Hippocrates all of them.... esp. Obama

[HA25]

The point is that it is none of the government or anybody else's business if a wealthy person (CEO or not) values his time enough to spend money on a private airplane instead of using the airline/bus/train system. They hypocrisy lies in the fact that Obama obviously believes his time and abilities are worthy of the necessary perk of using such expensive transportation to avoid staying home all of the time, but if anybody else in this country wants to do so, he will demonize them as living in excess. A classic example of hypocrisy.

It is obvious that the POTUS cannot just take his hybrid down to the local restaurant. But, what business is it of his if I choose to drive my hybrid or SUV or fly my G-IV to do the same?

Once again, I don't think anyone has an issue with liquid and viable corporations spending what ever money their shareholders can stand on jets for CEO's... The problem was GM's execs had the tin cup out.. as did AIG, and several banks..

 

[LJ45]

The point is that it is none of the government or anybody else's business if a wealthy person (CEO or not) values his time enough to spend money on a private airplane instead of using the airline/bus/train system. They hypocrisy lies in the fact that Obama obviously believes his time and abilities are worthy of the necessary perk of using such expensive transportation to avoid staying home all of the time, but if anybody else in this country wants to do so, he will demonize them as living in excess. A classic example of hypocrisy.

It is obvious that the POTUS cannot just take his hybrid down to the local restaurant. But, what business is it of his if I choose to drive my hybrid or SUV or fly my G-IV to do the same?

well said !!

 

[milky]

Once again, I don't think anyone has an issue with liquid and viable corporations spending what ever money their shareholders can stand on jets for CEO's... The problem was GM's execs had the tin cup out.. as did AIG, and several banks..

Still nobody's business how the money is spent. The taxpayer's money should not be given to private companies in this manner. If it is given, and it never should, then the company must be trusted to spend it wisely. We turn into fascist regime when the government has direct control of private sector. Unconstitutional bureaucracies such as the EPA and the like already wield massive power over the private sector with no constitutional backing. Truly, our country is turning into a dictatorial regime not much better than Venezuela. Our government has just been a little less overt in its actions.

 

[milky]

Once again, I don't think anyone has an issue with liquid and viable corporations spending what ever money their shareholders can stand on jets for CEO's... The problem was GM's execs had the tin cup out.. as did AIG, and several banks..

And for the record, the POTUS made many comments on the excesses of ALL private companies when he made statements about private jets and going on business trips to Vegas. The citizens of Vegas are still wondering where their jobs are because the business traffic/conferences nearly dried up this year as companies were afraid of being seen as excessive.

NONE OF THE F'ING POTUS's BUSINESS. PERIOD.

 

[HA25]

I'm sorry, I just find all of this to be silly and smacks of partisan style attack... I'm sure if an audit was done over the past several presidents, during up and down economic times, we will find that he's spending neither more or less than average on this "perk" of the job.. but I do find it funny that you seem to be more defending the "right" of the CEO and less attacking the excesses of the CEO or POTUS... I happen to take the more socialist view point that a CEO needn't earn 100x the average workers salary, nor the government (read the people), need to butt out of the business of business... Frankly, I think a bit of socialism might be just what this nation needs in this time of Godlessness and selfish narcissism.

btw, fascism isn't really an issue I worry about with Obama in office... if I have to explain that any further, then this debate likely not going to get anywhere.

 

[Hawker800]

The government has no business in private business. Socialism can go to hell.

 

[LJ45]

I'm sorry, I just find all of this to be silly and smacks of partisan style attack... I'm sure if an audit was done over the past several presidents, during up and down economic times, we will find that he's spending neither more or less than average on this "perk" of the job.. but I do find it funny that you seem to be more defending the "right" of the CEO and less attacking the excesses of the CEO or POTUS... I happen to take the more socialist view point that a CEO needn't earn 100x the average workers salary, nor the government (read the people), need to butt out of the business of business... Frankly, I think a bit of socialism might be just what this nation needs in this time of Godlessness and selfish narcissism.

btw, fascism isn't really an issue I worry about with Obama in office... if I have to explain that any further, then this debate likely not going to get anywhere.

why don't you move to: Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea etc. if you think it is so great?

You sir are the problem, keep drinking the Kool-aid.

 

[HA25]

why don't you move to: Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea etc. if you think it is so great?

You sir are the problem, keep drinking the Kool-aid.

none of those are what I'm talking about. But that kind of hyperbole sure gets people going, I'm sure! Totalitarian regimes that thro around "Socialism" in their titles, aren't what I'm referring to, but nice try.

Sweden, France, Italy, Spain, for that matter the entire EU is far more socialist than we are, and they tend to have a better quality of life for their average citizen (even with the constant bombardment of US and Chinese free market pressure).. than we do. A balance is what I'd like to see... we can afford universal health care, and we should RE-REGULATE the airlines.. those are the types of changes I'm talking about.

Sure, you're doing find and so are the top wealth holders in the US, but 10's of millions here are on the edge of poverty.. that's unheard of in the EU.

This is why in Europe, they work so they can live.. and we here, live so we can work! The Chinese are giving us a run for our money though, and this is why our productivity has gone up far more than our income since the mid 1970's.. Welcome to the free market, unfettered.

But if you prefer to live in the land of Walmart and McDonnalds over the land of Mom and Pop stores and restaurants, you are on the right track.. we're living the dream here.

 

[ksu_aviator]

Once again, I don't think anyone has an issue with liquid and viable corporations spending what ever money their shareholders can stand on jets for CEO's... The problem was GM's execs had the tin cup out.. as did AIG, and several banks..

Right, because when you force banks to take TARP money you should have the right to tell them what to do.

Quick question...which corporation will lose more money than the government this year?

 

[HA25]

Right, because when you force banks to take TARP money you should have the right to tell them what to do.

Quick question...which corporation will lose more money than the government this year?

The government isn't a for-profit enterprise, but with that said, the revenues taken in by the Government and spent on our welfare are far lower than the GDP of the nation (by 12:1 I believe) so I would argue that the money is well spent.. Granting our private enterprises the environment to make their profits in a safe and orderly society. Or would you have us just disband the government and have anarchy prevail?