Citi Group Execs get PWNED...

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Jan 29, 2009 | 07:37 AM

#71

rahul

Registered User

Joined: Dec 2000

Posts: 721

Likes: 0

From: Chicago

[quote name='kadeshpa' date='Jan 29 2009, 11:27 AM'] Who's to dictate what is unnecessary? Like I said, if you make NO PROVISIONS to how the lent money is spent, you keep your nose out of it.

Jan 29, 2009 | 07:48 AM

#72

senor_flojo

Registered User

Joined: May 2008

Posts: 11,074

Likes: 0

From: All up in your inner tubes. Whatcha gonna do sucka?

[quote name='rahvis' date='Jan 29 2009, 08:18 AM']I guess I can see what you mean here, but no government sends us back to Mad Max, don't you think?

Jan 29, 2009 | 08:26 AM

#73

rahul

Registered User

Joined: Dec 2000

Posts: 721

Likes: 0

From: Chicago

Quote:

Originally Posted by senor_flojo' date='Jan 29 2009, 11:48 AM

but I don't beleive there will be a solution to us cleaning the environment without dying off or leaving this planet. far too much damage has been done.

That's fair... I just don't see any harm in trying. I find that far more productive than repeatedly going to war over natural resources.

Quote:

and again, just because its how things are doesn't mean I should accept them. I'm just a dreamer.

Enjoy.

Quote:

not any form of government. I'm all about local government, on a town/city level, where anyone can run without needing millions of dollars, and its easier to hold people accountable. I mean, if we must have someone leading us, wouldn't you rather them be accessable?

I would rather have politicians more accessible. But, I'm from Chicago and we have a long history of publicly dirty politics. I would also like to have a body of government that can dish out something more than an angry Chicago mob. Of course, holding the feds more accountable is supposed to be done with 3 branches and people electing officials, but that hardly does the trick. Regardless, I'll take this over an absence of federal power.

Quote:

as I've always ranted, the states should have more rights than they currently have. if california wants to legalize gay marrage and allow medical marijuana, so be it. the nat gov shouldn't be allowed to swoop in there an void marrage certificates and raid med pot distribution centers. they should be regulating interstate commerce and national security.

Agreed, but as with all things, we have to take the good with the bad.

Jan 29, 2009 | 10:38 AM

#74

kadeshpa

Registered User

Joined: Jun 2001

Posts: 3,867

Likes: 0

From: Oh kwa tan zen wan

[quote name='rahvis' date='Jan 29 2009, 11:37 AM'] Actually, I just did some searching.

Jan 29, 2009 | 11:24 AM

#75

rahul

Registered User

Joined: Dec 2000

Posts: 721

Likes: 0

From: Chicago

Quote:

Originally Posted by kadeshpa' date='Jan 29 2009, 02:38 PM

Also looking into the amendments, it seems to be more for who can receive TARP funds vs. dictating how companies run their day to day business.

I'm unable to find the original TARP text, so you might be right.

But regarding the amendments, the second line says:

Quote:

Requires the Secretary to incorporate within the TARP assistance agreement how the funds are to be used and the benchmarks an institution must meet in using such funds.

Jan 29, 2009 | 12:19 PM

#76

kadeshpa

Registered User

Joined: Jun 2001

Posts: 3,867

Likes: 0

From: Oh kwa tan zen wan

Quote:

Originally Posted by rahvis' date='Jan 29 2009, 03:24 PM

I'm unable to find the original TARP text, so you might be right.

But regarding the amendments, the second line says:

Yes but this is AFTER the fact. The money has already been doled out.

The amendments will pertain to new TARP money given after the amendments are ratified.

You'll probably be pissed to read the latest headline, Wall Street doles out $18B in bonuses for 2008. The NY Comptroller is questioning whether the TARP money was used to partially fund the bonuses.

Jan 29, 2009 | 01:58 PM

#77

Yellow_S

Banned

Joined: Aug 2008

Posts: 2,708

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by CypherAZ' date='Jan 28 2009, 11:11 PM

I manage a large grocery store in Scottsdale, and I've seen people pay with food stamps and roll out in a Hummer H2 on dubs. Report it to who? The Government is to busy cutting education funds and what not to give a shit.

There are offices to report to. Seriously, this is an unlawful violation. Food stamp is reserved for people with low income, assets, and in need of assistance to buy food. Someone who has a Rolls Royce, Hummer, etc., definitely does not fall into such category. It's not only considered fraud, but theft of the society's tax money. How would one report it? I'm not sure. Maybe get the license plate and report to the Social Security Department, and maybe they can trace to the owner, and if that owner is indeed on food stamps, then boo yah!

Jan 29, 2009 | 03:05 PM

#78

senor_flojo

Registered User

Joined: May 2008

Posts: 11,074

Likes: 0

From: All up in your inner tubes. Whatcha gonna do sucka?

[quote name='Yellow_S' date='Jan 29 2009, 02:58 PM'] There are offices to report to.

Jan 29, 2009 | 03:41 PM

#79

jackalope

Registered User

Joined: Sep 2004

Posts: 1,351

Likes: 0

From: Brazoria

Quote:

Originally Posted by senor_flojo' date='Jan 29 2009, 06:05 PM

drug sales income isn't taxable.

yes it is. All income legal or not is taxable.

http://www.ksrevenue.org/perstaxtypesdrug.htm

and there is other stuff out there, some stanford grad charged with tax evasion for not paying income tax on the 89,000 dollars she made in prostitution, as well as other stories.

legal or not, the government is going to get theirs