Obama to try and block AIG Bonuses

[quote name='camoor']The board of directors has all the power.

Shareholders have very, very, very little say in how the company is run beyond electing the board of directors.

Even if, by some miracle, an item is put on a ballot about executive pay and the shareholders vote for more reasonable pay, the vote can simply be overruled.[/quote]

[quote name='dmaul1114']Here's some more info on the bonuses.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/17/aig.bonuses/index.html

-73 people got bonuses of $1 million or more
-11 people got bonuses and left the company
-largest bonus was $6.4 million
-7 others got $4 million or more[/quote]


Thanks for spelling that out camoor, I assume then that some of the bonuses are then going to the BoD? ^^ Those 7 others that got 4 million or more?
 
No way to know yet as I think that article said they hadn't got names of who the bonuses went to yet. It's someting Cuomo is trying to get though.
 
What a clusterfuck this is. I hate that we did bailouts in the first place... now that we fucked them up, we have to have more involvement and policing. It's my feeling that if we let these companies fold, someone would have stepped up to provide similar services; not because they have to, but because it would be a profitable venture for someone who already has enough wealth to do so and it would be just another way for them to grow it.

To get back on topic, I don't think these people deserve a penny for playing so recklessly with the power they built up and the shit storm that's ensuing because of them. But, to play devil's advocate, is it a crime to receive a bonus? Is anyone worried that we are going to rewrite tax law to target a specific group of people because of public outrage? Don't get me wrong, I think it's disgusting and immoral to take the money and run, but were laws broken? Just something to think about. I don't know any specifics, but I know there was such an uproar over the patriot act being invasive to private rights under the guise of national security, is this the same, different, what?
 
[quote name='camoor']Obama lost political capital, no amount of capaign contributions could make up for that (even in AIG was in a giving mood, which after being made the villians they won't be)

Someone in govt will have a secret toast with AIG if this whole thing blows over, but it won't be Obama.[/quote]


Yeah you're right, I pointed my finger at the wrong person.
 
I want Secret Toast. It's the best kind, you know.

These people may not deserve this money, but a lot of people don't deserve that kind of money. But in the end, they'll be keeping it. AIG kinda has the world's economic system by the balls at the moment, and until companies stop relying on AIG for economic backing (at the backing of the Government, mind you) it'll continue to be a shitstorm.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']I want Secret Toast. It's the best kind, you know.[/quote]
What if you have...

IT WAS JUST SO SECERT YOU DIDNT NO!!!!
 
[quote name='xycury']Thanks for spelling that out camoor, I assume then that some of the bonuses are then going to the BoD? ^^ Those 7 others that got 4 million or more?[/quote]

From what I've read, here's the way it works:

The BOD is composed of members who expect some tit-for-tat. Most CEOs want to raid their company coffers for the biggest bonuses they can take home. So they make deals with the BOD - if you're on the BOD and you are a partner in a law firm, suddenly the company is giving your law firm big lucrative legal contracts. If you own a supply company, suddenly you're one of the big suppliers for the company. In return, as a BOD member you approve a sweet bonus package for the CEO and his favorite executives.

These bonuses were agreed to before AIG was taken over by the Federal government, in this particular case the situation is getting more muddled by the second.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']What if you have...

IT WAS JUST SO SECERT YOU DIDNT NO!!!![/quote]

But I've had secret toast before. I just want more.
 
[quote name='QiG']... I don't think these people deserve a penny for playing so recklessly with the power they built up and the shit storm that's ensuing because of them. But, to play devil's advocate, is it a crime to receive a bonus? Is anyone worried that we are going to rewrite tax law to target a specific group of people because of public outrage? Don't get me wrong, I think it's disgusting and immoral to take the money and run, but were laws broken? Just something to think about. I don't know any specifics, but I know there was such an uproar over the patriot act being invasive to private rights under the guise of national security, is this the same, different, what?[/QUOTE]

We don't even know if the people receiving bonuses are the ones responsible for this 'crisis'. And because they work for AIG, not mortgage companies, we don't know that these people were responsible for bundling and rating bad securities as AAA in the first place. Are tehy directly responsible for the 'sub-prime' root cause of this debacle? No. These people could be some who were actually doing their job and making money for AIG. To single them out and tax their bonus income at 100% may satiate the class envious' need for justice, but what happens when the actual competent people who are owed these bonuses now decide to leave AIG because of this? Who's left to float the company and pay back the federal bailout loan? No one and AIG fails anyway. Oh, well, what's another 100 billion down the well.

