What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
111 Comments
- EMFK, on 03/20/2009, -14/+55FTA: "The absence of backbone on either end of Pennsylvania Avenue this week could carry a steep price."
Our government at 'work'. Sigh. - inactive, on 03/20/2009, -11/+30http://townhall.com/Columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/ ...
- tinkerthinker, on 03/20/2009, -25/+43What dolts,, as if they couldn't have made it worse! Pass an unconstitutional law...? Damn!
I want Sarah Palin! These Washington elite are ruining our country! - inactive, on 03/20/2009, -16/+33AND NOW FOR A BIGGER PROBLEM:
UN Panel says world should ditch dollar
http://digg.com/world_news/U_N_Panel_Says_World_Sh ... - inactive, on 03/20/2009, -13/+28What can we expect from a Democrat controlled congress that hastily throws together a bill, does not read it, nor does the Presidents advisers read it before a trillion dollar spending bill is signed into law. The outrage and the tax on bonuses are all feigned outrage, designed to deflect the real issue, which is congress and the President screwed up.
In the meantime, while Geitner has no plan when it comes to stabilizing banks, the President runs around behaving like a pop culture personality and picking NCAA winners, instead of being a President. This administration is really just stunning in its seeming lack of maturity. My god, is it 2012 yet? - Der_Eckinator, on 03/20/2009, -19/+34The end of the Republic is in full swing. Sad.
- inactive, on 03/20/2009, -18/+31The House is comprised primarily of flaming retards who spend most of their time pandering to what is essentially their own neighborhood. All politics is local, and local politics is stupid.
- AWBoy666, on 03/20/2009, -13/+25I am astounded the Post would publish such a scathing and logical article about this issue. The law is certainly unconstitutional, will cost more to defend than it would ever retrieve back, and prevent private companies from engaging the government in the future when their survival is in question. Not to mention drive away the best talent from a company that I am now a major stakeholder in!!
What are they thinking?? Think with your brain, not your heart you dumbasses! - fury420, on 03/21/2009, -5/+17yeah, we really need to protect all that "talent" at financial institutions from leaving, otherwise we'll have a financial meltdown on our hands, with nobody on hand with the necessary skills to fix it.
Because we all know there are tons of other financial institutions still offering rich compensation & bonuses for sub-par performance, and that these valuable executives need to be paid obscene amounts of money just to do the jobs they were hired to do, otherwise it will be the end of our economy... right? lawl - Doc123, on 03/20/2009, -19/+30More like DEMOCRATS gone wild.
- Blinker1315, on 03/20/2009, -4/+14Totally agree. What in the world is Obama doing on Jay Leno? I don't get it. I thought he was Mr. Serious. Didn't vote for him, but was glad it was him instead of Hillary. Now, as I can't believe I'm writing this, maybe if a Dem had to win Hillary wouldn't have been as disastrous.
- odkin, on 03/21/2009, -3/+12Like it or not, these people were promised money to stay long enough to shut down their division and put themselves out of work. Unless someone told you there was a bonus at the end, would you stay at a job that you yourself had to shut down?
Who else was going to close the business? In addition to these people being out of work, now the government is going to take 90% of the money they earned by staying til the end? - bobdob, on 03/21/2009, -1/+9So, in a representative democracy, our representatives are supposed to ignore our opinions? Congress is doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing. It's up to the president to decide whether the law makes sense for the country and sign or veto.
- MrCocktoasten, on 03/21/2009, -3/+10I don't really understand this. IF the government hadn't bailed the companies out they wouldn't have been able to receive those bonuses anyway, due to bankruptcy, right? So the people in AIG and other bailed-out companies should just be thankful they still have a job. Or am i missing something here? :/
- AJ338, on 03/21/2009, -1/+8I don't understand these "retention" bonuses. If a bunch of douchebags leave AIG because they don't get an extra couple million bucks, where are they gonna go? Nobody's hiring!
- charmaniac, on 03/21/2009, -2/+9AIG is full of idiots. If these bonuses are being given to talented folks who are bringing in good profits for AIG, the American people will understand. The employees who are receiving the bonuses need to explain why they deserve this directly to the public or they will continue to be excoriated.
Profit makers will only help AIG repay some of the money. If bonuses are being given to folks who are not bringing in the money, they should be reclaimed. You don't get bonuses when you lose money... I thought everyone knew that. - govsucks, on 03/21/2009, -6/+12Democrat, one that panders to the mindless whim of the masses. Not that the republicans are any better.
- Echota, on 03/20/2009, -16/+22More chicken little.
- mbtria, on 03/21/2009, -0/+6Bonus's to a company that is so bankrupt that no one can see the bottom of the pit? These executives shouldn't have jobs because AIG should be out of business. And speaking of jobs, what is with the excuse that the bonuses are required for retention? Fat chance they would have getting new jobs if they left. How many people are looking for equivalent positions now? And anyone from AIG would have to be suspect.
