Discussion re: my last entry is ongoing but I HAD to share this.
Joshua's Journal
My Podcast Link
02/05/2009 15:35 #47650
O'Reilly - Vintage Meltdown02/05/2009 10:51 #47648
Corporate Salary CapPeople are asking whether or not this will hurt New York - the answer is yes. Our state taxes these Wall St. bonuses heavily, and knowing the size of these bonuses our state is surely about to lose out on billions in income taxes. It makes you wonder whether or not the state's budget had that "revenue" incorporated into their current and future budget predictions, and how that might affect next year's $12 billion budget deficit.
So - here is where we are. We're happy that these crooks are going to have their income controlled by the government as long as they are borrowing taxpayer money. However, if these fat cats are going to be paying billions less in taxes due to earning less income, who do you think is going to be closing that budget gap? YOU are, one way or another. Isn't that a bitch?
They won't shrink the size of government and spend responsibly. New York State politicians do not have the will to tell people that they've overspent and made obligations they never could have afforded, and now we are about to have to deal with that problem in a harsh way.
Addition of federal tax money to states in this $1T federal orgy will only exacerbate the problem. Politicians who are afraid of possibly having to get a real job would rather sell the state out than tell the people the truth - that the budget has been too big for too long, and that Albany relied on unusually high tax receipts from Wall St. (and now we know why) over the past 5 years to pay for expansion of government programs that wouldn't be sustainable otherwise. Right now, instead of acting responsibly and paring the budget down to match realistic tax receipt projections, they are waiting to make a decision until that $160B for states is released. Cute, huh?
Not to mention that our state (and our county, and our city...) does its budgeting backwards, thinking of what to spend on before understanding how much you actually have to spend.
So - here is where we are. We're happy that these crooks are going to have their income controlled by the government as long as they are borrowing taxpayer money. However, if these fat cats are going to be paying billions less in taxes due to earning less income, who do you think is going to be closing that budget gap? YOU are, one way or another. Isn't that a bitch?
They won't shrink the size of government and spend responsibly. New York State politicians do not have the will to tell people that they've overspent and made obligations they never could have afforded, and now we are about to have to deal with that problem in a harsh way.
Addition of federal tax money to states in this $1T federal orgy will only exacerbate the problem. Politicians who are afraid of possibly having to get a real job would rather sell the state out than tell the people the truth - that the budget has been too big for too long, and that Albany relied on unusually high tax receipts from Wall St. (and now we know why) over the past 5 years to pay for expansion of government programs that wouldn't be sustainable otherwise. Right now, instead of acting responsibly and paring the budget down to match realistic tax receipt projections, they are waiting to make a decision until that $160B for states is released. Cute, huh?
Not to mention that our state (and our county, and our city...) does its budgeting backwards, thinking of what to spend on before understanding how much you actually have to spend.
joshua - 02/05/09 13:39
Goddammit, I wrote a monster response only for it to disappear...
I'll summarize what I was going to tell janelle - I read the same article! While it is true that bonuses are not outright banned, the method and time structure of these payments will be affected, and that is causing anxiety on the street. The rule will still have an effect on our state tax receipts, even if the reduction in bonuses was modest, say $1B off of that nearly $19B that was just paid out. Even a $1B change would freak Albany out right now.
For example, let's take a look at this thief from Countrywide, Angelo Mozilo. :::link::: In 2006 he was paid almost $3M in base salary, $20.5M in cash bonus and an additional $72.2M in stock. Under the rules right now, the bonus payment wouldn't be allowed, his base salary would be reduced 80% and he would not be allowed to extract any of the money from his stock until Uncle Samuel got his first.
I think there is a question of how effective this will be, but what most people don't realize (because they aren't being told by anyone) what it means when they say that only those who took taxpayer money will be subject to these changes. Most firms on Wall St. did not take taxpayer funds and will pay their executives whatever they like. I think the popular assumption is that Wall St. bonuses are going to be drastically reduced, which will probably not be true. For my part, I'm simply looking at how even a modest change would be big news for our state.
