, , , ,

Dave Helling tried to catch McCaskill in a bit of double talk. You see, Claire McCaskill wants to cap executive compensation at the same level as the President of the US. But wait! McCaskill and her husband are multimillionaires! Shouldn’t she cap her own pay as well?

Well, no. McCaskill’s proposal only applied to executives of companies that are accepting bailout money. And as far as I know, neither McCaskill nor her husband have accepted any money from TARP, money that was lent to banks to unfreeze credit and keep loans available to small businesses, not for bonuses for ultrarich (and failed) executives.

…Oh dear, I see that Helling updated the post with a lame defense. Her husband’s businesses benefit from tax credits, so therefore she’s a hypocrite. I claim tax credits, as do many Americans – are we all hypocrites for believing that Wall Street executives shouldn’t get bonuses for shoddy work out of taxpayer coffers?* In retrospect, voting to give TARP money out in the first place was probably a bad idea, but McCaskill’s proposal is a good one for the situation we find ourselves in now.

…Aargh! I see that Dan Ryan is blinded by his hatred of McCaskill and all too eager to accept Helling’s argument.

One of his commenters put it very well:

I’m not sure I understand why wealthy people should not criticise wall street firms who use tax dollars to fund exec bonuses.

I think everybody has a license to criticise wall street firms for behaving in that manner.

*I edited this sentence after the fact for clarity’s sake.