- inactive, on 03/21/2009, -1/+7Usually when companies go bankrupt the books are confiscated, creditors get 4 cents in the dollar and everyone is locked out. The place is locked down like a crime scene.
That is what should have happened. Primarily the books are dealt with and creditors get a chance to argue their case. The most important thing is is that the books are opened and any wrongdoing is quickly found out.
Something stinks! And its coming from Washington...
The worst part is the Cowboys who caused this will walk away....AGAIN! - govsucks, on 03/21/2009, -1/+7They swear an oath to uphold the constitution of the united states, not do anything the mob wants. If the "democracy" (the mob) decided that everyone should have their hair cut to 1.5 inches. Should we all comply? You collectivists are just outright idiots.
- butterpat, on 03/21/2009, -0/+6AIG executive's sense of entitlement is monstrous. Nobody, regardless of their political allegiance, should stand silently by as executives arrogantly suck public bailout money, while laid off workers have been denied their severance payments and benefits.
- inactive, on 03/20/2009, -2/+7Blinker,
Who knows? I just sit back every day and just watch this ongoing Congressional and Presidential side show. Now we hear Fannie and Freddie execs screaming about how the taxes on bonuses will drive people out of finances and thus hurt the housing market even more. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
These people because of their sheer incompetence are ***** (pardon the word, don't use it that often) no matter what they do. Chicken little is running the executive branch. Well, at least there is a cocktail party every Wednesday night at the White House where the politicos can drink themselves into oblivion. - angryfirelord, on 03/21/2009, -1/+6Except that they never do. There's nothing more permanent than a temporary government law or program.
- TheSwashbuckler, on 03/21/2009, -0/+5Bruce Fein, Constitutional scholar, says it doesn't qualify as a Bill of Attainder...
- magamiako, on 03/21/2009, -0/+4magoghm:
read through my digg history regarding these as I've already debunked this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder
"A bill of attainder (also known as an act or writ of attainder) is an act of legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial."
Does not apply. We have not found them "guilty" of anything. They have not been accused of a crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law
An ex post facto law (from the Latin for "after the fact") or retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of acts committed or the legal status of facts and relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law.
Again, there's nothing "illegal" going on here, nor has Congress convicted them of a crime.
Let's take this one step further..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_t ...
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
Done. - TheSwashbuckler, on 03/21/2009, -0/+4Lawrence Tribe agrees with Mr. Fein: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/03/18/would-an-aig-b ...
- erkokite, on 03/21/2009, -7/+11Gah... What is the crap? AIG may have not violated the letter of the contract, but they certainly violated the spirit of it. The taxes imposed on receivers of the bailout funds are most certainly not unconstitutional, and IMHO are entirely justified. It seems to me that Washington Post is showing its true colors as a shill for big business and supportive of screwing over taxpayers.
Make no mistake- WSJ's and Washington Post's recent articles highly critical of Obama, the Dems, and supporting AIG are all related. The GOP is the party of big business. This should come as no surprise. WSJ is owned by Murdoch, the same guy who owns FOX. I wouldn't be surprised to see similar connections at the Post.
I understand that some members of the libertarian/GOP crowd always like to scream, "UNCONSTITUTIONAL!" at the top of their lungs, but they usually don't know what they are talking about. They yell it because they think its fun to be part of an ideological crowd (even if they don't understand it) rather than taking the pragmatic/realistic point of view.
Let's get this straight- AIG doesn't deserve bonuses. Congress is doing the right thing in punishing them. GOP is the party of big business that doesn't care about your average taxpayer, and some libertarians (not all) are entirely misguided and aren't much better (as a matter of fact they are basically pawns). - inactive, on 03/21/2009, -1/+5Wow, have the right-winger fringeez been here so long that this is now accepted as how things have become? I mean, even not too long ago, aside from a few trolls you could have a reasonable conversation here. Just like what the GOP has done to the tone of discussion in our country for the last 8 years, the freeper freaks have come in, moved everything so far right that moderate people have to be confrontational just to state obvious realities, and destroyed the entire platform just to air their idiocy. There is room to be conservative and liberal in a discussion, but the far right extremists who have stormed Digg have turned every comment area into a cage match!
I don't know how, but I hope at some point there can be American conversations based in reality again without these extremists. Both America and Digg could be so much better for all of us!
Please, everyone who wants to return to a real Digg again, - inactive, on 03/21/2009, -3/+7The flag does not matter. The government on both sides is full of corporate plants so either way America is being run by a set of criminals with selfish intent.
America and the way its government is structured, how it all works and the rules by which it functions will guarantee the US downfall.
Accepting bribes is legal. Lobbyists----
Placing plants Like Cheney and Paulson is Legal even though they are batting for an enemy within.
