AIG to pay $165 million in bonuses this year

[Prince Cobra]

Well, this might have been avoided if a contract has been concluded with the recipients before the bail out... Two ideas

1) The bureacracy failed to notice it.

2) The government was more interested than the upper managers to keep the company. As far as I can remember, the upper managers of Lehman Brothers were not quite poor when the company went bankrupt...

Anyway, in the both cases the law shall be abided and the money paid. Government has not put any additional conditions on this aspect therefore it has agreed on this. As I already said somehwhere, life is unfair.

Yes, it is amoral (you know, the recipients can always decline the money), it is unfair (rich getting richer) but it is a fact. Reality.

[Gregoshi]

Would AIG still be in business without the bailout money? (not a rhetorical question)

If the answer is "no", then those execs would not be getting their bonus anyway, contract or no. Even if the answer is "yes", contracts can be renegotiated when there is incentive to do so (like keeping ones job). Considering the situation the company is in, shouldn't upper management be thinking about forgoing those bonus to help the company? Companies in general don't seem to have any problem going to the workers in tough times and ask them to accept pay freezes or cuts to help the company. Why can't the execs suck it up too?

[KukriKhan]

Fine idea, Gregoshi, and one floated. Also rumored in the works is simply adding the bonus money to the Bailout money already rendered. Kind of a service-fee. Gov't knows all about those.

Bonus payments ranged from $1,000 to $6.5 million, CNBC has learned. Only seven employees will receive a bonus of more than $3 million.

Although some suspect pressure may be growing for those employees who received bonuses to return them on their own free will, many of the employees who received bonuses are not American and may not care that American taxpayers are outraged over the incident.

[HoreTore]

Considering the situation the company is in, shouldn't upper management be thinking about forgoing those bonus to help the company?

If they had any decency at all and cared about anything other than the size of their home, cars and trophy wife boobs; yes.

But according to some, that's a left-wing idealist illusion.

[Gregoshi]

But according to some, that's a left-wing idealist illusion.

"Better (in the) Red than dead", eh?

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Seeing as we don't know the performance record of anyone who is set to receive bonuses (I mean, the nerve of that jerk collecting $1000) I can't really see how we should assume they're being paid to destroy AIG.

[Xiahou]

Isn't $165 million something like a tenth of a percent of the bailout money that AIG has already received? Yet one more reason not to waste your outrage....

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Aren't the bonuses being paid retention bonuses and not merit bonuses? Essentially they're part of the workers salary.

[KukriKhan]

Aren't the bonuses being paid retention bonuses and not merit bonuses? Essentially they're part of the workers salary.

Teh Guv is mad cuz AIG did like we did with our $600 stimulus checks: pay down debt & meet obligations - instead of buying a flatscreen TV.

They cudda sent us a 600 dollar computer, and they cudda directed AIG et al on how to spend the money. They didn't. They wrote bad law. And now they're PO'd.

Moral: write better law. Don't jump on bandwagons. Quit inflaming the public. Sasaki is always guilty.

:)

[Askthepizzaguy]

Sasaki is always guilty, except when he's innocent. Then he's even guiltier.

[Prince Cobra]

Maybe I will have to repeat myself... you, people are just idealists. Bureacracy is always absent minded when making important decisions + why should the upper managers reduce their bonus when there is somebody (the government) that is forced to bail out in order to save the economy??? In the worst possible case AIG goes bankrupt, more instability and the upper managers disappear with sad expressions and full pockets... This is the bad side of the system...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

And yet, nothing can be done for the past but what about the future? Shall this continue when the next crisis strike?

Well, this might have been avoided if a contract has been concluded with the recipients before the bail out... Two ideas

1) The bureacracy failed to notice it.

2) The government was more interested than the upper managers to keep the company. As far as I can remember, the upper managers of Lehman Brothers were not quite poor when the company went bankrupt...

Anyway, in the both cases the law shall be abided and the money paid. Government has not put any additional conditions on this aspect therefore it has agreed on this. As I already said somehwhere, life is unfair.

Yes, it is amoral (you know, the recipients can always decline the money), it is unfair (rich getting richer) but it is a fact. Reality.

