- the total bonus payouts consists of a meager 0.001% of the total bailout funds AIG received. To make an argument that these bonuses effect the bottom line would have a snowballs chance in hades of standing up.
- AIG entered into a contractual obligation over a year ago, long before the bailouts, with their employees that they would make these large payouts.
- Chris Dodd, D-CT, specifically wrote an amendment to the bailout package that would allow these payouts to be made. Note in that article that he denies any knowledge of it, blaming the amendment as something that was added after it left his office. Well what do you know, he fessed up to it today.
- If the government steps in and voids these contracts we are opening up a very dangerous door to a very slippery slope. For whatever reason it is apparently acceptable in this country to pillage the rich. But in doing this the government is setting a precendence that they can interfere with any contractual obligation you make with your employer. I know, many will say that this is a unique case and won't happen to anyone else. And maybe that really is the case, but as a statement of principal I can't accept that. If we allow the government to take from the rich, we are saying that its okay for them to take from anyone. I don't live in a caste system here in America, but we are moving that direction if we continually go after the rich in this country.
- The other argument I keep hearing is this. The executives are incompetant and ran the company into the ground, therefore, they shouldn't be allowed to get these huge bonuses. Okay, if these guys are incompetent and can't run a business, then why in the hell did we give them $170 billion!!!
Here are just a few of the articles blasting AIG
- AIG Bonus Story Just Keeps Getting Better - LATimes
- Making AIG Tow the Line - WCCO
- AIG Bonus Gluttons Start Giving Americans Fits - Bloomberg
- The White House Seeks to Block Bonuses to AIG - NYTimes
- Name and Shame - Breakingviews.com
- Stop the AIG Bonuses? Yes You Can - Huffington Post
- House Taxes AIG Bonuses - Yahoo
Articles that actually speak some sense:
- Spare Us Your Fake Fury - NYPost
- The Case of Paying out AIG Bonuses - NYTimes
- AIG Bonus Fiasco and Taxpayers - US News & World Report
- Cool Off the Bonus Rage at AIG - Forbes
3 comments:
So, tell me Mill Nuts, what do you think about going back and making the automobile workers renegotiate their contracts before their companies get any bailouts? Or does sanctity of contract only apply to the rich? And, your link to the Fox article does not say that Dodd was responsible for the exemption that allowed the AIG bonuses to be paid. It said that he was not. At present, the culprit who inserted the language after the House passed the bill has not been identified. Various liberal bloggers are on the case.
Crockhead, read the update I made to this post this morning, I updated it with an article where he did fess up to writing it. Word of advice, never trust a word said by anyone in Washington on either side of the aisle. They are all lying scumbags.
As for your question about the automobile workers contracts, its really an irrelevant question in my mind. I personally never would have given them bailout money in the first place. If they can't run a business well enough to survive, they should be forced into bankruptcy. My understanding of how those proceedings work is that the bankruptcy judge will then undoubtedly void those contracts. In my opinion, the contract can only be voided in the case of bankruptcy or if both sides mutually agree to change it. The government should have no say in employee-employer contracts if they aren't breaking any laws.
My view is the same with AIG. I never would have given them a penny of bailout money. If they ran their business as poorly as it appears, they should have been forced to file bankruptcy papers. Had they done that the chances these bonuses would have been paid out would be slim to none.
The whole concept of a bailout makes no sense to me. Why would we possibly want to enable bad business practices. Its one thing if a business is hurting because the economy is bad. But I don't know of one company that has received bailout dollars that people would say were "run well." They were all mismanaged, so why should cover their indiscretions with my tax dollars?
Post a Comment