Kevin Rudd or Kevin Red?

[tubs]

Well, here we are. Continuing our march towards socialism.

http://business.theage.com.au/business/rudd-blasts-greed-20081015-514b.html

Kevin Rudd, or Kevin Red as I now prefer to call him has blamed the global financial crisis on greedy capitalists. Maybe he's creating a 'monster' with the intention of turning Turnbull into the monster.

And what's more, he's going to stop people getting paid what their companies think they're worth! Hey, I think that some top executives get paid more than they're worth, but its not up to me, and its not up to the government.

If they negotiate the deal, then they negotiate the deal. Its up to them, not the government. Why stop there? Why not put a limit on how much the Wiggles and Kylie earn. After all, do they actually do that much to earn their money?

But now Kevin Red wants to bring down those nasty capitalists so they earn the same amount like the rest of us.

I dont understand why he says (in one breath) that we have a problem with greedy capitalists running our institutions causing problems, THEN says that we're well regulated and in a good position.

A lot of the blame has to be placed at the feet of the government who have always pushed for institutions to make credit available to lower income earners to a) let them buy houses and 'stuff' and b) keep the economy ticking along.

But its easier to create a monster, and then pretend to kill it, isnt it.

 

[ianvestor]

The headline should read:

Rudd sends our most talented executives overseas

 

[Aaron Sice]

first paragraph for that headline

Kevin Rudd has pulled the rug out from under anyone looking to secure themselves a position in the corporate ladder - and any hope of retaining our young people as they head overseas to seek better pasture.

 

[NedKelly]

I think MP's get paid too much. You don't here Rudd complaining when pay rise time comes.

 

[BayView]

And what's more, he's going to stop people getting paid what their companies think they're worth! Hey, I think that some top executives get paid more than they're worth, but its not up to me, and its not up to the government.

If they negotiate the deal, then they negotiate the deal. Its up to them, not the government. Why stop there? Why not put a limit on how much the Wiggles and Kylie earn. After all, do they actually do that much to earn their money?

If the shareholders knew what the Lehman Bros CEO was going to get paid after they tanked, I'm sure they would have not allowed it.

Kylie and The Wiggles don't have shareholders to answer to (or not answer to in the case of Lehman Bros) and won't hurt anyone else but themselves if they go bankrupt.

They won't be riding off into the sunset with a half a billion dollars - that's with a "B" - while many hundreds of thousands of shareholders lose everything.

Having said that, I certainly don't think Lapdance Kev should be interfering with our capitalist system, except to curtail these f-knuckle CEO's and CFO's from destroying companies through their greed for themselves first, company second.

I don't think that any company head should be getting any sort of golden parachute when they stuff up a public company. They should get nothing, and some nice vertical steel bar window views for a lot of years. A few one-on-ones in the jail showers would be good to.

Then they might try a bit harder to make sure they keep the company safe and profitable, instead of lining their own pockets first while the ship sinks.

 

[boomtown]

Uh the OP is missing the point. The regulation will be appplied through APRA (bank regulator) so restrictions on salaries will only apply to regulated lenders.

Let's be realistic here. The only reason the federal government stepped in to guarantee loans to Australian lenders was because the little ones (Suncorp etc) were squealing like stuck pigs that they couldn't get offshore funds and were about to fall over as a result.

If Aussie lenders are going to trade under a sovereign AAA rating (not because we want to give it to them but because we have to give it to them) there has to be some pro quid pro quo.

If a trimming of bankers salaries is what it takes - so be it. Don't forget no one forced ANZ to take on 56 billion in CDS exposure. They engaged in that little **** up on their own.

The only reason that banks in the US and Europe have survived is because they have been allowed to survive by nationalisation. Aussie banks have similar **** ups that may be smaller but are still there.

No one that loses billions of dollars should get millions in bonuses - end of story.

 

[boomtown]

A lot of the blame has to be placed at the feet of the government who have always pushed for institutions to make credit available to lower income earners to a) let them buy houses and 'stuff' and b) keep the economy ticking along.

That's crap. There is no US legislation that requires making home loans to people that cannot service the loans. Greespan lent money to the banks at 1 percent and they went to the ends of the earth to find people who would borrow it at 5 percent - nothing more.

The real issue is cheap credit and lax regulatory standards.

 

[freddie]

That's crap. There is no US legislation that requires making home loans to people that cannot service the loans.

That is a subject being hotly debated in the US. There certainly appears to have been pressure. The view seems to depend on which side of the policitical fence you sit.

"The lending institutions were threatened with dire consequences if they refused sanctioning home loans to poor credit holders. ACORN, which is a community activist group, put pressure on lenders to issue loans to unqualified buyers."

http://www.encyclocentral.com/27401..._Clinton_Regime_Lowers_Lending_Standards.html

 

[boomtown]

That is a subject being hotly debated in the US. There certainly appears to have been pressure. The view seems to depend on which side of the policitical fence you sit.

"The lending institutions were threatened with dire consequences if they refused sanctioning home loans to poor credit holders. ACORN, which is a community activist group, put pressure on lenders to issue loans to unqualified buyers."

http://www.encyclocentral.com/27401..._Clinton_Regime_Lowers_Lending_Standards.html

Greenpeace, which is a community activist group, put pressure on steak eaters to switch to tofu.

Doesn't mean anyone pays any attention to them.