[Xiahou]

I happened to catch some excellent commentary on the topic today from Brit Hume. Good stuff. It's too bad that he retired from anchoring Special Report.

[Don Corleone]

Confirmed capitalista speaking here, no left-wing namby pamby...

If you're solvent and can run your business AND pay yourself 10k times what you pay your average employee, Booyah... (I wouldn't invest in you, but hey, your right).

If you believe in rewarding incompetence, and your shareholders do too, and you insist on paying lying, stupid thieves 1M bonuses a year, again, good on you. Remind me to short your stock.

But when you take TAX MONEY that is, I can't short you, I can't divest of you, I HAVE to give you money...then you will *** **** WELL refrain from such assininity. And suggesting we should just shut up and take it, or the amount isn't that big, sounds like the advice rape victims get.

For Christ's sake. These clowns should be broke. BROKE! They paid $17M in retention bonuses to PEOPLE WHO NO LONGER WORK THERE!!!!

And if one more person says "Well, these are the guys who know how to dismantle the bomb..." You know what? I'll do a 24 on their . If they want to to hold our economy hostage, something by the way the clowns on 9/11 did, we do the same thing... fly their off to Afghanistan, and start taking digits off their fingers and toes with bolt-cutters until they talk.

I can't believe the number of apologists the rich have. Good on them for being rich, I don't hate them. But they sure as don't need my money, or at least they don't if they deserve to be there.

Let us all vote on bailing out AIG or the rest of these rotting piles of fecal matter that call themselves corporations, and I'll speak differently. Force me to take money out of Jillian's college savings account to bail out? You'll get more of this...

I'm glad they have armed guards outside their doors. Knowing that keeps me from driving to CT and doing something stupid....

ARGH!!!! :

[Major Robert Dump]

It's not the total, so much as the principle, and what that kind of money means to people who are losing the farm over this. Besides, AIGs situation doesn't begin or end with this latest round of bonuses...


hey check out this guy, fired in March

http://www.nydailynews.com/money/200...ph_cass-1.html

So has this always gone on? Because it seems like a fairly simple thing to do, negotiate a huge compensation plan than torpedo your own company either intentionally (corporate espionage) or unintentionally (negligence, callousness, ignorance, apathy).

I've heard about this stuff happening all my life, I guess more people just learned to do it, and then more and more and more, and eventually it was happening so much and to so many people and kapow.

It is hard for us, without being flippant, to even see a scenario within any kind of [rhyme] or reason that would see us losing one dollar in any of those transactions,"

[Strike For The South]

Good for AIG. Its there money. Im glad they are doing this.

[Major Robert Dump]

[Don Corleone]

Good for AIG. Its there money. Im glad they are doing this.

I swear to God in heaven, if you spew that bull again to me or my family, I will become vexed.

Sorry, I've been waiting for this moment. Dude, what the hell are you saying? Look, it's St. Paddy's Day, and perhaps I've had a bit more of the dew than I should have, but you WANT them taking your tax money to go piss it away? Glad you're not worried about kids yet. Newsflash, I am. You can't have mine. Give them your piggy bank and tell them to leave me the alone.

[Strike For The South]

I swear to God in heaven, if you spew that bull again to me or my family, I will cave in your head with a sledghammer!!!!

Sorry, I've been waiting for this moment. Dude, what the hell are you saying? Look, it's St. Paddy's Day, and perhaps I've had a bit more of the dew than I should have, but you WANT them taking your tax money to go piss it away? Glad you're not worried about kids yet. Newsflash, I am. You can't have mine. Give them your piggy bank and tell them to leave me the alone.

You reap what you sow my friend. The American people wanted a piece of populist legislature with more holes in it than a French battleship and that's what they got. Maybe we will learn next time before we do this again.

The guys in this company are not stupid , they no AIG isn't salvageable and there just taking what they can.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Let us all vote on bailing out AIG or the rest of these rotting piles of fecal matter that call themselves corporations, and I'll speak differently. Force me to take money out of Jillian's college savings account to bail fatass out? You'll get more of this...

If you accept the validity of our democratic republic, you must simply accept such things as these.

People were democratically elected and then they - acting in good faith on behalf of the voters and taxpayers - decided that AIG deserved a terms-free check. Isn't our system awesome?

