|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 7,137 Likes: 38
Society's Discontent 6000+ posts
|
|
Society's Discontent 6000+ posts
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 7,137 Likes: 38 |
It was a joke, Rex Loosen up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
...
Ford has placed European-built Fiestas with 100 U.S. bloggers, who competed to get and drive the cars for six months and blog about their experiences. Mulally said he has no doubt that the bloggers’ reviews will be highly favorable.
"I think within a year you will be able to ask people what their favorite car is and it will be the Fiesta," he said. "And it's not even going to be here yet."
.... Giving somebody a car for six months probably helps with getting a favorable review. Glad Ford is doing pretty good though.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
It was a joke, Rex Loosen up. Rex only gets loose for basams.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
more self hate? why do you try to use homosexuality as an insult?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
But the first report is a newspaper account of what was in their bankruptcy filing, in the filing they said they would not be bound by the caps. The second report is Chrysler telling the press(which btw you can lie to legally unlike the bankruptcy court) that they wouldn't do that. The main thing would be if they use it or not though correct? Now that Fiat/Chrysler have been "caught," they would be highly unlikely to exploit the loophole. As such, their failure to "use it" means very little at this juncture.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
But the first report is a newspaper account of what was in their bankruptcy filing, in the filing they said they would not be bound by the caps. The second report is Chrysler telling the press(which btw you can lie to legally unlike the bankruptcy court) that they wouldn't do that. The main thing would be if they use it or not though correct? Now that Fiat/Chrysler have been "caught," they would be highly unlikely to exploit the loophole. As such, their failure to "use it" means very little at this juncture. Maybe but either way the loophole isn't then being used.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
Geitner is on record as having requested the loophole for AIG. It was used.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
Geitner is on record as having requested the loophole for AIG. It was used. Not sure about the AIG thing but we were discussing Chrysler where the caps have held so far.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
I don't believe we were discussing that the caps have held so far. We were discussing that the Obama administration created another loophole for the companies to use if they wish. You said they haven't yet. Which of course is the case, but I could say the earth hasn't crashed into the sun yet, it doesn't mean that the Obama administration hasnt dropped the ball again.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
the Detroit Free Press: - The new Chrysler-Fiat partnership will get around U.S. restrictions on executive pay by having its top officers deemed Fiat employees.
The new Chrysler is among the first companies to fall under rules outlined in February by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, for companies getting "extraordinary assistance" from the Treasury that would cap pay for top executives at $500,000, excluding restricted shares of stock. The final rules for the limits have not been released. . . .
Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne has already indicated he will replace Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli. But under the deal, any of Chrysler's top officers can be deemed a Fiat employee who's "seconded" to Chrysler, and therefore take pay from Fiat beyond any Treasury cap.
Oh, this just better by the day, doesn't it? I'm not in favor of caps in the first place. However, it makes no sense whatsoever that the Obama administration would create the cap and THEN broker a deal that exempts bailout recipients in this case from that cap. MEM, seriously, do you still think this deal is anything but an abomination?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
Chrysler's Nardelli: reports on compensation loophole false
By Poornima Gupta
DETROIT (Reuters) - Chrysler Chief Executive Bob Nardelli said on Friday that reports that the company's executives have found a loophole that would help them avoid pay limits mandated by the U.S. government were false.
"I want to assure you that these reports are absolutely, positively incorrect," he said in a memo to staff that was obtained by Reuters. "Chrysler understands the limitations on compensation for senior executives during the term of the government loans."
Chrysler filed for bankruptcy on April 30 after talks with bondholders to restructure its debt collapsed. It also confirmed a global strategic alliance with Italy's Fiat SpA on the same day.
The new Chrysler-Fiat partnership could help the automaker's executives avoid U.S. restrictions on executive pay by having some top Chrysler officials designated as Fiat employees, according to Chrysler bankruptcy documents.
The documents say any of Chrysler's top officers including the CEO can be deemed Fiat employees who are "seconded" to Chrysler.
Earlier this week, local and national media reported that Chrysler had found a loophole to help avoid government-mandated pay limits for executives.
Corporate compensation has seen renewed scrutiny after public outrage over American International Group Inc's decision to pay $165 million in retention bonuses to some employees after accepting $180 billion in government aid to prop up the company.