Goddammit, I wrote a monster response only for it to disappear...
I'll summarize what I was going to tell janelle - I read the same article! While it is true that bonuses are not outright banned, the method and time structure of these payments will be affected, and that is causing anxiety on the street. The rule will still have an effect on our state tax receipts, even if the reduction in bonuses was modest, say $1B off of that nearly $19B that was just paid out. Even a $1B change would freak Albany out right now.
For example, let's take a look at this thief from Countrywide, Angelo Mozilo. :::link::: In 2006 he was paid almost $3M in base salary, $20.5M in cash bonus and an additional $72.2M in stock. Under the rules right now, the bonus payment wouldn't be allowed, his base salary would be reduced 80% and he would not be allowed to extract any of the money from his stock until Uncle Samuel got his first.
I think there is a question of how effective this will be, but what most people don't realize (because they aren't being told by anyone) what it means when they say that only those who took taxpayer money will be subject to these changes. Most firms on Wall St. did not take taxpayer funds and will pay their executives whatever they like. I think the popular assumption is that Wall St. bonuses are going to be drastically reduced, which will probably not be true. For my part, I'm simply looking at how even a modest change would be big news for our state.
joshua - 02/05/09 13:22
(e:janelle) - yeah, I read the same article this morning! The legislation specifically does not ban bonuses and so that is technically true. But the legislation does limit cash compensation to top executives(which is important - they still cannot be paid above $500,000 in cash regardless of how or when it is delivered) and it does restrict the selling of stock options until after the government has been paid back. So a CEO can still be paid $500,000 cash and $20,000,000 in stock to be sold after Uncle Samuel gets his. Who knows when that will be? This will still affect the behavior of Wall St., as you can see by the reaction to the law from yesterday's market activity. The street ain't happy... but as far as I'm concerned, screw them!
Another point that article made that is interesting to point out - this limit only applies to top executives. The "golden 25" or "golden 50," as it were. If you are a junior executive, or an extraordinarily well paid floor trader, etc., you can still earn millions of dollars. I don't particularly have a problem with that and don't see it as an issue. These people aren't the Madoffs or the Fulds of the world, and last I checked it was still perfectly legal to earn a lot of money in the United States. The design is to limit the pay of these top-flight "golden parachuters" who ruin their companies and end up with hundreds of millions.
(e:jho) - we'll see about how effective it is... I fully expect that these guys will find other ways to compensate themselves at the expense of the company and its clients. Plus, as the article highlights (or perhaps laments...), it doesn't address the companies who haven't taken government money. Wall St. will still pay out lots of money and people are going to wonder why, not realizing that it won't affect people who didn't go to the gov't for help.
In the end though, even a $1B reduction in tax receipts from Wall St. would drastically affect our state budget, so from my view even a modest reduction in executive compensation as a result of this law will result in loss of tax receipts that Albany will find tough to handle at the moment. Can we expect that the law will function in the way it was meant to? Nobody knows. We're already at the point where our state government is using a $600+ SUNY tuition increase solely to close a $1.7B state budget gap, which by the way has little to do with education and a lot to do with mismanagement.
(e:janelle) - yeah, I read the same article this morning! The legislation specifically does not ban bonuses and so that is technically true. But the legislation does limit cash compensation to top executives(which is important - they still cannot be paid above $500,000 in cash regardless of how or when it is delivered) and it does restrict the selling of stock options until after the government has been paid back. So a CEO can still be paid $500,000 cash and $20,000,000 in stock to be sold after Uncle Samuel gets his. Who knows when that will be? This will still affect the behavior of Wall St., as you can see by the reaction to the law from yesterday's market activity. The street ain't happy... but as far as I'm concerned, screw them!
