Mon, Apr 21, 2014, 11:23 AM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 4 hrs 37 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

American Capital Agency Corp. Message Board

  • quickbecky@ymail.com quickbecky Feb 27, 2013 7:57 AM Flag

    OT: redistribution of wealth

    For all you socialist 99%ers:
    You complain about CEOs making millions yet you pay Tom Cruise 70mln to make a movie.
    You pay Alex Rodriguez 30mln to play baseball.
    Taylor Swift $45mln to sing.

    If the 99% would immediately stop going to the movies, cancel all cable channels, netflix, stop renting movies, stop paying for sports channels, stop going to concerts, sporting events, buying music CD's , you would be redistributing the wealth immediately. You would take the money out of these criminal's pockets and put it back in your own. No government skim. The avg American family spends thousands per year on all these items
    99% of America can do something immediately!

    Lloyd Bankfein of GS is NOT taking money out of your pocket, Hollywood, Nashville and Professional Sports are.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • knh1234@gmail.com knh1234 Mar 1, 2013 5:45 PM Flag

      I am a socialist, but I don't hate rich people. I like rich people. I hate only poverty!!

    • I don't ever remember writing a check for either of these guys.

    • I don't have the power to act though I am a capitalist shareholder. Every dollar that the CEO et al take, is less EPS and growth of the Co. There is not one CEO in this world that is worth all those huge salaries that they draw. I wnat the money invested in the co. and EPS, not in airplanes, special dining rooms, vacations, etc.BTW the same goes with the big shareholders of Co.s such as mutula funds, hedge funds, that don't want to shake the ground. Imagine, they would get pay less................if they demand less from the CEO, Boards, etc.

    • After the 2008 election I did exactly as you suggest. I cancelled my Comcast cable. I have saved 51 months at $108/month = $5508 and counting. Couldn't agree with you more.

    • Onion, raybans:

      The nic that started this post is one of the people who thrive on meaningless back and forth flaming and senseless political junkstering.  

      Although he/she poses a meaningless choice between CEOs and Highly paid entertainers, if you look at the situation outside of tribal affiliation, you might see that in both cases, we are talking about a problem of public trust and responsibility.

      Highly paid entertainers are influential.   Yet the content they produce is clerly deleterious to public ethics and morals in an insidious way.   Just as there is junk food, there is junk entertainment.

      On the other hand, CEOs are in an extreme position of public responsibility.  Yet as a group, they have used their influence in ways that now appear to have compromised the notion of America as a place where the vast majority of people can do at least modestly well.  Historians may look back at the era that started in the 70s and which is now hopefully coming to an end as a time of dismantling.

      One thing is sure: 2008 was the tipping point where many people first started to realize we have gone off course in a major way.

    • Many CEOs take more than they could possibly be worth without the share holder’s approval. That needs to stop. It is ridiculous what some of these CEOs are siphoning away from company profits. This is not an issue about taxes. It’s an issue about them taking money that belongs to us because they unilaterally claim that they are worth that amount but we didn’t get a vote on it.

      I have no problem with someone taking a 100 million of their own money and turning into two 200 million. I do have a problem with someone taking 100 million as salary because they claim they are worth that amount when there are a lot of people who would do the same job just as well if not better for much less money. This is the executive equivalent of unions. It is corruptions at both extremes. It seems that everyone is trying to get more than they are worth and it is taking this country down.

    • With entertainment you can choose not to spend your money. With the US banking system you have no choice but to get serviced by GS and others (unless you put your money under a mattress). The retribution of wealth is from the poor to the rich under our tax code. Lower taxes favor the rich since a lower "safety net" causes the poor/middle class to even spend proportionately more of their income on health care and retirement. Higher taxes favor the middle class/poor since more money is available. The whole system (infrastructure, regulations, defense, etc) make it possible for the rich to get rich. They should pay back a substantial part of their wealth to keep the system going. Our whole political system needs reform. As long as unrestricted campaign contributions and lobbying are business as usual, the tax loop holes for the rich will continue to worsen and worsen the corrupt bond between the Congress and the rich as well as businesses.
      Socialism is just the current label for those who aspire to make life better for the disadvantaged. It used to be these people were called Communists (decent wages, working conditions etc). The rich extreme right wing will do everything to influence politicians to pass legislation favorable to them.
      For an example of the rich taking advantage of the middle class/poor see this week's issue of Time magazine on why health care is so expensive and how "non-profit" hospitals screw the middle class/poor.

      • 4 Replies to crankings0915
      • kidshelleen51@ymail.com kidshelleen51 Mar 3, 2013 12:50 PM Flag

        You don't make life better for the poor by stealing money from those that have it and giving it away to the irresponsible. This country is full of rich people whose families came over uneducated and poor, yet capitalism, hard work, and sometimes luck gave them a good life, so get over it.
        Stop cranking out babies without two parents that can support them, require people to complete high school and teach them how to actually use their brains before you graduate them. Then require people to be responsible for themselves and you wouldn't be able to peddle your (communist/socialist/liberal = idiotic) ideas.

      • You could join a credit union and do all your banking through them. That may not be the most convenient, but that way you can avoid banks.

      • The salaries they pay top executives at GS are ridiculous. However, this is what I find interesting. To get into the better colleges like Harvard and Yale they like to see an expression of what you will do for the common good of mankind when you graduate as part of your application. So these people all act like they want to be the equivalent of nuns and priest but in reality they all have eyes on getting a job at GS and earning a salary so they can buy a huge boat and a mansion. I don’t have a problem with that but what I have a problem with are these schools that get all the applicants to lie about their real intensions so that only the dishonest liars get accepted to the school. What is this an intelligence test? If you are dumb enough to be honest you go to a lesser school? Only smart liars need apply? Let’s quit with the false pretenses and just get on with life. Why the phony show?

        The fact is that 99.999% of people go to college to so that they can get a job for their own self interest and the last thing they are thinking about when they apply is how their career will impact the common good of mankind and anyone who says otherwise is a fool. So why even pretend otherwise? It just makes them look like simpletons.

      • But I think she is right to some degree. People spend too much money on entertainment. And the poor/middle class spend a higher proportion of their income on it, And those dollars are published in the incomes of those celebs/athletes.
        If Tom Cruise died tomorrow, nothing would happen. If Blankfein died tomorrow millions in wealth would be lost. Big difference.
        PS I also think the minimum wage should be higher.

 
AGNC
22.07+0.19(+0.86%)11:22 AMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.