AIG makes me sick

[MacGyver]

AIG receives a taxpayer bailout of $170 billion dollars. Then they turn around and give out $165 million to its executives in bonuses. Even after they lost $61.7 billion in the fourth quarter last year. They get a bonus for not making money? :huh:

Don't they phucking get it?

[Sean H]

actually the treasury dept signed off on it, AIG was contractually obligated to pay out those bonuses, otherwise it would of faced lawsuits from those employees. AIG didn't have much of a choice.

.

[MacGyver]

actually the treasury dept signed off on it, AIG was contractually obligated to pay out those bonuses, otherwise it would of faced lawsuits from those employees. AIG didn't have much of a choice.

.


The government should have stepped in and said, no way. Not give them the green light.

[BBB725]

The government should have stepped in and said, no way. Not give them the green light.

Do I agree with bonuses when the company's losing money? No.

But it's better then the alternative.

Are you sure you want the government to be making business decisions?

Cause they might step in and make them all:eek:

[MOBILEMERCMAN]

actually the treasury dept signed off on it, AIG was contractually obligated to pay out those bonuses, otherwise it would of faced lawsuits from those employees. AIG didn't have much of a choice.

.

Must be a great contract for the employees. Lose money get a bonus

Stupid company

[DollaBill]

I've given up thinking about it. It's all BS.

[Tommy Gun]

It is BS...contractual or not I find it hard to believe that there is not some kind of escape clause for the company based on the overall perfomance of the company. In my companys bonus policy that is absolutely the case.

I feel for the employee that did their job, hit their benchmarks and feel they are entitled to the bonus...but I really dislike having my tax dollars pay it.

[open72]

[QUOTE=MacGyver;Don't they phucking get it?[/QUOTE]

Yes ,they do get it , they got the money from the profits on the CDS'S and the taxpayer money ,so , really , they are making a double...


The best way to solve this would have been to let them go bankrupt in the first place!


WASHINGTON - American International Group is set to pay $450 million of bonuses to employees of the unit that was largely responsible for the New York insurer's near collapse last fall.

The decision to pay bonuses elicited howls of protest in Washington, which has prevented the failure of AIG by providing the insurer with more than $173 billion in aid. The federal government now owns 80% of AIG (AIG:American International Group Inc

Larry Summers, one of President Barack Obama's top economic advisers, called the payments "outrageous," and a key House lawmaker, Barney Frank, D.-Mass., told Fox News that the government should examine whether the bonuses are "legally recoverable."


Another Democrat, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D.-Md., renewed his call for AIG Chief Executive Edward Liddy to resign.

Liddy, in a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner dated Saturday, said AIG had committed to paying the bonuses to employees of the financial-products unit and that they were "binding obligations" the company cannot legally rescind. The first payments are due March 15.


"I do not like these arrangements and find it distasteful and difficult to recommend to you that we must proceed with them," wrote Liddy, citing the recommendation from the insurer's legal counsel.


The payments to 400 employees of the financial-services unit -- some of whom no longer work at the insurer -- were promised last year before the federal government bailout. Bonuses range from as little as $1,000 to as much as $6.5 million.


Summers said the government would examine its options, but he acknowledged it might not be able to terminate prior bonus agreements.
"We are a country of law. There are contracts. The government cannot just abrogate contracts," he said in an interview Sunday on ABC's "This Week."
AIG is already scheduled to pay $121.5 million in incentive payments for 2008 to senior executives and 6,400 of its employees. And AIG is laying out another $619 million for 2009 in retention payments to more than 4,000 employees.
Total expected payments amount to almost $1.2 billion.


Regarding future incentive payments Liddy told Geithner the company cannot retain its best employees if their compensation is subject to "continued and arbitrary adjustment by the U.S. Treasury." If AIG loses its best employees, he indicated, it would make it harder for the company to recover and help the government recoup its investment.

Liddy also pointed out he won't receive a bonus and that the company cut bonus payments for it senior executives. The top 25 executives in the financial-product unit, moreover, have agreed to accept a salary of just $1 for the rest of 2009, his letter said.

AIG nearly collapsed under the weight of contracts that the financial-products units sold to protect other institutions against losses from securities backed by subprime mortgages.

Since so many financial firms around the world were insured by AIG, the failure of the firm could deal a devastating blow to the global financial system, Treasury and Federal Reserve officials say in justifying the most expensive bailout ever.