Another point that article made that is interesting to point out - this limit only applies to top executives. The "golden 25" or "golden 50," as it were. If you are a junior executive, or an extraordinarily well paid floor trader, etc., you can still earn millions of dollars. I don't particularly have a problem with that and don't see it as an issue. These people aren't the Madoffs or the Fulds of the world, and last I checked it was still perfectly legal to earn a lot of money in the United States. The design is to limit the pay of these top-flight "golden parachuters" who ruin their companies and end up with hundreds of millions.
(e:jho) - we'll see about how effective it is... I fully expect that these guys will find other ways to compensate themselves at the expense of the company and its clients. Plus, as the article highlights (or perhaps laments...), it doesn't address the companies who haven't taken government money. Wall St. will still pay out lots of money and people are going to wonder why, not realizing that it won't affect people who didn't go to the gov't for help.
In the end though, even a $1B reduction in tax receipts from Wall St. would drastically affect our state budget, so from my view even a modest reduction in executive compensation as a result of this law will result in loss of tax receipts that Albany will find tough to handle at the moment. Can we expect that the law will function in the way it was meant to? Nobody knows. We're already at the point where our state government is using a $600+ SUNY tuition increase solely to close a $1.7B state budget gap, which by the way has little to do with education and a lot to do with mismanagement.
james - 02/05/09 13:10
Because NYS is so dependent on sales and property tax we actually have a regressive tax structure, which is absolutely insane. So, I wonder what kind of impact this will have on a county by county level.
But the proposal from Obama has no teeth in it what so ever. I have to wonder if it is a warning shot, appealing to these fat cats basic survival instinct to not be such fucking dicks with our money.
Because NYS is so dependent on sales and property tax we actually have a regressive tax structure, which is absolutely insane. So, I wonder what kind of impact this will have on a county by county level.
But the proposal from Obama has no teeth in it what so ever. I have to wonder if it is a warning shot, appealing to these fat cats basic survival instinct to not be such fucking dicks with our money.
jason - 02/05/09 12:53
I'm more concerned about their bon bon eating, luxuriating, not working, gold-diggin ass WAGs are going to do. Oh heavens!
I'm more concerned about their bon bon eating, luxuriating, not working, gold-diggin ass WAGs are going to do. Oh heavens!
hodown - 02/05/09 12:18
This salary cap is also not retroactive. All the fatcats basically get to keep their salaries. Honestly- I think this one was a lot of hot air that won't amount to much.
This salary cap is also not retroactive. All the fatcats basically get to keep their salaries. Honestly- I think this one was a lot of hot air that won't amount to much.
janelle - 02/05/09 12:05
An article I read in the NY Times indicated that the bonuses were not included in the salary cap.
:::link:::
Shareholders have a say in bonuses above the cap amount and there's not limits on what they can reward. And it doesn't apply to the 350 institutions that already applied for bailout funds.
It seems like it might take time to see just how much of an impact it will have on the NY state budget. But I hear ya on the budget. See what you have first, then budget accordingly. Basic budgeting 101.
An article I read in the NY Times indicated that the bonuses were not included in the salary cap.
:::link:::
Shareholders have a say in bonuses above the cap amount and there's not limits on what they can reward. And it doesn't apply to the 350 institutions that already applied for bailout funds.
It seems like it might take time to see just how much of an impact it will have on the NY state budget. But I hear ya on the budget. See what you have first, then budget accordingly. Basic budgeting 101.
01/30/2009 10:28 #47569
Outlandish Dog HaircutTold you -
Happy Friday -
Josh
PS - I have a post coming re: the whatever you'd like to call it going on in Washington at the moment.
Happy Friday -
Josh
PS - I have a post coming re: the whatever you'd like to call it going on in Washington at the moment.
ladycroft - 02/06/09 06:10
is this donald turmp's dog? ha
is this donald turmp's dog? ha
dcoffee - 02/01/09 15:10
dud you could be a pundit :) you were right on about Michael Steele
dud you could be a pundit :) you were right on about Michael Steele
libertad - 01/30/09 16:34
hehe!
hehe!
jason - 01/30/09 14:42
Well, on the bright side, after that 4-pack of Piraat she will look like a beauty queen.
