Outrage I Can Believe In

[guido911]

FWIW, the people actually in charge (Congress handed the purse to Treasury) said there were contracts already in place to pay out said bonuses.  If they did not pay them out litigation would have ensured and the result would have been legal fees AND paying out the bonuses.  Congress should have conditioned the money on many things including the ability to rework compensation packages (as they should do with the automakers) in such a way as to make it fair but NOT drive away quality labor.  Unfortunately, getting people that can run a multi billion dollar company is expensive.  Since I own a stake in the company as a tax payer, I want qualified people.

Not that I'm defending the bonus structure.  I'd also want performance bonuses and a rational basis for compensation.  If your company goes into receivership (basically) odds are at least SOME of the executives didn't do their damn jobs. 

I'd love to see companies restructure their entire bonus packages.  Make them stock of which you can sell no more than 10% of the original allotment in a given year (minimum 10 year holding).  Something to make them long term liable.  Most these guys are not at the same job for more than a couple years, an acquittance of mine that works as a high level executive says if you are at the same job for more than 3 years your career has stagnated.    Hard to get a long strategy with people like that I imagine . . .



And here I thought I was clever for figuring that out.  New forum, new chance I guess.  Behave yourself AOX, I enjoy the, ummm, the discussion you bring to the forum.

You are correct about the bonuses being contracted for salary and there could have been litigation. But hey, why do the UAW workers have to renegotiate their contracts and not AIG employees? Easy solution.  Stop with the freakin bailouts.

[cannon_fodder]

I'm not arguing in favor of bonuses.  Just giving a rationale for the decision.  For icing on the cake; most of the bonuses are for the London division that was in charge of derivatives (read: caused the problem).

[guido911]

Well, it apparently turns out that Chris Dodd, the man wanting to tax the AIG executives that received bonuses 98% of that bonus, was responsible for providing the mechanism so these executives could receive these bonuses:

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/finance/dodd-cracks-aig---time/

I wrote "apparently" because, after all, the article is from Fixed News Business.

[we vs us]

Well, it apparently turns out that Chris Dodd, the man wanting to tax the AIG executives that received bonuses 98% of that bonus, was responsible for providing the mechanism so these executives could receive these bonuses:

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/finance/dodd-cracks-aig---time/

I wrote "apparently" because, after all, the article is from Fixed News Business.

While Dodd probably didn't add the bonus protection clause specifically for AIG, I agree, it wasn't a smart move.  There've been bonus issues with other bailout recipients as well, though AIG's is by far the most visible. 

Why these CEOs can't see just how tone deaf they look when doling out bonuses -- legal or not -- is beyond me.  It's the equivalent of taking the private jet to your congressional hearings.  It just makes everybody look filthy, and that includes the company, the recipients of the bonuses, the government, and us, for trusting that the companies might do the right thing unprompted.  Everyone looks bad.

It also seriously hampers any chance that the Obama Administration could get more money for aid in the future (of which there have been rumblings on and off for awhile now). 

[guido911]

While Dodd probably didn't add the bonus protection clause specifically for AIG...

Man I hope you are right. But when Dodd gets more campaign capital from AIG than any other politician, one has to wonder (or adjust the aluminum foil deflector beenie).  I see the NY AG is claiming that 73 AIG execs got at least $1M in bonus money.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96VTRDG0&show_article=1

I am sure that's going to go over well with those standing in an unemployment line somewhere.

[FOTD]

One side benfit....bipartisanship.....for a change!

http://www.reuters.com/article/BANKSL/idUSN1548834720090315

Guido, you got to appeciate Grasley's comments.

[Gaspar]

No FOTD.  I've simply come aware that it makes me feel bad to debate people that operate in a different capacity.  You guys simply think in a different way.

Debate fuels the engine that emotional people run on, and in the process reality is burned just as surely as diesel.

You don't realize that your prize is your gloat. . . and that is your only prize.

Leaders of men do not descend from heaven and give you things, they only have the power to slack your chains or pull them tight.

The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves. – Dresden James

[cannon_fodder]

Here is a fun article published today on the AIG crisis.  Essentially everyone in Washington new or should have known it was coming and didn't care.  OBama and Dodd were received the largest campaign contributions from AIG's failed division  ($100,000+ from the one getting the bonuses).  And no one, from either party, was really interested in this "problem" until the news papers got interested.  Cash out the door will fix the economy, we need to send trillions out to failing businesses NOW!  NOW!!!

Spare Us Your Fake Fury, DC Hypocrites.

[Gaspar]

Here is a fun article published today on the AIG crisis.  Essentially everyone in Washington new or should have known it was coming and didn't care.  OBama and Dodd were received the largest campaign contributions from AIG's failed division  ($100,000+ from the one getting the bonuses).  And no one, from either party, was really interested in this "problem" until the news papers got interested.  Cash out the door will fix the economy, we need to send trillions out to failing businesses NOW!  NOW!!!

