Obama Administration Takes Aim at Executive Pay

The Obama administration is making attempts to reign in on Wall St, to penalize those companies who have not given back their share of bailout money. Where are they starting? Executive pay.



Too much government involvement? You tell me.

Pro: Wall St. got the money in order to fix the problems, but now they are just going back to business as usual, continuing to take risky moves. GIVE IT BACK.

Con: There were no stipulations placed upon the funds prior to them being given out that demands that the recipients had to give it back. This is another example of government meddling in business.

What do you think?

--
a.Rias
www.poli-babble.blogspot.com

FOX News' Shep Smith Supporting the Public Option Against a Republican Member of Congress...???

Hmm...

Shep Smith of Fox News challenging Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) on why the public option will allow for the type of reform that the country needs. Why is this notable? Well, Shep Smith is from Fox News. Fox News' general stance on the public option (which they call the "government run option") appears to be going against the effort (link here and link here - Youtube). Upwards of 60% of the country is in favor of the public (non-profit) option. Apparently Shepard Smith agrees.

Watch the exchange below:



Here's a key exerpt from the exchange:

SMITH: "Over the last ten years health care costs in America have skyrocketed. Regular folks cannot afford it. So, they tax the system by not getting preventative medicine. They go to the emergency room in the last case and we all wind up paying for it. As the costs have gone up, the insurance industry's profits, on average, have gone up more than 350%. And it is the insurance companies which have paid, and who have contributed to Senators and Congressmen on both sides of the aisle to the point where now we cannot get what all concerned on Capitol Hill seem to believe and more 60% of Americans say they would support, which is a public option. This has been an enormous win for the health-care industry, that is an unquestioned fact. But I wonder, what happens to the American people when we come out with legislation now which requires everyone to have health care insurance -- or many more people -- but does not give a public option? Therefore millions more people will have to buy insurance from the very corporations that are overcharging us, and whose profits have gone up 350 percent in the last ten years. It seems like we the people are the ones getting the shaft here. ... But with every vote against the public option is a vote for the insurance companies, sir, it is." (Huffington Post)

--
a.Rias
http://poli-babble.blogspot.com/

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/06/fox-newss-shepard-smith-g_n_311627.html

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/06/fox-newss-shepard-smith-g_n_311627.html(

More Health Care Debates...This One Gets Ugly

Betsy McCaughey and Rep. Anthony Weiner on "Morning Meeting" with Dylan Ratigan

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

A link from the perspective of the Huffington Post (link)

--
a.Rias
http://poli-babble.blogspot.com/

The Health Care Battle: Updated

(photo from NY TIMES)

Sept. 30, 2009, the U.S. Senate Finance Committee voted down two Health Care bill amendments proposed by Sen. J. Rockefeller (D-WV) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) [in above photo].
(Link from NY TIMES)

Proponents of the public option are still optimistic--despite the 15-8 and 13-10 votes against--that the final Bill will include it. Four of the five Bills throughout the House include a public option. Opponents of the public option remain poised to defeat it.

An NY Times/CBS poll suggest that 65% of Americans are in favor of a Public Option.
(Link from Huffington Post)

Some say that a bill can be expected by the end of this year (2009).

Stay tuned.

--
a.Rias
poli-babble.blogspot.com

Public vs. Private Healthcare

A link (to more links) to help frame our understanding of the debate:

Public vs. Private Healthcare

http://bit.ly/c52Un

--
a.Rias
http://poli-babble.blogspot.com/

Health Care Reform?

Why we need Health Care Reform?:

--
a.Rias
http://poli-babble.blogspot.com/

Students as Investments?

We all may (or may not) know that the President wants to see an evolution of the education system, where merit and quality are enhanced for both teachers and students.

I got this from the Freakonomics blog from the NY Times (from Planet Money blog on NPR)
--
What if teachers were paid based on the future income their students make. For example, student A grows up to make 100k a year. We look at the records and find the 20 teachers that taught student A and compensate them based on that. Compensation could be based on number of months spent with student.

That way the students would turn into "investments" for the teachers.
--

I'm curious what you all think about this. Some questions come to mind:

1. What benefits could come out of compensating a teacher for a student's future earning potential?
2. What are the downfalls (could this benefit some teachers of areas that generally earn more than others [ie: arts teachers versus business teachers]).
3. Is this method of compensation flawed from the beginning (equating quality of education with money earned--some careers just don't pay as much as others, regardless of how talented you are)?
4. How else can student/teacher productivity be related to encourage high quality, meaningful education and educators?

--
a.Rias
http://poli-babble.blogspot.com/