Well, on the bright side, after that 4-pack of Piraat she will look like a beauty queen.
hodown - 01/30/09 12:12
I can't decide if that's cute or scary. Can it be both?
Also looking forward to what you have to say about DC.
I can't decide if that's cute or scary. Can it be both?
Also looking forward to what you have to say about DC.
james - 01/30/09 10:59
That dog is sporting The Blago. Very fashionable these days.
That dog is sporting The Blago. Very fashionable these days.
mrmike - 01/30/09 10:49
That is bad, makes the poor dog look like Will Robinson on Lost in Space
That is bad, makes the poor dog look like Will Robinson on Lost in Space
01/21/2009 21:21 #47480
The Cancelling of a CoronationSorry, Princess Caroline!
I'm absolutely thrilled that she bowed out. Then again, Andrew Cuomo, who I've previously been high on, shouldn't be selected either IMO based on his mismanagement of HUD, including having $59 billion of HUD money "disappear." If you want to read about how he was involved in the Fannie/Freddie scandal read this Village Voice article -
I'll go with Gillibrand. She's a Democrat that I'd consider supporting based on her positions, and it seems like she'd be more of a consensus candidate for the entire state. Steven Israel seems to really, really, really want to be a Senator... which is why he should not get it. He should be thankful his district was gerrymandered in his favor six years ago.
I'm absolutely thrilled that she bowed out. Then again, Andrew Cuomo, who I've previously been high on, shouldn't be selected either IMO based on his mismanagement of HUD, including having $59 billion of HUD money "disappear." If you want to read about how he was involved in the Fannie/Freddie scandal read this Village Voice article -
I'll go with Gillibrand. She's a Democrat that I'd consider supporting based on her positions, and it seems like she'd be more of a consensus candidate for the entire state. Steven Israel seems to really, really, really want to be a Senator... which is why he should not get it. He should be thankful his district was gerrymandered in his favor six years ago.
james - 01/22/09 10:39
Ted has brain cancer, and he seems to have no trouble being a senator. He must be made of sterner stuff than his niece.
Ted has brain cancer, and he seems to have no trouble being a senator. He must be made of sterner stuff than his niece.
joshua - 01/22/09 09:15
I heard it on NPR this morning during the ride into work as well! But you know how deeply cynical I can be - it is so ridiculous that the media is tying this decision to the health of her uncle. I don't believe that crap - do you? She knew damn well that she had perpetrated the most botched political debut in NY history and possibly American history, given her famous name. Call me a cynic but I think Uncle Ted's seizure is being used as a convenient excuse.
I heard it on NPR this morning during the ride into work as well! But you know how deeply cynical I can be - it is so ridiculous that the media is tying this decision to the health of her uncle. I don't believe that crap - do you? She knew damn well that she had perpetrated the most botched political debut in NY history and possibly American history, given her famous name. Call me a cynic but I think Uncle Ted's seizure is being used as a convenient excuse.
01/20/2009 23:08 #47468
InaugurationIt was unremarkable, except for the fact that we have inaugurated the first black President and the sheer size of the crowd... the pictures on TV were very impressive. His speech was boring - I agree with people who say that he seemed more passionate in Denver. Overall I thought it was a sober speech, which I think was appropriate, but it could have used a bit more of that quasi-ecumenical uplift qualify that has seemed to sucker captivate so many people! I kid, I kid.
This, however, was an atrocity -
Praise song for the day.
Each day we go about our business, walking past each other, catching each others' eyes or not, about to speak or speaking. All about us is noise. All about us is noise and bramble, thorn and din, each one of our ancestors on our tongues. Someone is stitching up a hem, darning a hole in a uniform, patching a tire, repairing the things in need of repair.
Someone is trying to make music somewhere with a pair of wooden spoons on an oil drum with cello, boom box, harmonica, voice.
A woman and her son wait for the bus.
A farmer considers the changing sky; A teacher says, "Take out your pencils. Begin."