President Barack Obama has set a $500,000 annual cap on pay for top executives at companies receiving taxpayer funds.
Nardelli said "Chrysler has and will continue to fully comply" with all conditions relating to executive compensation.
The CEO also said in the memo that the automaker has started the process of paying suppliers for invoices that pre-date Chrysler's bankruptcy filing.
"At the same time, we initiated a procedure to move supplier contracts over to the new company established in a global alliance with Fiat once a sale is complete," he said.
Chrysler aims to complete a sale of most of its operations to Fiat later this month.
"Today's announcement that the vast majority of Chrysler suppliers will receive payments for parts they have shipped and will continue business relationships with Chrysler going forward should provide an important measure of certainty and stability to America's auto supply base," an Obama administration official said.
The automaker will mail details to 1,200 of its suppliers on how suppliers can receive payment for pre-bankruptcy claims and how their contracts can be assumed by the new company, according to the memo.
"It is critical to get all of our key suppliers on board to take on new agreements and move business quickly to the new company," he said in the letter.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
So now we trust the wealthy executives?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
So now we trust the wealthy executives? Trust doesn't come into play just because I posted that.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
So which report do you believe? The initial one or the latter report, which came about only as a result of the first?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
So which report do you believe? The initial one or the latter report, which came about only as a result of the first? Errr, how about go with what actually happens next? If they don't try to get around the caps then the latter report, if they do then the early one.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
But the first report is a newspaper account of what was in their bankruptcy filing, in the filing they said they would not be bound by the caps. The second report is Chrysler telling the press(which btw you can lie to legally unlike the bankruptcy court) that they wouldn't do that.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
But the first report is a newspaper account of what was in their bankruptcy filing, in the filing they said they would not be bound by the caps. The second report is Chrysler telling the press(which btw you can lie to legally unlike the bankruptcy court) that they wouldn't do that. The main thing would be if they use it or not though correct?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
I don't believe we were discussing that the caps have held so far. We were discussing that the Obama administration created another loophole for the companies to use if they wish. You said they haven't yet. Which of course is the case, but I could say the earth hasn't crashed into the sun yet, it doesn't mean that the Obama administration hasnt dropped the ball again. 
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
But the first report is a newspaper account of what was in their bankruptcy filing, in the filing they said they would not be bound by the caps. The second report is Chrysler telling the press(which btw you can lie to legally unlike the bankruptcy court) that they wouldn't do that. The main thing would be if they use it or not though correct? Now that Fiat/Chrysler have been "caught," they would be highly unlikely to exploit the loophole. As such, their failure to "use it" means very little at this juncture. Maybe but either way the loophole isn't then being used. No, it's not "either way." A loophole was created. It was going to be used and only wasn't because the people planning to do so were "caught." That in no way justifies the creation of the loophole in the first place. In fact, if the loophole was completely benign, one could argue that an article about it shouldn't have caused the executives to drop the plan.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
as g-man and myself are saying, why create a loophole in the first place?
also because you hijacked the discussion to cover for your god's inadequacies it does not mean that is what the issue was.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
But the first report is a newspaper account of what was in their bankruptcy filing, in the filing they said they would not be bound by the caps. The second report is Chrysler telling the press(which btw you can lie to legally unlike the bankruptcy court) that they wouldn't do that. The main thing would be if they use it or not though correct? Now that Fiat/Chrysler have been "caught," they would be highly unlikely to exploit the loophole. As such, their failure to "use it" means very little at this juncture. Maybe but either way the loophole isn't then being used. No, it's not "either way." A loophole was created. It was going to be used and only wasn't because the people planning to do so were "caught." That in no way justifies the creation of the loophole in the first place. In fact, if the loophole was completely benign, one could argue that an article about it shouldn't have caused the executives to drop the plan. I wasn't ignoring the loophole, just pointing out that the chrysler guy was saying they were going to not dodge the caps.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
which had nothing to do with the what we were talking about. he could also say that the moon isnt made of cheese.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
which had nothing to do with the what we were talking about. he could also say that the moon isnt made of cheese. It related directly to the loophole story basams.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
dont let me questioning your god upset you.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
Try to avoid being the sore loser because Obama won the election basams, I'm not going to waste much time with your crybaby exagerations.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
Rex, your pussy wants some meow mix.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 46,308
Who will I break next? 15000+ posts
|
|
Who will I break next? 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 46,308 |
I didn't know your mom liked cat food.