And could this be a political ploy of the AIG board to workaround those bonus contracts and void them, defacto? Congresspeople are demanding returning the money to the company, not to the treasury. What's the company going to do with that money? Pay other people bonuses and make more contracts for new workers after the old ones have been forced out? This whole situation makes absolutely no sense, especially since the government deal makers knew about these obligations before administering bailout money. This is nothing more than a propaganda campaign to complete the nationalization of the financial industry with popular support. Gin up some anger and class envy and the government will be able to take over any industry they choose.

Voiding contracts seems to be the third rail of labor relations when dealing with union contracts, but when other, individual, contractual obligations are fair game when the political machine isn't staffed with leg breakers, thieves, and thugs. Sorry, I meant 'lobbists'.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Voiding contracts seems to be the third rail of labor relations when dealing with union contracts, but when other, individual, contractual obligations are fair game when the political machine isn't staffed with leg breakers, thieves, and thugs. Sorry, I meant 'lobbists'.[/quote]

Bad analogy. Third rail refers to the rail that supplies electricity to a train. It will severely hurt or kill you if you touch it. When a company is under financial duress, there is absolutely no consequences for voiding union contracts and pension plans beyond a little bad press, congressional brow beating, and a potential lawsuit that will ultimately go nowhere. It's hardly a "third rail"

On the other hand, when we talk about scaling back executive bonuses due to poor performance, suddenly we are a nation of law and contracts that must be honored.
 
[quote name='camoor']
On the other hand, when we talk about scaling back executive bonuses due to poor performance, suddenly we are a nation of law and contracts that must be honored.[/quote]

My thoughts exactly. These bonuses were for keeping with the company right? Or where they for good permormance because that's a big clown joke right there.

I would rather the company take back the bonuses, pad up the coffers and use it to get rid of toxic waste.

That may mean their own employees...
 
I find it strange that so many people are so worked up over 160 million in bonuses to AIG when 20 Billion of our stimulus package went to foreign (mostly European) banks, and nobody seems to care.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I find it strange that so many people are so worked up over 160 million in bonuses to AIG when 20 Billion of our stimulus package went to foreign (mostly European) banks, and nobody seems to care.[/quote]

You have to focus on the important things. $20 billion walking out of the country? Not a problem. $160 million spread out amongst a few hundred people who can be easily silenced? Fan that anger.

How much are we spending on Iraq this week? Is that more, less or the same as last week?
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I find it strange that so many people are so worked up over 160 million in bonuses to AIG when 20 Billion of our stimulus package went to foreign (mostly European) banks, and nobody seems to care.[/quote]

I just now found out and I care.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Sure don't mind any criticisms of what's in the video. Just at least watch the video before you criticize it this time, lest you look a fool.[/quote]

Awww, come on, it's Glenn Beck.

(Can't watch at work. No audio.)
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']You have to focus on the important things. $20 billion walking out of the country? Not a problem. $160 million spread out amongst a few hundred people who can be easily silenced? Fan that anger.

How much are we spending on Iraq this week? Is that more, less or the same as last week?[/quote]

You have to start somewhere. We're finally getting exposure to the corrupt amoral greed-above-all executive class lifestyle that most people have been so ignorant of.

Oh and BTW had you ever been to an Iraq anti-war rally, there was plenty of anti-war sentiment. Obama has a timeline for getting out, so what are we supposed to do, further denigrate Bush W. as the very, very, very worstest President?
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Sorry, but this is the quickest way to illustrate for you all why, in a way, you're being hoodwinked with this 165 million talk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rl9J9OKa_lw

Sure don't mind any criticisms of what's in the video. Just at least watch the video before you criticize it this time, lest you look a fool.[/quote]

I saw the same tired, lazy arguements from elsewhere (the sudden sanctity of employer-employee contracts, nation of law, etc etc)

Believe me, that doesn't mean dirt when you're a regular employee who gets his pension raided or his yearly benefits slashed.
 
