I am so exhausted with the impending DOOM of the collapsing economy and 700 billion dollars in bail-outs that would seemingly go to the richest companies, and CEOs, in America so that they can continue to 'play the markets'.
I've read so many articles and columns, and it scares me to think that this is just another scare tactic. They say Democrats are for BIG GOVT! They say Democrats are TAX AND SPEND!!
Over 550 billion dollars already for the Iraq War (which is not OUR war: we should not have gone over there In the first place) and now THIS...
Has anyone heard of 'GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD'? Will we really go into a MAJOR DEPRESSION if we don't QUICKLY push through a FLAWED bailout package that DOES NOT PROTECT the majority of working Americans?
Wow!!!
It's time for a CHANGE.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
(The Obama campaign sent out an email entitled "Greed and Irresponsibility" about the plan to bailout Wall Street with taxpayer money. Here's the response I sent to that email. If anybody thinks there's something unfair about this, please tell me. I just don't understand.) Why can't the bailout plan insist on executive pay cuts? When a company restructures, the first thing it does is downsize to cut payroll. If these companies want a handout, (when it's "regular" folks, they call it welfare) from taxpayers who can't pay their own bills because they got downsized, it seems reasonable to start with cutting executive salaries down to size: what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? If these companies can't even stay afloat, they certainly can't afford to pay six and seven figure salaries--with bonuses. The FDIC limits the amount of the deposits it will insure. The bailout plan should set a salary--the $100,000 that the FDIC uses seems fair--multiply that by the number of employees, including executives, and set that as the limit for the amount of the bailout money that can be used for salaries. If the companies want government help, they can agree to those terms or sink. These companies are trying to intimidate us with the threat of folding and devastating the economy. But we'll probably only have to let one fall for the rest to get the message that we're not going to be bullied into rescuing them. Who wouldn't want someone to absorb all the negative fallout from their misjudgements and set them up for life in the process. That option is never even considered for average workers. If we're going to do it for the fat cats, there ought to be some pretty tough rules.
Post a Comment