People who read this blog often get the wrong impression. While it is true that I am against Communism in all forms I am for sound regulation of business.
The recent scandals in business point to the dire need for governmental review of business. Left unregulated some businessmen will act criminally. Their is something wrong with a system that treats a buffoon like Madoff differently than a bank robber.
Let white collar vermin sit right in with drug dealers in a harsh lock up. No more country club prisons for these parasites.
I also am too familiar with employees of public corporations using corporate cards for hookers, drugs and lavish lifestyles. This behavior should be criminal even in private companies with bank loans.
Those of you familiar with this blog know that I spent years in the fashion industry where I witnessed all types of malfeasance. These corporations were private companies
but were heavily leveraged by banks making this type of activity criminal. I actually went on a job interview where the owner of the company asked me if I would
object to picking up his cocaine. The entire chain of delivery from suppliers to distribution is rife with graft.
My ire was reserved for the owners who complain about labor costs and expense lavish lifestyles on the company. One former owner complained about greedy union labor seeking $1.50 an hour raises. This same corporate skank expensed hundred dollar massages, limos to go eight blocks, monthly trips unrelated to business and bottle after bottle of booze on the company. Predictably when the company failed it was the fault of the union labor. Predictably, the same banks lent the same dolt money to fail a second or third time.
Obama is correct about limiting compensation to companies that get Federal bailouts.
However, the time has come to place teeth into agencies regulating business. The days of benign neglect and pretending business can regulate itself need to end.
6 comments:
The recent scandals in business point to the dire need for governmental review of business.
In theory, yes. However, the government has shown itself to be just as corrupt those whom the government oversees.
Obama is correct about limiting compensation to companies that get Federal bailouts.
And BHO and Barney Frank now want to impose that limit on ALL companies, regardless of whether or not they took bailout funds. I'll have a post about that next week.
BTW, I note today in the WaPo that the head of Chrysler will comply with the pay limits in the hopes of securing more aid. Now, how is that a plus?
Plus, I just read a short time ago that the government has actually forced at least one bank-Wells Fargo-to accept bailout money they neither asked for nor wanted. So now of course they are going to try to regulate their business practices. Yeah, I'm all for limiting CEO perks for those who willingly accepted taxpayer funded bailout money, but to try to force the money on a successful company and then try to force changes on them is beyond the pale.
Plus, the companies that accepted the money won't really change their practices anyway, they'll just figure out some new angle, like they always do.
Pagan
Obama is 100% correct on this one. If a company requires federal money
than executive compensation should be capped.
I am also against the fleecing of shareholders and banks when executives bill hookers and lavish lifestyles on the corporate dime.
I can't say I agree with him in setting the Salary caps with the bailout because I'd first have to support the actual bailout.
If these big corporations that wiped out small local business are as evil as the Liberals want us to believe, then why are we afraid to let them fall?
Pagan Temple,
I just read a short time ago that the government has actually forced at least one bank-Wells Fargo-to accept bailout money they neither asked for nor wanted.
Do you have a link for that?
I missed the story.
Feel free to email me the link or to post it at my site.
Thanks.
AOW-
You can read it on the blog Hillbilly White Trash which is on my blogroll, but you'll have to scroll down five or six posts to get to it. My blogroll is on he sidebar to the left and is under the heading Pantheon Of Blogs. The blogs are listed in alphabetical order, so look for the H's. I don't know if he has a link or not, I haven't gotten around yet to verifying the story, but I am sure it is accurate.
Beak-I agree with all that you said, but you have to admit it's kind of off the charts to force a company to accept bailout money when they don't even ask for it, want it, and apparently have no need for it. Wells Fargo is one of those companies that have been doing just fine. Why force them to take bailout money,and then try to control the practices of a successful company? It only makes sense if they are trying to get Wells Fargo to do the same crap that got the other businesses in such a load of shit. In other words, what they might really be trying to do is prop up a faulty system in the hopes everything will work out over time.
These sons-of-bitches running our government are at least profoundly corrupt, in other words-if not flat out bat-shit insane.
Post a Comment