Why do you feel socialism is bad?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PlipPlop
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
sidbrown said:
Government can promote the general welfare, promote freedom and promote virtue. I don’t see anything wrong with promoting the welfare of the working class and everyone else, but I do see something radically wrong with promoting the welfare of multimillionaires who work for AIG and Wall Street by first bailing them out with taxpayer dollars and then allowing them to hand out multimillion dollar bonuses after the hard working taxpayers have bailed them out.
Click to expand...
So are you saying that the Catholic Church is wrong in condemning collectivisms and wrong in supporting subsidiarity systems? Is the Catholic Church on the wrong side? Please explain.
:confused:
 
humblelurker said:
So are you saying that the Catholic Church is wrong in condemning collectivisms and wrong in supporting subsidiarity systems? Is the Catholic Church on the wrong side? Please explain.
:confused:
Click to expand...
No.
I am saying that I don’t think the workingman should have to support socialistic bailouts for the rich and wealthy. Why should the taxpayer subsidize one million dollar bonuses to rich executives who have shown themselves to be incompetent? While at the same time when the worker is thrown out of a job, he and his family have to turn over thier house to the bank and are left to starve to death?
 
sidbrown said:
No.
I am saying that I don’t think the workingman should have to support socialistic bailouts for the rich and wealthy. Why should the taxpayer subsidize one million dollar bonuses to rich executives who have shown themselves to be incompetent? While at the same time when the worker is thrown out of a job, he and his family have to turn over thier house to the bank and are left to starve to death?
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I had to have you clarify what position you are taking for my own sake concerning collectivisms. Thank you for clearing that up for me.
 
sidbrown said:
In 2007, CEO’s at major US companies were paid 344 times the pay of the average worker. But in 1980, they were paid only 42 times the pay of the average worker. Were executives a whole lot less hardworking and qualified in 1980 than in 2007? AIG was brought to financial ruin by the incompetence of those executives leading the company. They begged the hardworking US taxpayer to bail them out, which Bush did with government funding of $175 billion. So now, after it has been proven that their executives are incompetent and failures, the company AIG pays out $165 million in bonuses to executives in the very division which had brought about the financial ruin of the company? Seventy three employees received bonuses of one million dollars or more?
So we have socialism for the rich, and promote the general welfare of the rich, but nothing for the working man thrown out of work and facing foreclosure on his house. Nothing for him except perhaps a $25 tent and a few food stamps so that he and his family can avoid total hunger and death.
Click to expand...
Oh please AIGs excecutives were not at all culpable for the collapse of their company. You do understand that if AIG fell, the entire financial sector would have fallen with it, right? That would have set us back decades.
 
sidbrown said:
No.
I am saying that I don’t think the workingman should have to support socialistic bailouts for the rich and wealthy. Why should the taxpayer subsidize one million dollar bonuses to rich executives who have shown themselves to be incompetent? While at the same time when the worker is thrown out of a job, he and his family have to turn over thier house to the bank and are left to starve to death?
Click to expand...
AIG does insurance. When the entire area you insure collapses and tries to collect, of course you need help.
 
tjm190 said:
Oh please AIGs excecutives were not at all culpable for the collapse of their company. You do understand that if AIG fell, the entire financial sector would have fallen with it, right? That would have set us back decades.
Click to expand...
I thought the Fed is supposed to make up that difference under the “lender of last resort” rule.

For the record, I have mixed thoughts on the TARP bill.
 
sidbrown said:
Government can promote the general welfare, promote freedom and promote virtue. I don’t see anything wrong with promoting the welfare of the working class and everyone else, but I do see something radically wrong with promoting the welfare of multimillionaires who work for AIG and Wall Street by first bailing them out with taxpayer dollars and then allowing them to hand out multimillion dollar bonuses after the hard working taxpayers have bailed them out.
Click to expand...
If you want to promote the welfare of others, more than our taxes already do now, GREAT! Go for it!
I’m not about to give up to HALF of my paycheck for the promotion of others’ welfare.
I work so I can live and support my family members - I don’t work to support my neighbors, but my taxes are mandatory, so, YES, I guess I AM working to support my neighbors. I’m supporting them enough already - those who want to support them MORE can do so. Everyone else is forced to pay already and that is enough!
 