The Rules by which corporations are governed are open to bribes and alterations favorable as has happened.
Your government is nothing of the sort! That government is about 2% Patriot 60% opportunistic and ignorant small timers made up of 90% easily bribed positions. The rest are Working for Drug Companies, Energy Companies, Financial Companies, the War Machine, Big Oil....
What they are not doing is working for American interests....
So they are going to argue over one law...one!
Taking away the focus of the disease to one symptom...
A muscle spasm in my Lillie finger.....
Meanwhile your lungs are filling with water and your kidney and liver have turned black...
you are dying...
Your government is a dog with rabies.. - supercandy, on 03/20/2009, -21/+25Pelosi - Reid - Obama - Boxer - Leahy - Clinton - Schumer - Murtha - Obey - etc.
disaster... - LocalDocal, on 03/21/2009, -1/+5http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090321/ap_on_go_co/ai ...
FTA: "Senate Democrats said they will try again next week to take up the tax bill and hope to complete it before April 4, when Congress leaves for a two-week spring break. Combining the disparate House and Senate versions of the bill might have to wait until after the recess."
Yeah, at work. - elTito, on 03/21/2009, -1/+5Which is why the bailout should never have happened and these companies should have been forced into mediated chapter 11 like fiscal conservatives have been screaming since TARP 1.
That is the insanity of the way it was handled. They essentially bought the company and, by definition, whatever contractual obligations and bad practices came along with it. A chapter 11 trustee can basically go in and be a dictator, making decisions and taking actions on his own as he sees fit. Instead we have to involve the entire ***** government in every decision and deal with the ***** that goes along with that process (earmarks, pork, etc.).
I think there were only a few things that needed to happen in this whole mess:
1) Set up a bank to buy up toxic assets
2) Force companies in need of "bailout" into mediated chapter 11 and compel the sale of toxic assets to the government at whatever price they can get
3) Fix the regulatory *****-ups that created this mess to begin with (including the gov't mandated mortgage lending to unqualified borrowers)
4) Revisit the anti-trust laws to address the fact that if any company is "too big to fail," it's TOO ***** BIG TO EXIST
Instead they're piling *****-ups on top of *****-ups, reinforcing with *****-ups and reacting to ***** up *****-ups with yet more *****-ups. And now they've decided to mix in some good ol' fashioned tyranny just for fun. - allowners, on 03/21/2009, -1/+5FTA: By changing the terms of a deal months after it was entered into, Congress will show the government to be an unreliable partner, further draining confidence from the financial system and endangering long-term recovery.
This sounds like a bank sort of thing to do, changing terms at will and sending out notices that you must comply.
God forbid the government should start pandering to the proles, it should keep pandering to those who brought us to this point. - AladinSane, on 03/21/2009, -0/+4...and if they DID leave, maybe they could be replaced by people who actually know what the hell they're doing. These are the very same people who DESTROYED their company in the first place. I have to wonder what form of "Capitalism" it is that Diggers believe in, when 90% of the people here seem to be convinced that huge Corporations should be shielded from the effects of their own incompetence by taxpayer money.
- TheSwashbuckler, on 03/21/2009, -0/+4Terri Schiavo...
- AladinSane, on 03/21/2009, -3/+6Dude, you're talking to Diggers. Half the people here think "Un-Constitutional" means "anything I don't personally like". Diggers are retards. I doubt most of them could even tell you six consecutive words from the Constitution.
- b4gk1lz, on 03/21/2009, -2/+5How is it the Repubs fault that the Democratic congress passed an unconstitutional law? If Obama would have read the original bill line by line and didn't try and push is through in record time like he promised during his campaign...maybe the Dems wouldn't be so embarrassed and try to recover by passing an unconstitutional law.
- inactive, on 03/21/2009, -3/+6/sarcasm
- LemurDaddy, on 03/21/2009, -4/+6Ah, the latest submission from Digg's neo-con brigade. And they'll be engaging in a mutual masturbation of each others' posts for the indefinite future. Dig down the libs! Dig up the cons! This is an interesting development. As always, I'm forced to wonder what exactly they think they are *accomplishing* ....
- CSheikh, on 03/21/2009, -0/+2If private companies are fighting for there survival they should not pander to the government. They should either stop being such a ***** company, or declare bankruptcy.
And if the people who lose the company billions of dollars are the best talent, then they should leave the company. We have plenty of fresh blood graduating with degrees, and they could do just as well, and probably better. I bet a high school kid could do just as well. - ryan83189, on 03/21/2009, -2/+4The NOAA should start naming hurricanes after bad politicians to help improve their image.
- 08soso, on 03/22/2009, -0/+2I seldom agree with the WaPo editorial page anymore but this is right. Instead of leading a charge to fix the system, they pander to the public with their outrage, all the while picking up their campaign checks from the companies they rail against.