[quote name='camoor']You have to start somewhere. We're finally getting exposure to the corrupt amoral greed-above-all executive class lifestyle that most people have been so ignorant of.

Oh and BTW had you ever been to an Iraq anti-war rally, there was plenty of anti-war sentiment. Obama has a timeline for getting out, so what are we supposed to do, further denigrate Bush W. as the very, very, very worstest President?[/quote]

1. Bush is the worst President ... so far.

2. We're still bailing anybody out.

3. We're still pissing away money in our foreign adventures.

I got hope in Obama just like most people have hope in eight the hard way. We need to roll those dice.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']1. Bush is the worst President ... so far.

2. We're still bailing anybody out.

3. We're still pissing away money in our foreign adventures.

I got hope in Obama just like most people have hope in eight the hard way. We need to roll those dice.[/quote]

All true.

But back to the original point of my post - at least Americans are getting outraged by something noteworthy - namely lopsided executive-take-all arrangements. Granted this is an extreme case but hopefully they can see this for what it is - the visible tip of the iceberg lying straight in the path of the SS Middle Class.
 
[quote name='camoor']I saw the same tired, lazy arguements from elsewhere (the sudden sanctity of employer-employee contracts, nation of law, etc etc)

Believe me, that doesn't mean dirt when you're a regular employee who gets his pension raided or his yearly benefits slashed.[/QUOTE]

I wasn't so much trying to show an argument for honoring the contracts (although it's in that video) - I was trying to show just how much the government, through AIG's bailout, has funneled billions upon billions to banks that already received their bailouts and foreign banks.

Yet the 165m is far more upsetting for some reason. It's just sad that the American people continue to fall for these distractions and misdirections like a group of senior citizens at a cheap magic show.
 
[quote name='camoor']Yeah, and just at the time when the invisible hand of the free market was doing such a bang-up job.[/quote]Fixed.
If this exercise gets people to notice how morally bankrupt, how financially incestuous, how contemptuous the elite class are of the rest of us, then it will not be in vain.
Click to expand...
I agree.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']1. Bush is the worst President ... so far.

2. We're still bailing anybody out.

3. We're still pissing away money in our foreign adventures.

I got hope in Obama just like most people have hope in eight the hard way. We need to roll those dice.[/quote]

Sometimes you gotta roll the hard six.
 
[quote name='evanft']Sometimes you gotta roll the hard six.[/quote]

I'm think a hard five is more likely than Iraq and Afghanistan being wound down before Caitlyn is out of college.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...was-responsible-for-bonus-loophole-says-dodd/

Dodd admits to being the impetus behind the "Bonus clause" in the bailout legislation. Surely you must have meant our Congresspeople when disparaging the elite among us, Camoor.[/quote]

I don't want to be labeled as a conspiracy theorist, but of course the elite have needed to use congressional lackeys and friendly government officials to amass the lopsided amount of wealth they've accumulated in recent history.

We know they were gaming the stock market with mortgage statistics provided in bad faith. We know they were gaming the regulatory board. So is it really a surprise that they were gaming the legislative branch as well?
 
[quote name='KingBroly']...

As for Dodd...he's a shining example of why politicians aren't all that smart and don't deserve what they get.[/QUOTE]

What are you talking about? He rails against the bonuses and wags his dick in the air, denies any dealings or responsibility, then casually admits he wrote the exemption with virtually no media coverage for the latter. Popular outrage - done. Personal responsibility and blame - none. He knows exactly what he's doing. He may not be smart, but he's not stupid. It's everyone else who's dumber than a doornail who vote for meat puppets like Dodd.