More power to AIG. Best to make out with as much government money while you can before the whole system goes under.

EDIT: lol SFTS is reading my mind

[Don Corleone]

As much as the "thumb in your eye" aspect of your arguments appeals to me, I can't listen to either of you. It's a very different matter when it's YOUR money they're pissing away, or more to the point, YOUR CHILDREN'S. As far as I know, neither of you actually pays taxes nor receives cards on the 3rd Sunday of June, so your opinion, while entertaining, weighs as rather irrelevant to me.

Send 33% of your graduation gifts off to AIG, then we'll talk.

P.S. By the way ATPG, are you TRYING to encourage me towards a National Socialist movement?

[Strike For The South]

As much as the "thumb in your eye" aspect of your arguments appeals to me, I can't listen to either of you. It's a very different matter when it's YOUR money they're pissing away, or more to the point, YOUR CHILDREN'S. As far as I know, neither of you actually pays taxes nor receives cards on the 3rd Sunday of June, so your opinion, while entertaining, weighs as rather irrelevant to me.

Send 33% of your graduation gifts off to AIG, then we'll talk.

P.S. By the way ATPG, are you TRYING to encourage me towards a National Socialist movement?

They take money out of my paycheck. AIG is doing nothing illegal, simply because the American people are finding out these politicians are not the knight in white armor they thought there were doesn't me you can tell these AIG people to commit suicide

Capiche?

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

You think my parents don't pay taxes? My dad might lose his job come May, so I don't think personal financial situations really have much sway in this debate.

This little outrage is just a tiny drop in the bucket. If you haven't gotten shootin' mad yet I don't see why you'd start now.

And no, I'd prefer you reject authority altogether. You'll still have bastards in Washington pissing away money under National Socialism, and they'll probably discard the few pretenses of legality the current crowd uses.

[Whacker]

I was talking to dear ol' Mah on the phone a week or so ago, she had two ideas that I found absolutely BRILLIANT.

First, every corporate exec of a firm that failed this year or was "fired" should be taxed at about a 90% income tax rate, absolutely no kind of tax shelters or deductions permitted. Suddenly that 30 million dollar severance package isn't so great anymore, is it?

Second, ALL executive level bonuses paid out this year should be paid ONLY in common company stock. No cash, no Learjets, no BMW's, no trips to Brasil to sleep with ladyboys, etc etc. Stock only. AND. AND. They can't sell it for a year.

I love it.

[Askthepizzaguy]

P.S. By the way ATPG, are you TRYING to encourage me towards a National Socialist movement?

Capitalism is awesome when it is honest. This is dishonest.

A little government intervention when the entire system is one big porkfest and corruption fest and bailout fest would be nice. I don't want the economy to go down in flames, and having a little control over what happens to our money they stole would be lovely.

I don't want to nationalize the entire economy, but when big businesses are too big to fail, then they need to be regulated when they do, and we bail them out. Point blank, if you loan someone money, you have a right to ask them not to piss it away on BS.

I'd prefer any bonuses be given to the workers who were NOT responsible for the mess, and I'd prefer to let the fat cat CEO's get nothing for their horrendous blunders which have nearly ruined this country and left thousands unemployed.

Edit: 165 million is not a lot, to be honest. But if it is coming from the taxpayer, it needs to be spent with our approval, or refunded to us. PERIOD.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I don't want the economy to go down in flames, and having a little control over what happens to our money they stole would be lovely.

AIG stole nothing; we gave it to them.

Point blank, if you loan someone money, you have a right to ask them not to piss it away on BS.

No you don't. You can only expect to be repaid the loan. If you loan someone money without stipulation, you can't suddenly expect them to follow new terms you suddenly came up with.

I'd prefer any bonuses be given to the workers who were NOT responsible for the mess, and I'd prefer to let the fat cat CEO's get nothing for their horrendous blunders which have nearly ruined this country and left thousands unemployed.

How do you know that's not the situation? AIG isn't exactly a mining company.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I don't know, for sure. But that is the whole point. Unless I do know, I don't want the money being spent. I don't mind it spent, I just want to know WHERE it is spent. The Federal Government, funded by taxpayers, should not be handing out blank checks. That's why people hate the Fed, it does things with our money irresponsibly.

