Obama administration considering charging banks fees to recoup bailout funds
Apparently, whoever came up with this scheme doesn't understand how corporations work. They answer to their stockholders first, last, and always, and what's good for the stockholders is not to cheerfully pay these fees and leave everything else equal, taking the hit as a decrease in their bottom line. No, these types of fees get passed along to bank customers, with the end result being less money in taxpayer pockets. It's a way of raising taxes again without announcing, "Hey, everyone, we're raising taxes again!" Look, every dollar the government spends comes from one place: you and me (unless you're reading this from another country). Raising "fees" (government-speak for "taxes") to "recover" tax dollars spent on bailouts is just robbing Peter to pay Paul. The only way to truly "recover" the money without taking it out of the people's pockets is to cut spending--something that this administration doesn't seem to get yet.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Paying It Forward
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Corporations do not answer to stockholders first. Go buy some stock and find out for your self. They don't give a damn about any stockholder. In theory it would be that way but it isn't. They are run by management who's only conern is themselves. They will do anything for the short term gain and then give THEMSELVES more bonuses. This will be approved by the board who don't give a shit anyway because "Damn look at those short term gains!" I'm sure they will try to pass any fees off to anyone they can, but I say just tax their bonues by 90 % and then see what happens. (High tax rates are not unheard of in this country just look at our tax rates from 40 years ago)
ReplyDeleteSorry I'm not trying to rant on you in particular, just flipping through blogs and I have a particular interest in this subject.
That being said - my opinion - What's wrong with taxin' the rich?
Well, I guess I should have written that corporations are supposed to answer to stockholders first, even though it's really all about the boards and executives. Nonetheless, let the company stop making money...for the stockholders...and see how long the upper brass lasts before the board pushes the "eject" button on their golden parachutes.
ReplyDeleteThere's nothing wrong with taxing the rich. There's plenty wrong with asking the rich to carry a disproportionate share of the tax burden. It's a penalty on achievement, and it stifles innovation in the long run.