Spare Us Your Fake Fury, DC Hypocrites.

CF,

Dodd wrote this "amendment" into the stimulus bill the NIGHT BEFORE IT WAS PASSED.  Of course no one had an opportunity to read it.  There was no reason to write this in at the 11th hour unless it was specifically requested by AIG execs.  He was serving his masters at our expense.

He got caught, now he's acting like he's outraged.  News outlets are not reporting it to the sheep, and they wouldn't care anyway while the spell is still in effect.  The federal government will have no recourse in this unless they set a president by negating contract law, and therefore, doing irreparable harm to the legal system.

We got screwed, get used to it.


The prohibition required under clause (i) shall not be construed to prohibit any bonus payment required to be paid pursuant to a written employment contract executed on or before February 11, 2009, as such valid employment contracts are determined by the Secretary or the designee of the Secretary.

[cannon_fodder]

Yeah, there's that too.  Which points to the bigger issue of everyone watching the whips thumb instead of actually reading the damn bills.  But it still means the issue was out there for a month before anyone cared to say something, if not longer.

[Gaspar]

Yeah, there's that too.  Which points to the bigger issue of everyone watching the whips thumb instead of actually reading the damn bills.  But it still means the issue was out there for a month before anyone cared to say something, if not longer.

It took that long for groups to translate the PDF scanned bill into searchable text and then find the damage.

I estimate that this bill will be topic for the next year or more as we find out what exactly was passed by the marauders. 

[Gaspar]

You just gotta laugh now.

News is just coming out that Merrill Lynch execs got 3.4 Billion in bonuses from the TARP funds, and several Fannie May execs each got $644,000 bonuses, and more to come.

I'm not upset with President Obama, after all, he did not get a chance to read the bill. 

He was taken advantage of, but now it's his responsibility to take control of the situation.

There is little legal recourse to this, it is simply something that the president can say he's learned from.   

I think he will be far more cautious in the future when signing something that Pelosi puts on his desk.

[Cats Cats Cats]

You just gotta laugh now.

News is just coming out that Merrill Lynch execs got 3.4 Billion in bonuses from the TARP funds, and several Fannie May execs each got $644,000 bonuses, and more to come.

I'm not upset with President Obama, after all, he did not get a chance to read the bill. 

He was taken advantage of, but now it's his responsibility to take control of the situation.

There is little legal recourse to this, it is simply something that the president can say he's learned from.   

I think he will be far more cautious in the future when signing something that Pelosi puts on his desk.

Gaspar, come on man I thought you were better than this.

    "The Financial Times reported that Merrill Lynch accelerated its normal time schedule for awarding bonuses and distributed $ 4 billion dollars on Dec 29, just 3 days before its takeover by Bank of America. At the same time Merrill posted $15 billion in losses for the fourth quarter. The total compensation for Merrill Lynch employees in 2008 was $15 billion."

Assuming when you said "I'm not upset with President Obama, after all, he did not get a chance to read the bill."  I am assuming you are talking about the fact that since he wasn't President and didn't SIGN the TARP bill in the first place he didn't read it?  This is done on Bush's watch.  You can bring Pelosi into it all you want but you shouldn't try dragging Obama in on it.  A MAJORITY of the bank bailouts happened under Bush. 

[FOTD]

It was Paulson. Skin head engineer of the collapse....saved his buddies....screwed the taxpayers....republicanized the numbers on behalf of those in charge long before BO. It was Paulson who failed to stipulate controls while giving out corporate welfare checks.

[Gaspar]

Gaspar, come on man I thought you were better than this.

    "The Financial Times reported that Merrill Lynch accelerated its normal time schedule for awarding bonuses and distributed $ 4 billion dollars on Dec 29, just 3 days before its takeover by Bank of America. At the same time Merrill posted $15 billion in losses for the fourth quarter. The total compensation for Merrill Lynch employees in 2008 was $15 billion."

Assuming when you said "I'm not upset with President Obama, after all, he did not get a chance to read the bill."  I am assuming you are talking about the fact that since he wasn't President and didn't SIGN the TARP bill in the first place he didn't read it?  This is done on Bush's watch.  You can bring Pelosi into it all you want but you shouldn't try dragging Obama in on it.  A MAJORITY of the bank bailouts happened under Bush. 

LOL  I guess I really didn't make myself clear.

That was my point.  AIG is business as usual.

We were assured that the old way was not going to be the new way.  We were promised change.  The TARP bill was a CRIME in the old administration, and we are getting another dose of it in the first 60 days of this administration.

I am not blaming Obama.  He had no way to know in such a short time, what he was being pushed into.