Tar and Feathers for AIG
Our Readers Who Comment want revenge on American International Group for paying bonuses to AIG executives. Their fury comes in response to Brady Dennis' report that the bailed-out insurance giant finally revealed where it sent the money.
Readers have detested bailouts from the time they was first mentioned back in the Bush Administration and their hostility has only grown as the economy continues to tank, taking with it jobs, housing values and retirement funds. They're not getting any help, so why should the bozos who wrote those insurance contracts be getting bonuses?
Readers suggest tar and feathers, severe tax audits or a 99 percent tax rate for bonus recipients and wonder why, if we can help these misguided insurance executives,we can't help the auto industry.
We'll start with ASKENNEDY, who wrote, "I believe this calls for the time honored tradition of tar and feathering."
TalkingHead1 asked, "So, again, why is it legal for the feds to give $160 billion of American taxpayers to AIG in bailouts, but illegal for them to take away $160 million bonus from AIG?"
TabLUnoLCSWfromUtah wrote, "...for a company to enter into a written agreement that represents a poor business decision raises serious questions about the integrity of those ruthless business people who can use the legal system to rip off both the company they "work for" and the rest of us. Somehow somebody needs to be responsible and lose in such "legally" questionable deals..."
hc2254 said, "What's the worst that could happen? Millions of millionaires lose their faux wealth? Millions of thousandaires have to work for their money rather than rely on that racetrack called the stock market? We have to burn this house down to save it."
profco wrote, "Retention bonuses to keep "top talent"? Where exactly do all these AIG executives think they are going to find jobs in the financial sector these days? Let them leave AIG bcause they don't get their bonuses--and find out what the real world is like."
pjc8300892 suggested that "Everyone who got a bonus should go under the IRS microscope to see how much of that bonus the tax payers can recover."
And laSerenissima2003 added "...Perhaps bonuses paid by companies receiving bailout funds should be taxed at a rate of 99%?"
Beprudent noted that many American millions "...flowed to the bank accounts of large international financial institutions that are the national champions of other nations" and wondered "Has any consideration been given by the Obama Administration to seeking, by moral suasion, contributions to help with the AIG bill?..."
lowercaselarry wrote, "Geithner and Summers are buffoons. Their pathetic attempts to justify AIG's actions deserve ridicule. There may be contractural obligations on the part of AIG, but there is certainly no obligation for the Treasury to pour money into AIG willy-nilly."
JoeSixPack1 asked, "...Can I trust this Administration in the White House? If the Obama folks truly believe what AIG is doing on the bonus payout is wrong, they should find a way stop them. Otherwise, the Obama is either incompetent or in bed with the crooks."
Keenobserver wrote, "...Many taxpayers have lost their jobs, retirement, and individual wealth from the actions of AIG. So far, AIG (the responsible party) doesn't think that their employees should lose their jobs or their bonuses. Think again!"
JulesJames said, "Honor every bonus contract. Then terminate any AIG employee who accepts the bonus..."
arjay1, noting that retaining quality employees is one of the reasons given for paying bonuses, wrote, "...If they are the same employees who were there in 2007 and 2008, what difference does it make whether they are retained or not? The[y] got their paychecks by selling insurance on something that didn't have related assets or actual value."
goodcake4u wrote, "There are thousands of American citizens who are going homeless right now while these rats are taking bonuses for destroying the economy. Something is not right and if it is not corrected perhaps we should help them correct it."
sjones77 offered the one comment I could find at this hour that seemed to defend AIG: "I don't understand the consternation with how AIG has been spending the bailout money (except for the millions in bonus payouts). It sounds like it used the money to pay off its bad debts. Isn't that exatly what it was supposed to do?"
But AverageJane asked, "Can anybody tell me why Wall Street gets 100s of billions in bailouts while the big 3 automakers have to go on bended knee for asstistance?..."
And woody2471 wrote, " 'We are a country of laws. There are contracts,' Summers said yesterday. 'The government cannot just abrogate contracts....'
Unless, of course, it is a contract with the United Auto Workers."
We'll close with swatkins1, who wrote, "Sounds like AIG wiped the bad assets from its books. So......When does my stock portfolio and my house value start to go back up?"
Posted by: walker1 | March 16, 2009 1:01 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.