GoldmanSachs666 Message Board

According to the Collins English Dictionary 10th Edition fraud can be defined as: "deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage".[1] In the broadest sense, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual; the related adjective is fraudulent. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction. Fraud is a crime, and also a civil law violation. Defrauding people or entities of money or valuables is a common purpose of fraud, but there have also been fraudulent "discoveries", e.g. in science, to gain prestige rather than immediate monetary gain
*As defined in Wikipedia

Saturday, March 5, 2011

There's Enough Hyprocrisy to Go Around, Goldman Sachs

As many people have noticed, sometimes a comedic/satiric take on what is happening in the world has more truth than the somber one. Jon Stewart's show, for example, sees the ludicrous aspects of life, such as a comparison of the salaries of bank executives (at firms like Goldman Sachs) with the salaries of teachers.

Katla McGlynn of The Huffington Post comments,

Jon Stewart Calls Out Fox News' Hypocrisy Comparing Teachers, Wall Street (Video)
by Katla McGlynn - The Huffington Post

Thursday night's "Daily Show" featured Jon Stewart doing what he does best: calling out hypocrisy in the media. After a segment on the intensified battle between Gov. Scott Walker and Wisconsin unions, Stewart took a look at how Fox News was reporting on the story, specifically compared to how they covered similar threats to the Bush tax cuts and bailed-out bank CEOs' salaries.

Stewart showed plenty of pundits saying that when it comes to taxing those who make $250,000 a year, you're taxing people who are "not rich" and even "close to poverty" if they have a family of four with kids in college. But when it comes to teachers in Wisconsin, the same pundits say they, as government employees, should expect to see cuts in their ample $50,000 a year salary plus benefits.

In other discussions on Fox News, cuts in teachers' salaries were compared to those of Wall Street executives. Megyn Kelly argued teachers don't deserve as much money because they "don't work as much." Stewart totally understood:

"See the difference? Regardless of the greed-based, almost slightly sociopathic job bankers did wrecking our economy, those people were there every single day, 12 months a year. Not that nine month bullsh*t!"

Stewart took it even further by showing another level of hypocrisy. Clips showed the same people on the network who agreed with the government limiting teachers' benefits also said that limiting the salaries of government bailed-out CEOs would be detrimental to the industry and "isn't a good way of attracting talent in the future."

"Absolutely, we have got to pay those bailed-out firm CEOs top dollar! Otherwise, those companies could wind up being run by a couple of jacka**es who f**k things up so royally, it torpedoes the entire global economy!"

Read the full article and see the video here


Anonymous said...

The teachers will pay....and we all will pay for the tbtf thievery...

"Watch how they weave their arguments over the misappropriated social trust funds and pensions, bank bailouts, and subsidies to the
corporations and monied interests to see what their methods will be.
This debt is sovereign, a matter of national interest if not sacred honor, and so must be paid whatever the cost. But that debt to those
people, well, the money is gone, so too bad for them. Sacrifices must be made, and we will choose who makes them based not on the law or
justice, but on the principles of crony capitalism, which are always
for private benefit of the few."

Doug said...

Privatize schools and let teachers compete in the open market. If they can make as much as other occupations, good for them. But right now, teachers are government employees funded by taxes, not by voluntary trade. Until then, let's stop comparing teachers to those in the private sector.

Anonymous said...

It is not the $50,000 salary that is creating the problem. It is the ENORMOUS pension plans that ARE IMPOSSIBLE to sustain and keep the states from going broke.
These pensions work as long as the economy is growing. But as soon as the economy takes a dive, the pensions get revealed to be an impossible promise...kind of like Madoff, which worked till the economy tanked (thats when the truth is revealed).

Anonymous said...

Goldman’s Own Ferries Will Ply the Hudson

Unknown said...

Salaries and taxes are not the same things. Salaries and pension plans are not the same things. Government jobs and private sector jobs are not the same things. When you use these simple postulates before looking at economic issues you find Mr. Stewarts statements to be invalid on all levels.

Anonymous said...

As American government will federal state and local has less money people of the government will have to take pay cuts. In 1960 America and 6% of the population and 50% of all the gross national product, the 50% means things that they can sell.. We were the number one banker in the world with all the money. They have destroyed our manufacturing base and moved it to other countries. There is a bigger disparity between the rich and the poor because of poor cannot work in manufacturing. We have become a service industry. That means we produce nothing

Joyce said...

Doug, I have to disagree with you. Teachers cannot work in the "open market" like a for-profit business. If they did, then you would have teachers teaching for profit and what do you think they would teach?

The reason the government employs teachers is so that the teachers can teach students how to be good citizens of a true democracy. Teachers are the backbone of the country and pass on the freedoms and beliefs of America from one generation to another. Students learn how to show empathy for others, how to achieve the skills needed to obtain and hold a job, how to relate to other people, etc. Would you want a for-profit group of teachers given such a task? Not all things in life do well in the "open market" where profit is king.

Some things, like teaching, need to be nurtured by all and the government and teachers must work together to do the best job for the youth of the country. Unions provide the means to create the best education that can be obtained by negotiation. Teachers, who are well-trained in their work, need a say in how education should be provided in the best possible way.

It appears the government did not negotiate a sustainable pension for the teachers. The government needed better negotiators. Teachers are reasonable people and would see what is sustainable and not sustainable.

I hope for one thing: that teachers learn not to depend on Wall Street to invest their pension money wisely. Wall Street was responsible for Wisconsin pension losses.


Joyce said...

Teachers are paid for the work they do. They do not take taxpayers' money any more than other members of the government do, including the Governors and the politicians. Teachers, however, give a better return on the money they receive, in my humble opinion.

Anonymous said...

Do not buy into this privatize everything mantra...its being pushed by banksters, their cronies, and their private equity masters..

If It Sounds Too Good ... What You Need to Know, but Don't, About Privatizing Infrastructure

In fact, tax breaks explain why the deals last generations. One tax break for leases that last longer than the useful life of the infrastructure allows investors to write off their investment in just over a decade. A second tax break lets private companies issue tax-free bonds to finance their deals. While tax-free bonds and tax breaks make it less expensive to finance these deals, the downside is that governments lose tax revenue. Losing tax revenue puts government budgets deeper in the red and worsens problems privatization was supposed to fix.

But that's not all. Infrastructure privatization contracts are full of "gotcha" terms that require state or local governments to pay the private contractors. For example, now when Chicago does street repairs or closes streets for a festival, it must pay the private parking meter contractor for lost meter fares. Those payments put the contractors in a much better position than the government. It gets payments, even though Chicago did not get fares when it had to close streets.

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately Joyce..there are some, that squeeze excess for less, when a majority receive less for more effort..and it makes it seem like a cushy job for all....they should be chopping the excess top/down

Syosset Central School District at a glance:
Syosset school compensation

* $506,322: Carole Hankin, superintendent
* $382,382: Jeffrey Streitman, deputy superintendent
** $238,221: Joseph LaMelza, assistant superintendent
$145,114: Dean Strohmayer, gym teacher
$129,818: Jeffrey Rozran, English teacher

*Includes fringe benefits, retirement funds, perks
** Includes fringe benefits

Joyce said...

Anonymous above, I read the article and I'm astounded. When unions negotiate there are supposed to be two sides and the teachers' huge salaries should be reined in by the government long before they reach the sums mentioned in the article. Is this just another example of the government not doing its job?

There are so many lop-sided pay checks, salaries and bonuses going out to create a rich over class that the whole system seems to need a revamping. A lot of institutions (like unions and banks) seemed to have failed and continue to do so.

Post a Comment