We encounter each other in words, words spiny or smooth, whispered or declaimed; words to consider, reconsider.
We cross dirt roads and highways that mark the will of someone and then others who said, "I need to see what's on the other side; I know there's something better down the road."
We need to find a place where we are safe; We walk into that which we cannot yet see.
Say it plain, that many have died for this day. Sing the names of the dead who brought us here, who laid the train tracks, raised the bridges, picked the cotton and the lettuce, built brick by brick the glittering edifices they would then keep clean and work inside of.
WEW WEW - GRAMMAR POLICE - PULL OVER! Anyway -
Praise song for struggle; praise song for the day. Praise song for every hand-lettered sign; The figuring it out at kitchen tables.
Some live by "Love thy neighbor as thy self."
Others by first do no harm, or take no more than you need.
What if the mightiest word is love, love beyond marital, filial, national. Love that casts a widening pool of light. Love with no need to preempt grievance.
In today's sharp sparkle, this winter air, anything can be made, any sentence begun.
On the brink, on the brim, on the cusp -- praise song for walking forward in that light.
WOT?
This is why you should not ever recite poetry at an inauguration unless you are an obvious genius, as Robert Frost and Maya Angelou are/were. (Don't have much of an opinion on Miller Williams). When Robert Frost was selected as the first inaugural poet, the poor guy was 86 years old and didn't have it in him to read the poem he wrote for the occasion, so he recited one he knew by heart, which starts like this:
The land was ours before we were the land's.
She was our land more than a hundred years
Before we were her people.
Ahhh..... that is like a warm comforting blanket compared to the nails on chalkboard of this "praise song," with its forced pretension and utter meaninglessness.
In today's sharp sparkle, this winter air, any poet can be selected (apparently), any sentence passed off as meaningful.
This, however, was an atrocity -
Praise song for the day.
Each day we go about our business, walking past each other, catching each others' eyes or not, about to speak or speaking. All about us is noise. All about us is noise and bramble, thorn and din, each one of our ancestors on our tongues. Someone is stitching up a hem, darning a hole in a uniform, patching a tire, repairing the things in need of repair.
Someone is trying to make music somewhere with a pair of wooden spoons on an oil drum with cello, boom box, harmonica, voice.
A woman and her son wait for the bus.
A farmer considers the changing sky; A teacher says, "Take out your pencils. Begin."
We encounter each other in words, words spiny or smooth, whispered or declaimed; words to consider, reconsider.
We cross dirt roads and highways that mark the will of someone and then others who said, "I need to see what's on the other side; I know there's something better down the road."
We need to find a place where we are safe; We walk into that which we cannot yet see.
Say it plain, that many have died for this day. Sing the names of the dead who brought us here, who laid the train tracks, raised the bridges, picked the cotton and the lettuce, built brick by brick the glittering edifices they would then keep clean and work inside of.
WEW WEW - GRAMMAR POLICE - PULL OVER! Anyway -
Praise song for struggle; praise song for the day. Praise song for every hand-lettered sign; The figuring it out at kitchen tables.
Some live by "Love thy neighbor as thy self."
Others by first do no harm, or take no more than you need.
What if the mightiest word is love, love beyond marital, filial, national. Love that casts a widening pool of light. Love with no need to preempt grievance.
In today's sharp sparkle, this winter air, anything can be made, any sentence begun.
On the brink, on the brim, on the cusp -- praise song for walking forward in that light.
WOT?
This is why you should not ever recite poetry at an inauguration unless you are an obvious genius, as Robert Frost and Maya Angelou are/were. (Don't have much of an opinion on Miller Williams). When Robert Frost was selected as the first inaugural poet, the poor guy was 86 years old and didn't have it in him to read the poem he wrote for the occasion, so he recited one he knew by heart, which starts like this:
The land was ours before we were the land's.
She was our land more than a hundred years
Before we were her people.
