Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Latest AIG Bonuses
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
How is it that this is still going on? How is it that the government doesn't OWN their ass and get to decide who gets bonuses???
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/17/aig.bonuses/index.html |
Anonymous
| I'm pissed about it. |
Anonymous
| They won't get away with that. |
Anonymous
|
I'm not sure I understand all of the outrage caused by this when ther are far more example of wasteful spending going on in this country. I wish America would stand up like this to all of the wasteful spending in America that runs in the BILLIONS not millions. Where was the public outcry when it was revealed in the latest budget package that there was $7.7 BILLION in earmarks. $7.7 BILLION PEOPLE. The AIG bonuses are $170 million or said another way 10% of the total earmarks in this years budget.
This goes on every year whether there are democrats or republicans in control. It will never stop until Americans reach the boiling point like they have over the AIG issue. |
jsteele
Site Admin Online
Site Admin Online
While I am not a supporter of the earmark process, earmarks are efforts by members of Congress to bring home the bacon. The money is spent in America for projects that benefit Americans. You cannot reasonably argue that all earmarks are wasteful simply because they are earmarks. There is probably the same ratio of waste among earmarks as there is in the rest of the budget. On the other hand, the AIG bonuses are going to a bunch of people in London who nearly tanked the entire world economy. Many of those individuals are not even US citizens. I'd say that Americans' outrage is rightly placed. I'd much rather see Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell get his $51 million in earmarks (decrying earmarks the entire time) and spend it on projects in Kentucky than see some scumbag trader in London get even a penny. |
Anonymous
|
I am more upset that my tax dollars are going to bail out people who took out mortgages that they knew they could not afford.
Like you I would rather see Robert Byrd (D) get his $123 million in earmarks for projects in West VA than see someone get bailed out of a mortgage. |
Anonymous
|
Very dicey road we are on. If the bonuses are part of contractual obligations and the employee did not do anything to abridge his/her contract--it is a scarey signal to just nullify the contract because the public is mad. This is the difference from being in a western country and China or Cuba etc. The bad decision came when we decided to bail out these companies because you can't bailout and then not fulfill your agreements. I could understand the government as a major shareholder getting involved in future compensation..which of course will mean good people will not work for AIG because why would they..if you are talented you go to the best place for you but as a shareholder they have that power but going backwards is not the way to go..and of course I don't think it's legal anyway.
|
jsteele
Site Admin Online
Site Admin Online
Actually, it's pretty likely the employees did invalidate their contracts by engaging in illegal activities. The issue really belongs with the DOJ rather then the Treasury. |
Anonymous
|
I think it will be very difficult to prove that the people who received bonuses acted illegally. They made bad investments and speculated on the markets but I don't know how that can be turned into illegal activity.
If what they did was illegal I would assume that that they would have been indicted by now. |
Anonymous
A quote from the NY Times Market page:
Is that a respose to Liddy asking that half the bonuses be returned, or is something else going on? BTW, is Edward M. Liddy related to G. Gordon Liddy? |
Anonymous
My question is how the bonuses are calculated? Operating income? Performance of the individual or company? Rewarded based on the scale of world financial trauma? What is the contract and the formula? |
Anonymous
LOL, I totally disagree. I'm sure if the legal system looks closely at them they can find SOMETHING to ding them on. Hell, congress is already talking about doing whatever they have to do to legally tax 90% of those bonuses right back. You can't fight City Hall. |
Anonymous
I have not seen any accusations by anyone of wrong doing within AIG. Has anyone else? If so can you point me in the right direction as to where this has been discussed. The only likely outcome is that we will end up spending millions of tax dollars for some attorneys from DOJ to review and prosecute the cases and in the end we will end spending more to try and recover the money. I like the 90% tax idea but I'm not sure you can enforce that without a long drawn out court battle. |
jsteele
Site Admin Online
Site Admin Online
Here is good place to start: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/03/looking_further.php Yes, it's a blog. But, it's also the blog responsible for investigating the US Attorney firings that led to AG Gonzales' resignation. You are right that it would take lot's of time and money to prosecute. That is also true for the bonus-recipients. They may well decide that returning their bonuses is preferable to spending the next 10 years defending themselves in a court of law. |
Anonymous
|
Here's an idea for potentially increasing stock price of AIG and any other corporation for that matter. Even at my own large corporation, I've seen them adding senior level execs all the while eliminating the worker bees and other execs. CHICAGO, IL March 16, 2009 -- A Bain & Co. study of successfully transformed corporations had something in common-- most of the top management were fired, resulting in a rapid 250 percent per year average stock price increase. http://www.braindrain.biz/index_files/Outrage_over_AIG_bonuses.htm |