November 6th, 2012: Americas new Independence Day.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
But the first report is a newspaper account of what was in their bankruptcy filing, in the filing they said they would not be bound by the caps. The second report is Chrysler telling the press(which btw you can lie to legally unlike the bankruptcy court) that they wouldn't do that. The main thing would be if they use it or not though correct? Now that Fiat/Chrysler have been "caught," they would be highly unlikely to exploit the loophole. As such, their failure to "use it" means very little at this juncture. Maybe but either way the loophole isn't then being used. No, it's not "either way." A loophole was created. It was going to be used and only wasn't because the people planning to do so were "caught." That in no way justifies the creation of the loophole in the first place. In fact, if the loophole was completely benign, one could argue that an article about it shouldn't have caused the executives to drop the plan. I wasn't ignoring the loophole, just pointing out that the chrysler guy was saying they were going to not dodge the caps. I didn't accuse you of "ignoring the loophole." I pointed out that the actions of the executives after getting "caught" did not justify the loophole's creation or existence.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
...
I didn't accuse you of "ignoring the loophole." I pointed out that the actions of the executives after getting "caught" did not justify the loophole's creation or existence. I wasn't defending the loophole either, just posted a follow up on the story that the Chrysler people were not going to try to use the loophole.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
...but you did so to justify, or at least excuse, its creation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
...but you did so to justify, or at least excuse, its creation. I'm guilty of posting a story that they say they're not going to try to get around the caps but sorry any justification is something your probably reading into. I certainly don't feel the loophole is justified.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
I certainly don't feel the loophole is justified. Now that you've conceded that the loophole isn't justified (and, therefore, that the failure to take advantage of same is irrelevant to my original question [reproduced below]) what's your take on my original question: MEM, seriously, do you still think this deal is anything but an abomination? Now, before you answer, let me state the following: it is perfectly acceptable (and not a sign of hypocrisy, a flip flop, or other failing on your part) to just say that, as more information comes out regarding the bailout, your opinion as changed regarding same.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
I certainly don't feel the loophole is justified. Now that you've conceded that the loophole isn't justified (and, therefore, that the failure to take advantage of same is irrelevant to my original question [reproduced below]) what's your take on my original question: I don't agree that it's irrelevant. Is a plan to do something as bad as actually doing it? (we'll be revisiting some of Gordon Liddy's plans if you want to argue that it is  ) MEM, seriously, do you still think this deal is anything but an abomination? Now, before you answer, let me state the following: it is perfectly acceptable (and not a sign of hypocrisy, a flip flop, or other failing on your part) to just say that, as more information comes out regarding the bailout, your opinion as changed regarding same. The bailout isn't perfect and there's much to criticise but I still think it's better than what would have happened without any government help.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
well, it's not the first abomination he's gotten all defensive over. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
well, it's not the first abomination he's gotten all defensive over. Usually your little hit and runs at least make some sense but this one 
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
Is a plan to do something as bad as actually doing it? (we'll be revisiting some of Gordon Liddy's plans if you want to argue that it is
Again, irrelevant. Whatever a convicted Watergate conspirator now palling around with Al Franken (or domestic terrorist now working as a college professor for that matter) may or may not have done nearly forty years ago in no way relevant to whether or not a particular economic policy is advisable today OR whatever loophole a corporate executive may or may not plan to exploit. It's called "two wrongs don't make a right." You may have heard the expression in the past.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,203 Likes: 80 |
Is a plan to do something as bad as actually doing it? (we'll be revisiting some of Gordon Liddy's plans if you want to argue that it is
Again, irrelevant. Whatever a convicted Watergate conspirator now palling around with Al Franken (or domestic terrorist now working as a college professor for that matter) may or may not have done nearly forty years ago in no way relevant to whether or not a particular economic policy is advisable today OR whatever loophole a corporate executive may or may not plan to exploit. It is relevant because the principle is the same. In both situations you have plans we both view as wrong. If those plans were carried out (somebody firebombed or a pay cap dodged for example) does it become more wrong? Well of course it does. It's called "two wrongs don't make a right." You may have heard the expression in the past. I agree two wrongs don't make a right. That's why one of my latest posts concerning Obama called for him apologizing to Rush Limbaugh.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
