1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Wall Street's latest major paradigm shift in the last week

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Simon_Cowbell, Sep 22, 2008.

  1. 2muchcoffeeman

    2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

    It's light and tasty for adults of discriminating taste. In fact, you might say its taste is killer.
     
  2. hondo

    hondo Well-Known Member

    Judge Smails loved Fresca.
     
  3. deskslave

    deskslave Active Member

    I would remind you that Obama has had multiple days on which he has raised millions of dollars. I would hardly call $125K "mind-boggling," at least not to him.
     
  4. 2muchcoffeeman

    2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

    Politics on the politics forum. This is a Frescajack.
     
  5. sportschick

    sportschick Active Member

    My father makes more than $125,000 a year. That's hardly a mind-boggling amount of money.

    And the Fresca Mafia is ready and willing to fight for its blood diamond.
     
  6. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member

    No he's not. You're making this up.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13606.html
     
  7. 2muchcoffeeman

    2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

    http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/threads/60538/
     
  8. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    DB'er! ;D
     
  9. Simon_Cowbell

    Simon_Cowbell Active Member

    Nazi propaganda leaflets tossed from a biplane don't count as "a paper"
     
  10. Simon_Cowbell

    Simon_Cowbell Active Member

    http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/21/what_wall_street_should_do_to/


    By Robert Reich

    .....

    So if you are a member of Congress, you just might be in a position to demand from Wall Street certain conditions in return for the blank check.

    My five nominees:

    1. The government (i.e. taxpayers) gets an equity stake in every Wall Street financial company proportional to the amount of bad debt that company shoves onto the public. So when and if Wall Street shares rise, taxpayers are rewarded for accepting so much risk.

    2. Wall Street executives and directors of Wall Street firms relinquish their current stock options and this year's other forms of compensation, and agree to future compensation linked to a rolling five-year average of firm profitability. Why should taxpayers feather their already amply-feathered nests?

    3. All Wall Street executives immediately cease making campaign contributions to any candidate for public office in this election cycle or next, all Wall Street PACs be closed, and Wall Street lobbyists curtail their activities unless specifically asked for information by policymakers. Why should taxpayers finance Wall Street's outsized political power - especially when that power is being exercised to get favorable terms from taxpayers?

    4. Wall Street firms agree to comply with new regulations over disclosure, capital requirements, conflicts of interest, and market manipulation. The regulations will emerge in ninety days from a bi-partisan working group, to be convened immediately. After all, inadequate regulation and lack of oversight got us into this mess.

    5. Wall Street agrees to give bankruptcy judges the authority to modify the terms of primary mortgages, so homeowners have a fighting chance to keep their homes. Why should distressed homeowners lose their homes when Wall Streeters receive taxpayer money that helps them keep their fancy ones?

    Wall Streeters may not like these conditions. Well, you should tell them that the public doesn't like the idea of bailing out Wall Street. So if Wall Street doesn't accept these conditions, it doesn't get the blank check.
     
  11. hondo

    hondo Well-Known Member

    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hC9O6sRspcMU1TS3H0CLrE2IWu-gD939NBFO0

    "McCain spokesman Brian Rogers ... noted that the Washington Post reported on three occasions, between July 16 and Aug. 28, that Raines was advising Obama.
    "If he was not advising, obviously someone somewhere along the way should have corrected the record," Rogers said.

    Sorry guys ... usually you take it as gospel if it appears in the Washington Post.
     
  12. PeteyPirate

    PeteyPirate Guest

    And since they didn't, we'll run with the incorrect information even now.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page