HeWillProvide said:
If you want to promote the welfare of others, more than our taxes already do now, GREAT! Go for it!
I’m not about to give up to HALF of my paycheck for the promotion of others’ welfare.
I work so I can live and support my family members - I don’t work to support my neighbors, but my taxes are mandatory, so, YES, I guess I AM working to support my neighbors. I’m supporting them enough already - those who want to support them MORE can do so. Everyone else is forced to pay already and that is enough!
Click to expand...
And do you support government sponsored handouts of one million dollars to executives at AIG who don’t know what they are doing as it seen by the way the invested money?
 
tjm190 said:
Oh please AIGs excecutives were not at all culpable for the collapse of their company. You do understand that if AIG fell, the entire financial sector would have fallen with it, right? That would have set us back decades.
Click to expand...
I doubt that the whole financial sector would have failed if the bonuses given to incompetent executives was only $100,000 each instead of one million dollars apiece.
Further, if we want a free and independent market system, why not let the market decide what will succeed and what will fail, instead of letting politicians like George Bush and Dick Cheney make that decision?
 
sidbrown said:
I doubt that the whole financial sector would have failed if the bonuses given to incompetent executives was only $100,000 each instead of one million dollars apiece.
Click to expand...
Bonuses paid to corporate executives have very little to do with the financial collapse. The real problem was subprime loans mandated by Congress.
sidbrown said:
Further, if we want a free and independent market system, why not let the market decide what will succeed and what will fail, instead of letting politicians like George Bush and Dick Cheney make that decision?
Click to expand...
I disagee with what Bush and Cheney did, and what Obama did on an even greater scale. Why blame Bush and Cheney exclusively?
 
qui_est_ce said:
Bonuses paid to corporate executives have very little to do with the financial collapse.
Click to expand...
Yes. I am glad you agre with me on this and see that socialism for the wealthy is not justified. One million dollar bonuses to reward the incompetence of executives whose decisions have brought a company to financial ruin doesn’t make any sense., Further, it makes less sense to have the starving taxpayer pay for these outrageous bonuses for fatcat incompetent millionaires.
 
sidbrown said:
I doubt that the whole financial sector would have failed if the bonuses given to incompetent executives was only $100,000 each instead of one million dollars apiece.
Further, if we want a free and independent market system, why not let the market decide what will succeed and what will fail, instead of letting politicians like George Bush and Dick Cheney make that decision?
Click to expand...
What makes you think they were incompetent? Their contracts entitled them to certain bonuses- if their contracts weren’t being fulfilled, they would have gone and worked somewhere else.
 
sidbrown said:
Yes. I am glad you agre with me on this and see that socialism for the wealthy is not justified. One million dollar bonuses to reward the incompetence of executives whose decisions have brought a company to financial ruin doesn’t make any sense., Further, it makes less sense to have the starving taxpayer pay for these outrageous bonuses for fatcat incompetent millionaires.
Click to expand...
Show me some evidence of incompetence.
 
tjm190 said:
Show me some evidence of incompetence.
Click to expand...
Please see:
“418 Got AIG Bonuses” NY Times, March 18, 2009, page A1.
AIG paid $165 million in bonuses to incompetent executives in the very division that had precipitated the crisis.
 
sidbrown said:
Yes. I am glad you agre with me on this and see that socialism for the wealthy is not justified. One million dollar bonuses to reward the incompetence of executives whose decisions have brought a company to financial ruin doesn’t make any sense., Further, it makes less sense to have the starving taxpayer pay for these outrageous bonuses for fatcat incompetent millionaires.
Click to expand...
Let’s not even go into how much worse government corruption and waste are hurting the tax payers.
 
sidbrown said:
Please see:
“418 Got AIG Bonuses” NY Times, March 18, 2009, page A1.
AIG paid $165 million in bonuses to incompetent executives in the very division that had precipitated the crisis.
Click to expand...
The Financial Crisis is much bigger that $165 million. The problem was subprime lending.
 
qui_est_ce said:
The Financial Crisis is much bigger that $165 million. The problem was subprime lending.
Click to expand...
Bush and Cheney gave $173 billion to AIG after its incompetent executives brought the company to financial ruin by the risky investments of its financial products unit. Then after getting this money from the starving taxpayers, AIG decided to reward its incompetent executives with one million dollar bonuses totalling $165 million in the very unit which precipitated the crisis. Why not give a few dollars to the starving taxpayers who have lost their jobs and their houses ? Why should the taxpayer be required to reward fatcat millionaires for their incompetence?
 
sidbrown said:
Please see:
“418 Got AIG Bonuses” NY Times, March 18, 2009, page A1.
AIG paid $165 million in bonuses to incompetent executives in the very division that had precipitated the crisis.
Click to expand...
AIG fell as a RESULT of the crisis because it insured companies that nobody thought could fail. Waiting on you too shown me some incompetence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top