greatly allayed my worry of whether or not this bailout would actually get paid back, especially in a timely manner. This pretty much guarantees that they'll move quickly to get out from under the government's thumb.
- byronm, on 02/11/2009, -6/+25Just more political grandstanding by the rich & elite. Its a little late to still be crying because you can't blow tax dollars on your need BMW/House/Airplane/Vacation/Art/Political Charity/Organization/PAC
- theaceoffire, on 02/11/2009, -0/+19But I don WANNA give up my money to fix my problems!
I want more of YOUR money to fix my problems!
God you just don't understand, You never loved investing in me!
*Slams door* - WBWB, on 02/11/2009, -3/+21They should return the government money, but you know they're going to survive by ***** over their customers. I mean, even more than they are now.
- Balanced, on 02/11/2009, -0/+17I think he might mean there's some regulations that banks need to keep certain amounts of cash on hand for legal reasons.
- AgeofMastery, on 02/11/2009, -1/+18And of course there's no links backing up this "Government made them take it" story...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 440 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is