Feinstein on bailout: Set execs 'on fire' if they don't play ball

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Feinstein on bailout: Set execs 'on fire' if they don't play ball

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Feinstein_on_bailout_Set_execs_on_0928.html

Americans don't like the bailout.

That's the message that Sen. Dianne Feinstein is receiving from her constituents, making her more hesitant than many of her fellow Democrats to pass the $700 billion Wall St. bailout proposed by President Bush, McClatchy reported.

"Only one of a thousand supports it — whatever it is," the California Democrat said. "People call us and say they're really against bailing out fat-cats. That's a big issue."

Even as lawmakers claimed a compromise had been reached early Sunday morning, doubts remained on both sides of the aisle about a bill that has grown from three pages to more than a hundred and offers little protection of taxpayers.

Feinstein explained one of the main sources of voters outrage over the bailout plan during an address to Congress: "I'm told that the reason the Treasury Secretary doesn't want limits on executive compensation is because he believes that an executive then won't bring his company in to partake in any program that is set up."

"Well here's my response to that," she said. "We can put that executive on his boat, take that boat out in the ocean and set it on fire if that's how he feels. That's what should happen, or his company doesn't come in."

Feinstein said the frantic push for the bill from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson feels too much like the rush into Iraq, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

"There is a great deal of cynicism among those of us who have to live with having voted to go into Iraq based on misinformation and intelligence that later turned out not to be truthful," Feinstein said

A full transcript of Feinstein's floor statement to Congress can be seen here: http://www.rocklintoday.com/news/templates/community_news.asp?articleid=6605&zoneid=4

[ShortnFiery]

1. Yeah, when DiFi says that she'll hold Corporate Execs accountable ... when pigs fly? eom

[whistle]

3. When pigs with lipstick fly!!!

[Kalyke]

2. Can you say, "Class War?"

I knew that you could.

[whistle]

4. Funny you should mention that, I ran across this post

<snip>
Peace Train: Say no to more class warfare!
Don't let Bush reward Wall Street for its failure

By Ron Forthofer, For the Colorado Daily
Thursday, September 25, 2008

The financial crisis facing our nation today is due to deregulation, to lack of enforcement of regulations and to the greed and fraud on Wall Street.

Incredibly, the Bush administration's proposed solution to the crisis is to redistribute at least $700 billion from workers to the wealthy on Wall Street.

Is this the free market at work? It sounds more like socializing the cost and privatizing the profit.

According to Bush, Congress must act immediately to protect the nation's economic health from serious risk. This bailout proposal is an example of the shock doctrine written about by Naomi Klein -- in a time of crisis, make major changes that benefit the powerful and wealthy.

Using the current crisis, Bush and his Wall Street cronies in both parties are trying to steal our financial future. Congress must for once stand up and say no to this huge money-and-power grab. Congress indeed must act, but the plan of action needs to be well thought-out instead of simply adopting a Wall Street bailout.

<MORE>

http://www.coloradodaily.com/news/2008/sep/25/say-no-to-more-class-02/


It's been know for some time:

<snip>
November 26, 2006
Everybody's Business
In Class Warfare, Guess Which Class Is Winning
By BEN STEIN
NOT long ago, I had the pleasure of a lengthy meeting with one of the smartest men on the planet, Warren E. Buffett, the chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway, in his unpretentious offices in Omaha. We talked of many things that, I hope, will inspire me for years to come. But one of the main subjects was taxes. Mr. Buffett, who probably does not feel sick when he sees his MasterCard bill in his mailbox the way I do, is at least as exercised about the tax system as I am.

Put simply, the rich pay a lot of taxes as a total percentage of taxes collected, but they don’t pay a lot of taxes as a percentage of what they can afford to pay, or as a percentage of what the government needs to close the deficit gap.

Mr. Buffett compiled a data sheet of the men and women who work in his office. He had each of them make a fraction; the numerator was how much they paid in federal income tax and in payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare, and the denominator was their taxable income. The people in his office were mostly secretaries and clerks, though not all.

It turned out that Mr. Buffett, with immense income from dividends and capital gains, paid far, far less as a fraction of his income than the secretaries or the clerks or anyone else in his office. Further, in conversation it came up that Mr. Buffett doesn’t use any tax planning at all. He just pays as the Internal Revenue Code requires. “How can this be fair?” he asked of how little he pays relative to his employees. “How can this be right?”

Even though I agreed with him, I warned that whenever someone tried to raise the issue, he or she was accused of fomenting class warfare.

“There’s class warfare, all right,” Mr. Buffett said, “but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

<MORE>

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/business/yourmoney/26every.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

[pitohui]

5. well there needs to be some accountability

if we privatize the profits but socialize the risk then it's the tragedy of the commons, the CEOs and CFOs would be stupid to do anything other than to take the greatest possible risk in hopes of reaping the greatest possible reward and if they fail, so what, there is no consequences to them since the system is too big to be allowed to fail and they will be bailed out

i have no problem w. a bail out "if" there is some way to make sure that those who benefited financially from failing have to pay a price

my idea was for a random lottery among the CEOs, CFOs, and the highest ranking execs, and a certain percentage of their names should be randomly drawn and those particular individual executed in a humane manner

in that way, in future actions, other CEOs, CFOS, etc. will be invested in the game and have something potentially at risk if they screw up by gambling too recklessly

okay, i realize there are various reasons why we can't/won't do this, only the poor should die for making a bad decision, that's the way our society is, but in that case, i do have a back-up suggestion

have the same lottery, and a certain percentage of these folks should have all of their assets (and all of their wives, children's, parents' assets seized -- all immediate family members, basically) -- if that seems unfair, remember when when the homeowner loses his or her house, they put out every member of the family, even the family dog and cat, not just the guy or gal who signed the crummy loan -- again, in this way, the high ranking execs actually have something at risk when they gamble -- they have the risk that not just themselves but ALL immediate family member should lose all, which is no more and no less than the price paid by the casino gambler who wagers more money than he has

the poor and the middle class often lose EVERYTHING for no crime worse than getting ill, i don't think it is unfair for someone to lose EVERYTHING when he makes the reckless choice to gamble with billions of other people's money

if that is class war, what of it? one BIG problem w. this country is that we don't have enough class war, because the stupid people of the poor and middle classes identify more w. the rich than with their own interests, we need more class war, not less if we are ever to have social justice

[burythehatchet]

6. Dianne Feinstein as The Populist. That's rich.

[Waiting For Everyman]

7. I'm glad she's talking "brakes" on this anyhow.

They need to find a way to make the banks and the ultra-rich pay for this themselves, not us. And put in a lot of foreclosure relief, and overhaul of regulating. They need to get our agenda NOW - or at least the rough outlines of it, or it will never happen.

Otherwise, the Dems are committing suicide.