Ahhh..... that is like a warm comforting blanket compared to the nails on chalkboard of this "praise song," with its forced pretension and utter meaninglessness.
In today's sharp sparkle, this winter air, any poet can be selected (apparently), any sentence passed off as meaningful.
mrmike - 01/21/09 17:41
Funny part, when the poem started people left in serious numbers
Funny part, when the poem started people left in serious numbers
james - 01/21/09 14:19
oh yes, I don't recommend cowboy poetry to anyone accept cowboys. And even then, only begrudgingly.
oh yes, I don't recommend cowboy poetry to anyone accept cowboys. And even then, only begrudgingly.
joshua - 01/21/09 13:59
Bleh, if I want Western imagery I'll read Cormac McCarthy!
Bleh, if I want Western imagery I'll read Cormac McCarthy!
james - 01/21/09 12:36
cowboy poetry isn't just a Texas thing. It is all over the west and tons of poets get up in cowboy-garb and pretend to be cowboys with deep, hardened souls. There are a bunch of actual cowboys who live the life and write poetry on the side. It is supposed to be simple verse written by hard men who lead hard lives. They hold conventions and everything.
But, I tried to find some poets from Texas and came across a list of Texas Poet Laureates over the years. There isn't much poetry going on in that state, as there has been quite a few dry spells.
:::link:::
cowboy poetry isn't just a Texas thing. It is all over the west and tons of poets get up in cowboy-garb and pretend to be cowboys with deep, hardened souls. There are a bunch of actual cowboys who live the life and write poetry on the side. It is supposed to be simple verse written by hard men who lead hard lives. They hold conventions and everything.
But, I tried to find some poets from Texas and came across a list of Texas Poet Laureates over the years. There isn't much poetry going on in that state, as there has been quite a few dry spells.
:::link:::
joshua - 01/21/09 11:40
I took a look - GWB never had a Poet Laureate as Governor of Texas. Cowboy philosophy expressed via poetry? It probably starts something like this -
Roses are red
violets are blue
Now that I've just disparaged the literary establishment of an entire state, can someone point me to a Texan poet of reknown?
I took a look - GWB never had a Poet Laureate as Governor of Texas. Cowboy philosophy expressed via poetry? It probably starts something like this -
Roses are red
violets are blue
Now that I've just disparaged the literary establishment of an entire state, can someone point me to a Texan poet of reknown?
james - 01/21/09 11:33
Poetry is a written art for the most part. When I read her poem I liked it a lot more than when I heard it. There have only been a handful of poets I have seen whose work actually benefited from them reading it.
I do think that Bush should have had a cowboy poet at his inauguration. Big grey mustache, a red bandana tied around his neck, and a little camp fire next to the podium. Reading a poem with a title like "Gathering Colts" or "Cow Birth on my Gloves".
Poetry is a written art for the most part. When I read her poem I liked it a lot more than when I heard it. There have only been a handful of poets I have seen whose work actually benefited from them reading it.
I do think that Bush should have had a cowboy poet at his inauguration. Big grey mustache, a red bandana tied around his neck, and a little camp fire next to the podium. Reading a poem with a title like "Gathering Colts" or "Cow Birth on my Gloves".
hodown - 01/21/09 10:54
Agree about the Poet. Disagree about the speech.
Agree about the Poet. Disagree about the speech.
I'll write it, and we'll do it live!
This fucking thing sucks!
There are no words on it!
What does that mean, "to play us out"? To end the show?
bahahahahaha my friends have had entire conversations using only lines from that video, and "DO IT LIVE" has become a bit of a battle cry.
Look up the 'dance remix'- it's worth it.
crazy man
That was me, sorry.
Oh no your journals all fisukped isup. I will investigate when I am home from the gym.
Hey Peter -
Yeah, his show is called The O'Reilly Factor. This is old - mid 90's I'd guess? Before he had his own show he was on Inside Edition.
Ok Help here I'm lost since when does he work on Inside Edition the News show. Also isn't his show the O'Riley Factor all live????????????