 

[Rockstar]

Mungo MacCallum's take on the situation in this weeks Byron Bay Echo.

 

[boomtown]

Just to set the record straight about the Community Reinvestment Act - because the rednecks in the US have seized on it:

The CRA does not list specific criteria for evaluating the performance of financial institutions. Rather, the law directs that the evaluation process should accommodate the situation and context of each individual institution. The law also does not require institutions to make high-risk loans that may bring losses to the institution, instead the law emphasizes that an institution's CRA activities should be undertaken in a safe and sound manner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

 

[freddie]

Just to set the record straight about the Community Reinvestment Act - because the rednecks in the US have seized on it:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

Well, you can't simply set the "record straight" by pointing to a wikipedia piece which is formally headed as having disputed neutrality. There are many internet links regarding the dispute from both sides.

 

[WinstonWolfe]

I prefer Kevin Redd....that'll stick.....

BTW, the first overpaid executive he should slash the income of is Therese Rein.

Ahhhh noooooo.....someone linked to Mungo McMarx.........who wants to keep Byron for himself and his mates....no proletariat trash welcome.....and how about that...this week he is flying up to Bali for a pi$$ up......Mungo has always considered himself more equal than the rest of us.

 

[boomtown]

I really dont want to read the bloody act.....

 

[boomtown]

Ok Ive read the act. Its surprisingly short.

Here is an excerpt:

Section 2901. Congressional findings and statement of purpose

(a) The Congress finds that -
(1) regulated financial institutions are required by law to
demonstrate that their deposit facilities serve the convenience
and needs of the communities in which they are chartered to do
business;
(2) the convenience and needs of communities include the need
for credit services as well as deposit services; and
(3) regulated financial institutions have continuing and
affirmative obligation to help meet the credit needs of the local
communities in which they are chartered.

(b) It is the purpose of this chapter to require each appropriate
Federal financial supervisory agency to use its authority when
examining financial institutions, to encourage such institutions to
help meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they
are chartered consistent with the safe and sound operation of such
institutions.

Basically all it says is that lending to minorities and disadvantaged groups is encouraged and you have to submit regular reports about your lending. Thats it. Nothing else. It sure as **** doesnt say go splash around in ghetto land without consequences.

Read it yourself if you dont believe me. Its only about 600 words and should only take you about 5 minutes. Push the "next" button on the lower right to advance to the next section.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/12/chapters/30/sections/section_2901.html

 

[WinstonWolfe]

The headline should read:

Rudd sends our most talented executives overseas

The more that go, the sooner he can be Chairman Kev.
He didn't study Chinese language and culture for nicks....

In fact, one could deduce Rudd's policies are all about driving Australia quicker into a financial hole, so that the only solution involves the Fed Govt buying the banks....and more quickly creating a Socialist State.

First he erodes the future fund, then he spends the surplus as inefficiently as possible (ensuring the profits flow overseas- thinking plasmas, ipods, xboxes), then he drives up the price of property further with a demand side stimulus like tripling the FHB grant, then he drives anyone intelligent and self determining overseas so he can create his Leninist Utopia with less resistance.

Nothing like a depression as a backdrop for an egomaniacal Marxist to make himself feel needed.

 

[topcropper]

If Aussie lenders are going to trade under a sovereign AAA rating (not because we want to give it to them but because we have to give it to them) there has to be some pro quid pro quo.

If a trimming of bankers salaries is what it takes - so be it. Don't forget no one forced ANZ to take on 56 billion in CDS exposure. They engaged in that little **** up on their own.

.

I agree, I think.


I don't fully understand the issue, but if Kevin 747 has guarenteed the banks, then I think the whole of aussie society has a little bit of right and say in how much the bank CEO's can now be paid. Bugger them, they get enough already.

See ya's.

 

[tubs]

And what happens once the $10.4b is spent?

If the economy is going downhill it'll get there. All that will happen is that around Christmas, it'll flatten out for a couple of months while everybody spends their money, and the off it goes again.

The really ironic thing is (and there are a few) is that the govt has been pushing people from a spending mentality to a saving mentality. Then they give everyone a fistfull of cash, and tell them to go and spend it! Dont save it. Dont pay off your credit card or car loan.

Make sure you go out there and spend it. Who knows, maybe you'll have to provide receipts by the end of December, or pay the remainder back to give to someone who WILL spend it.

Why not spend it on infrastructure. It'll get people working by building roads, railways and ports, and have a more positive impact on our economy longer term.

Sure, something needs to be done to keep our economy strong. And using the surplus is not such a bad idea, but could it have been executed any worse!

 

[WinstonWolfe]

And what happens once the $10.4b is spent?

well said Tubs. There'll be no flow on once it is spent. several years of Coalition saving and sound economic management squirted down the toilet in a few weeks.....on trinkets...

All Chairman Redd will manage is to increase the gap between rich and poor, smart and dumb.....the dumb will blow it on trinkets...the smart will horde it until assets come down in price.

lucky for chairman the majority are dumb and impulsive non savers, otherwise the stimulus wouldn't stimulate.

 

[Aaron Sice]

Well, you can't simply set the "record straight" by pointing to a wikipedia piece which is formally headed as having disputed neutrality. There are many internet links regarding the dispute from both sides.

uh - yes he can because the wiki link clearly explains the act.