Citigroup's new wings

TBF,

I think what you're not understanding here is that, in effect, the bailout makes the American people, and consequently their leader, able to weigh in on corporate decisions, especially when it comes to spending OUR money which they demanded that we hand over or the whole country was going to come crashing down. Remember when Bush and his thieves insisted that it had to be done that weekend or we were all going to be out in the streets with tin cups by Monday? Once you take the cash, you have to take the ADVICE on how to spend it. Quid pro quo. And as I recall, you and many others from the South were all about telling Detroit where they could stick it if they didn't want to go along with your rules on getting that money. What comes around, goes around.

 

I agree.

You take handout money from the government; you get to hear from American citizenry on how to spend that money. Starting with citizen #1.

The rules changed completely for these companies when they decided to grab onto what was essentially a monetary life raft.

 

Did you not read the rest of this thread? Of course there has to be "rules" that go along with getting the money. But, I'm sorry, this bailout money does NOT give the president the authority to pick up the phone and insist that companies make the decision he wants them to. Period.

 

The President always has the authority to pick up the phone. Citi has the option not to listen to him. They'll just look like jerks if they don't.

 

So, the next time (insert investment bank name) decides it wants to invest some money somewhere, they can expect a phone call from the President, advising them on the best avenue?

 

With what, dear Liza?

 

I believe it does. If the bailout money gives Congress, and consequently, the American people (including many antiunionists on this board) the right to demand that the UAW reduce salaries for thousands of workers so they allow FOREIGN car companies to not have to pay a decent wage to their workers, and also insist on many other niggling rules for automakers, it sure as HELL gives Obama the right to demand some of the same from these thieving banks.

 

I believe what this incident really shows, thank God, is that we now have a president from the industrial Midwest who knows what kind of pain people are feeling here. And instead of an East Coast elitist, as GWB really was, bullshit clearing brush notwithstanding, who just winks and nods at all kinds of abuse of the citizenry by investment banks while demanding outrageous things from automakers, we have someone who is going to tell those people they gotta pay to play, too.

 

You said the magic word. Congress. Through the arm of some oversight committee. Not the president's whim.

 

If it's their (the bank's) money, no.

If it's our money, I got no problem with that.

And again, the only way it gets to this point is if the bank in question is doing something incredibly stoooopid.

 

I think the financial institutions have clearly demonstrated to this point that they don't have a clue of what they are doing, or give a fuck. Good on Obama.

 

Plane go bye-bye



Citigroup backs off plans for $50-million corporate jet

By TODD SPANGLER • FREE PRESS WASHINGTON STAFF • January 27, 2009

WASHINGTON – Citigroup won’t be getting a brand-new corporate jet after all.

A day after U.S. Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan lashed out at the financial institution for its apparent plans to buy what the New York Post called a $50-million corporate jet, the New York City uberbank put out this terse statement:

“We have no intent to take delivery of any new aircraft.”

Levin’s ire was based on two factors. First, that Citgroup had taken $50 billion from the government’s Wall Street rescue package. Second, that when Detroit’s automakers came looking for government help – eventually getting a line on $17.4 billion in loans from the White House – they were tarred and feathered for showing up in private jets.

General Motors and Chrysler had to promise to divest themselves of any aircraft as a condition to getting the cash, while no such demand was placed on the banks.

On Monday, the day the Post reported the purchase of the jet citing an unnamed source, Citigroup put out a statement saying the contract for the new plane went back four years and was “done as part of our plan to reduce the number of aircraft Citi owns and use more fuel-efficient aircraft with lower operating costs.”

“Refusing delivery now would result in millions of dollars in penalties,” the statement went on to say.

There was no immediate word in a follow-up e-mail to Citigroup whether it plans to get rid of its other planes.