- 2of8, on 03/21/2009, -0/+2Maybe it's the same thing as good cops/bad cops. Yes there are bad cops that _do_ bad things. How about the good cops that watch this happen idly? Perhaps these employees are, too, not bad by doing, but bad by inaction.
- inactive, on 03/21/2009, -1/+3You think their mothers would come down to the basement, catch them typing one-handed, and make them go to bed by now!
When do the Repugs go back to their marginalized freeper crap and return Digg to us?? Probably answered my own question there, they only get attention from anyone other their own ilk when they step out of their echo-chamber, and they cant stand each other... - secrity, on 03/21/2009, -1/+3The government didn't single out individuals, it specified a certain type of income.
- Urrelles, on 03/21/2009, -0/+2You think this bill was hastily put together? don't you remeber the other bill in October last year? At least both parties sat down and bickered over this billl a bit and clarafied things. The last bailout in October was completely rushed with little opposition to its contents.
- LemurDaddy, on 03/21/2009, -0/+2Bub, you're thinking of lemmings. Lemurs are a different animal. Nice try, though, and it would be fantastic if you would make some sort of attempt to answer my question. Here, I'll dig you up just to be sporting.
- AladinSane, on 03/21/2009, -2/+4Tell me, Genius, where were all these people GOING TO GO if they didn't get their bonuses? Who was going to hire them? And please, Einstein, tell me what advantage there is to keeping people so incompetent that they drove a multi-Billion dollar company into the ground in the first place? Oh, but hey, don't let me interrupt while you continue to suck the ***** of Corporate America. After all, that's worked so well for us lately.
- SquigglyP, on 03/21/2009, -4/+6You militant, partisan liberals and conservatives - you retarded little party-line-towing fools - are what's really destroying this country. All of you on both sides. No one out here in the real world gives a ***** about your political *****. Stop pretending the little D or R means anything. Almost every politician in government ANYWHERE in this country is just after your votes and your money, and they'll lie, cheat and steal to get it. That's all that matters to them at all. The country doesn't matter. The economy doesn't matter.
They obviously don't know what the ***** to DO about the economy, since neither side has gotten even relatively close to a solution. The next best thing to a solution they've been able to come up with is to figure out a way to just delay the inevitable, and in the process of delaying it, make the resulting economic melt down that much worse for our kids and grandkids. You ***** sit here and bitch about the other side and their flawed policies and politics, but both 'teams' have taken up positions that will ***** this country badly in the years to come.
Bush spends both his terms doing everything he possibly can to:
A) get as rich as possible
B) get his buddies and their companies as rich as possible - all right under your ***** noses with nary a peep from the politicians (because they all get their little fingers into the same sort of ***** deals)
C) Pressure the fed and banks to continue feeding a bull market that is - in the long term - completely unsustainable, so that in the short term he can have a boom economic "legacy". Unfortunately for him, the money wells ran out a few months too soon and he's now known as the guy who ***** us all over worse than any president before him. He would probably have gone down that way anyway, but you can't blame him for trying. He's a ***** moron. Just like every other politician. None of them understand a single ***** thing about economics or money. Not one ***** thing. They just do what the banks tell them to do.
Then Obama gets elected. Hip-hip-*****-hurrah! First thing he does? Build a 'budget' that will make a ***** of his friends happy and grease a lot of political gears, but which will ultimately only contribute further to the collapse of our monetary system and our economy. I'm all for infrastructure improvements and upgrades, but you have to have a balance system. You can't have it all. You can't fund a thousand pork projects and rebuild the infrastructure and expand departments and expand existing programs and expand this and expand that. You can't do all of that at once.
And yet this is exactly what he wants to attempt to do. And we'll be the ones paying for it. Do you think the ***** in Congress give a ***** about people losing their jobs and their homes? All they have to do is get on TV and say something 'hopefull' or 'positive' and they'll get to keep their jobs while spinning their wheels at work - if they even manage to show up half the time (which most congress members fail to do).
And everyone's upset about some banks giving out bonuses? I wonder what sort of pay raises the ***** politicians have given themselves this year for the bang-up job they've been doing thus far? Maybe they only went for 10% instead of the normal 15 or 20.
You people make me sick. You've allowed your public servants to become your masters. This whole thing is a posturing charade. The politicians who cry the loudest about the bonuses and the bailouts will reap the benefit come election time, and that's the only thing that motivates these *****. It's not a job about running the country anymore. It's all about positioning. Their lives are a constant advertisement. They're trying to sell themselves.
Stop giving these ***** your votes simply because they have a ***** letter next to their names.
And most of all, stop and think about the ramifications of ***** like this before you just knee-jerk yourselves into a totalitarian state. -
Show 51 - 100 of 114 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is