Advertisement

Letters to the Editor

Ethics, greed

March 23, 2009

Advertisement

To the editor:

The Republicans are having a field day criticizing the president and Treasury secretary concerning the AIG million-dollar bonuses. And in the midst of this financial crisis, it is fun to have a diversion as long as we don’t forget that it was the Republicans and their president who withdrew the financial safeguards that kept this country prosperous for the past 50 years.

It was the Republicans who were controlled by the corporate greed-mongers, who took from the poor and gave to the rich. It was the conservative Rush-followers who forgot that when you destroy the middle class, you eliminate the feeder system to the entire economy. These are the historical facts that we need to remember the next time we forget that, without safeguards, greed will win out over ethical practices every time.

E. Kent Hayes,
Lawrence

Comments

RoeDapple 5 years, 9 months ago

"These are the historical facts that we need to remember the next time we forget "

Let me think now did I forget to remember or remember to forget?

E. get a grip on it. Move on. Rehashing does nothing to correct anything. It is 2009. Want to make it better? Focus on the "now", not the "then"

You think Republicans are all "Rushies"? Not this one. Not most anybody I talk to. Quoting extremes (on either side) then saying,"See how they all are?" is a weak tool at best. Stop being a "tool".

labmonkey 5 years, 9 months ago

Oh no, people are starting to look at the government's failures. Quick, a diversion. Lets attack Rush again.

And many Republicans are stupid enough to take their attention away from government policies to defend him. Way to play into the Liberal's hands.

By the way...bad LTE. What Roe said.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 9 months ago

The Clinton Administration definitely deserves some of the credit for the current crisis, but it has absolutely nothing to do with seeking to increase access to home-ownership. The blame lies with Phil Gramm sneaking in a provision to allow almost anything to be securitized, including sub-prime mortgages, and Larry Summers got Clinton to sign it (although given the omnibus bill it was tacked onto, in the waning hours of the Clinton Administration, it's possible Clinton wasn't even aware it was in there.)

This allowed snake-oil salesmen to write loans they knew were likely not to be paid back. But they didn't care, because thanks to Phil Gramm, they would be immediately packaged up in securities and sold off to institutional buyers, most of whom should have known better, but in the "anything goes" spirit of the times, it nothing but just "party on."

BTW, Liberty One, despite your contentions to the contrary, the rule of the day ever since Reagan (although Carter started some of the deregulation fever) has been deregulation. Perhaps they haven't gone as far as you'd like, but to say the overregulation has gotten us where we are is just plain unsupportable.

BrianR 5 years, 9 months ago

The legislation everyone is so quick to lay at Clinton's feet was railroaded through in the waning days of Clinton's second term. The lame duck president had no chance of stopping it.

jumpin_catfish 5 years, 9 months ago

How about Chris Dodd? Oh, he's a democrat so what was I thinking.

Chris Ogle 5 years, 9 months ago

E. get a grip on it. Move on. Rehashing does nothing to correct anything. It is 2009. Want to make it better? Focus on the “now”, not the “then”

Right on, Roe

HermioneElliott 5 years, 9 months ago

The only reason for talking about the past is if something very specific was done that was wrong and can be corrected now to make things right.

jonas_opines 5 years, 9 months ago

"By the way…bad LTE."

Err. . . it's an E. Kent Hayes LTE, making "bad" somewhat redundant in its descriptive ability.

Kryptenx 5 years, 9 months ago

"Bozo, the facts just don't support that. Bush was the most regulation-happy president in the history of the US. 91,000 new regulatory employees, increased regulatory agency budget from $25 billion to $41 billion, and 18,000 new pages of regulations. To say that the rule of the day has be deregulation is just plain unsupportable."

Lmao, let me guess: all Homeland Security, NSA, other Patriot Act organizations. That's a pretty loose definition of regulatory. We know damn good and well that these positions weren't regulating the banks or Wall Street. Fail.

elfth 5 years, 9 months ago

The natives of both tribes are restless this morning. Drums beating very loud.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 9 months ago

Good point, Kryptenx. BushCo's "regulation" had nothing to do with promoting ethical practices, but rather were designed primarily to expand the revolving door between regulators and the regulated. Just because there is an increase in the number of "regulators" doesn't mean that regulation has increased. Quite the contrary, what BushCo did was to make the whole notion of "regulation" irrelevant.

So, Liberty One, while I can agree with you that we would be better off with that kind of "regulation," going to a complete free-for-all would be equally disastrous, since the results would likely be much the same.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 9 months ago

"Crimes would still be crimes, torts would still create liability."

With complete deregulation, there would no longer be any crimes. And if everything is determined by "property rights," there would be endless and conflicting litigation over whose property rights are superior. In other words, a free-for-all.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 9 months ago

And under your proposed system, property ownership would concentrate into ever fewer hands, as always happens in total laissez faire systems, leaving the dispossessed with no rights of any kind.

Flap Doodle 5 years, 9 months ago

Where does Rahm Emanuel fit into the AIG whoop-de-doo?

"Over the past ten days, as the furor over AIG retention plan bonuses has focused on Sen. Chris Dodd and Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, the White House has undertaken a PR offensive to protect the highest ranking Obama Administration official who was involved in the House and Senate negotiations over the stimulus bill, in which the AIG waiver language was inserted. "Right now, you get the feeling this is all about protecting [White House Chief of Staff] Rahm Emanuel,” says a former Treasury Department lawyer, who worked in that department's counsel's office on the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) before joining a D.C.-based law firm in February. "At the time, we were led to believe there were basically three or four people from the Administration at the table when the final deals were cut and one of them was Emanuel." "

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/23/plenty-of-rahm-at-the-aig-tabl

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 9 months ago

"lol, whenever you wish to talk with a real person instead of a straw man, let me know."

What's to discuss? You want a system that works great on paper, or with sparse populations of a few million-- just not with billions of us.

notajayhawk 5 years, 9 months ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

"(although given the omnibus bill it was tacked onto, in the waning hours of the Clinton Administration, it's possible Clinton wasn't even aware it was in there.)"

Uh huh.

Clinton signed the omnibus bill 'cause he didn't read it.

Dodd allowed the exception for the AIG bonuses 'cause he didn't read it.

Everyone voted for the Obamaton's 'stimulus' pckage 'cause they didn't read it.

Once again, boohoozo defends the Democrats with a foolproof argument - they did what they did 'cause they're stupid.

(boohoozo's defending the Dems only because he didn't read what they said.)

"You want a system that works great on paper, or with sparse populations of a few million— just not with billions of us."

You mean like socialism, herr klowne?


ocean;

Not that I believe you're interested in facts, and wouldn't let them get in the way of a good rant, but most of the expenditures you cite weren't paid for by AIG.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.