Why is more responsibility and accountability a bad thing?

[Don Corleone]

You think my parents don't pay taxes? My dad might lose his job come May, so I don't think personal financial situations really have much sway in this debate.

This little outrage is just a tiny drop in the bucket. If you haven't gotten shootin' mad yet I don't see why you'd start now.

And no, I'd prefer you reject authority altogether. You'll still have bastards in Washington pissing away money under National Socialism, and they'll probably discard the few pretenses of legality the current crowd uses.

Are both you of you yet so noble, idealist yet foolishly naive that you think somehow this whole mess will lead to the population to wean itself off the government teat? Oh, you poor, honorable, dimwitted fools.

Here's what happens... AIG execs get rich. Congress bitches and explains AIG is the reason why taxes have to go up to 40%.

End of story. No mass evolution of thought. No trends to libertarianism.

We're past all that.

Aside from which, can either of you explain to me WHY AIG should receive bonuses when 1) they turned in false books and 2) they're paying retention bonuses to people who have left the company.

If you want to social engineer, do it with your own money. Not with mine, and not with Daddy's, ATPG. Your own. Watch your own kids go without, so that some fat rich criminal bastard pads his offshore accounts.

Until then, the two of you are pissing in the wind.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Why is more responsibility and accountability a bad thing?

It's not, but that's not being discussed here. AIG was given a blank check, and now we're demanding - without knowing anything about the actual situation - that the bonuses be returned. Is a "one size fits all" approach to demanding the bonuses be rescinded responsible?

Are both you of you yet so noble, idealist yet foolishly naive that you think somehow this whole mess will lead to the population to wean itself off the government teat? Oh, you poor, honorable, dimwitted fools.

Here's what happens... AIG execs get rich. Congress bitches and explains AIG is the reason why taxes have to go up to 40%.

End of story. No mass evolution of thought. No trends to libertarianism.

We're past all that.

I agree. This isn't about your kids future or mine. This is about getting what you can from the government while you can. We decided we weren't going to play ball with a free market. Fine. Hand me my welfare check.

Aside from which, can either of you explain to me WHY AIG should receive bonuses when 1) they turned in false books and 2) they're paying retention bonuses to people who have left the company.

AIG isn't as a whole, they're merely compensating employees (who may not have had anything to do with AIG falling apart).

Were you this full of vinegar when they were bailed out to begin with? Because that's where the real outrage belongs. Not here. Like you said, the story ended right there.

I'm not social engineering anything.

[Devastatin Dave]

Sorry, I meant to say those who had committed crimes, falsified documents and reports, interfered with investigations, perpetrated fraud, and so on and so forth. Surely we can get some people indicted. I do not advocate stripping property from the law-abiding, nor even do I support an income tax. I'd prefer a sales and property tax bump, and the elimination of most of the functions of the IRS, but that's a different topic.

Are we talking about AIG or Barney Frank and Chris Dodd?

[Major Robert Dump]

If we didn't give bailouts in the first place none of these silly arguments would be getting tossed around. But what's done is done, and giving bailout money with no strings attached as to how it will be spent is simply ludicrous, considering the companies mismanagement and failure is why they needed a bailout in the first place. Equally as ludicrous are the people who try to attach the strings, what with their ineptness, politics and outright corruption.

It's really a lose, lose, lose situation, and I can honestly argue that the best-case scenario in situations like this is to just let the companies fail and what happens happens. How is paying 3000 people unemployment for a few months from a closed factory any different than spending a few million to keep it open? The taxes from the continuation of work don't exist because they are being spent on the bailout.

It's called employment extortion: give us money or we will have to fire people, and gosh you don't want that. It's not unlike what North Korea does every few years with their alleged nuclear program when countries cut their aid levels.

Let them fail. The vacuum will be filled by new businesses, people will move on to other jobs, and essentially the same concept of social welfare reform (you can teach a man to fish etc) applies to businesses. If there is always a safety net with no repurcussions, it will be abused, it's simple human nature.

But what's done is done. This whole thing is a circus, and we are the monkeys