So, the Democrats are responsible for the bonuses being given out. Who's still the bitch? Greedy, obstructionist republicans and the evil business "elite". Mission accomplished.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']What are you talking about? He rails against the bonuses and wags his dick in the air, denies any dealings or responsibility, then casually admits he wrote the exemption with virtually no media coverage for the latter. Popular outrage - done. Personal responsibility and blame - none. He knows exactly what he's doing. He may not be smart, but he's not stupid. It's everyone else who's dumber than a doornail who vote for meat puppets like Dodd.

So, the Democrats are responsible for the bonuses being given out. Who's still the bitch? Greedy, obstructionist republicans and the evil business "elite". Mission accomplished.[/quote]

Where did I separate Republicans from Democrats in my post? I said Government. And Dodd said he messed up on the whole bonus issue (still confused on how exactly).
 
[quote name='bmulligan']So, the Democrats are responsible for the bonuses being given out. Who's still the bitch? Greedy, obstructionist republicans and the evil business "elite". Mission accomplished.[/quote]

Actually I think we may have witnessed the beginning of the end of Dodd's senate career. Put up a moderate Republican looping commercials with Dodd's confession juxtaposed against his phony outrage and you've got a tight run for reelection. I won't be surprised if he suddenly decides to spend time with family after this term.

Then again, that just changes his role from useful agent of the financial elite to patsy.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']That bill passed the house 328-93.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...3/19/AR2009031901542.html?hpid=topnews&sub=AR[/quote]

Adam%20Goldberg%20-%201%20-%20300%20-%20I%20Love%20Your%20Work.jpg


YOU'RE NEXT!
Yes, this is a double joke.
 
I doubt I'll get any retroactive taxes on my Ph D student income! Though I did make more than the vast majority this past year and actually owed taxes for the first time since I had about $7K in contractual income on top of my regular salary that I hadn't paid taxes on yet.
 
While I'm as outraged about the AIG bonuses as everyone else, this sets a very bad precedent. The idea of the government having the power to specifically target individuals to impose arbitrary taxes should outrage us even more.
 
[quote name='dopa345']While I'm as outraged about the AIG bonuses as everyone else, this sets a very bad precedent. The idea of the government having the power to specifically target individuals to impose arbitrary taxes should outrage us even more.[/QUOTE]

It does rub me a bit the wrong way.

But so does a company that needed billions of tax payer dollars to keep from going out of business using said money to pay millions in bonuses to the execs who were running the company in to the ground.

As much as it would have sucked hair donkey balls, I'm starting to think we should have just suffered through another great depression and let all these banks and companies fail. That's probably the only thing that would ever end this corporate greed and get rid of the absolutely fucking ridiculous and ever expanding income cap between executives and average workers of the same companies salaries.
 
That's just fucking ridiculous. Congress needs to find a way to take the money back and let these ungrateful pricks go under like they probably should have in the first place.

No way to do that. But they better not get another die of stimulus funding.
 
I'm not surprised AIG is suing. But then again, did we honestly think Government didn't think AIG would react?

As much as I'd like to let AIG die...doing that would be really, really bad. Like...worldwide economic collapse instantly.
 
So when are our "leaders" going to return all AIG campaign contributions from the last election? Why should they be allowed to keep that ill-gotten gain? Let's start with Obama's six figure donation.
 
I learned in High School Government class that you can't pass laws that retroactively punish people. How exactly are the people in congress so stupid that they pass a law to retroactively punish these people by taxing their bonuses 90%.

And 90%? Has anyone in the US ever paid a tax rate that high on anything in the history of the country?
 
[quote name='Kaijufan']And 90%? Has anyone in the US ever paid a tax rate that high on anything in the history of the country?[/quote]

Top marginal tax rate was around that for 20 or 30 years somewhere in the 40s, 50s, and 60s (I dunno the specific years). Nobody was successful then.
 
The only reason a retroactive tax increase doesn't scare me is because I'm not asking the government for billions in bailout and tossing the money around, etc..
They didn't go after regular people with this law. They are trying to get regular peoples money back.

Also, that's unbelievable AIG is going to sue. How are they paying for lawyers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top