Funny , huh , to retain the best employees....errrrr...crooks!

[nortech4play]

actually the treasury dept signed off on it, AIG was contractually obligated to pay out those bonuses, otherwise it would of faced lawsuits from those employees. AIG didn't have much of a choice.

.

If that's true that Treasury signed off on this it's total b.s. The government own's 80% of AIG and if they want to sue the federal government so be it let them start the freaking processs... Either way paying bonuses or commissions when your insolvent and need taxpayer money just to stay afloat is ridiculous.

That's why most of these companies should be forced into bankruptcy if they are insolvent...otherwise your going to keep rewarding people who helped bring them down....who's to say that most of these so called bonuses or commissions aren't tied to failed policies that we (the actual people paying the government) are having to bail out...total b.s. in my book...

Rewarding failure seems to be the Democratic way these days and I can't say that I agree with it one bit....just my $.02...

[ChiefApache]

I can't even comment on this it's so stupid!!

We have a small growing business, 4 years in business, and we're contniually turned down for a loan because we haven't been in business long enough, EVEN THOUGH we have doubled our business in those 4 years.

Our government is screwing us every second of every frickin day, and smiling the entire time! MUTHER FUKERS!:boxing_smiley:

[ChiefApache]

That's why most of these companies should be forced into bankruptcy if they are insolvent.....

100% agree! They got themselves into this mess. If I did the same thing as a taxpayer, I certainly would no longer be in business.

[LaughingCat]

I am calling complete and utter BS for anyone who says they don't want re government to intervene and cancel these bonuses. WIG came crawling, begging for bailout money. We, The People, gave it to them. These phuckers ran it into the ground and now they would have the audacity to sue for contractual bonuses. They are lucky to not be in jail. And they probably have the nerve to call themselves republicans.

When the automakers asked for money, everyone said the government should bust up the union deals before bailing them out. Let's not be hypocrite here. These contractual bonuses are really not different than the blood sucking union deals that pull the company's profitability or ability to stay in business down.

I demand the government intervene. The capitalist system (read: individual companies) is temporarily boken. Now it's time for the League (read: government) to get it back on track. If the business leaders want to come to grandpa government for some money, they can abide by tyrukes the government will attach to it.

[LaughingCat]

I am calling complete and utter BS for anyone who says they don't want the government to intervene and cancel these bonuses. AIG came crawling, begging for bailout money. We, The People, gave it to them. These phuckers ran it into the ground and now they would have the audacity to sue for contractual bonuses. They are lucky to not be in jail. And they probably have the nerve to call themselves republicans.

When the automakers asked for money, everyone said the government should bust up the union deals before bailing them out. Let's not be hypocrite here. These contractual bonuses are really not different than the blood sucking union deals that pull the company's profitability or ability to stay in business down.

I demand the government intervene. The capitalist system (read: individual companies) is temporarily boken. Now it's time for the League (read: government) to get it back on track. If the business leaders want to come to grandpa government for some money, they can abide by tyrukes the government will attach to it.

[masher44]

They lost 61 Billion, not million in the 4th quarter.

[boomer35]

i dont know where the bonuses went, and i agree they should have just let AIG sink, BUT as devils advocate, what if the bonuses went to employees who individually hit all there goals and bench marks and worked their buts off selling loans, in sales arent most jobs and job contracts tied to some sort of incentives for personal success....

still BS either way, but there might be more than we know

[MOBILEMERCMAN]

Put the faces and positions of those earning bonuses on the news.

[masher44]

And I agree it is stupid but if we get pissed off over 100 million while our investment is 170 billion we are nuts. They do need to retain key employees. Sales agents, middle management etc etc. Upper management got them into trouble. Not the people doing their job and what they were told to do. Senior management??? I am not sure what that means? I have a feeling people are getting paid that shouldnt be but some of those people should. If all the talent leaves than we can kiss goodbye the 170 billion we already gave. AIG will be viable again. If it failed, I am not expert but I would say it would be huge....

[masher44]

Put the faces and positions of those earning bonuses on the news.

exactly

[Ratickle]

And I agree it is stupid but if we get pissed off over 100 million while our investment is 170 billion we are nuts. They do need to retain key employees. Sales agents, middle management etc etc. Upper management got them into trouble. Not the people doing their job and what they were told to do. Senior management??? I am not sure what that means? I have a feeling people are getting paid that shouldnt be but some of those people should. If all the talent leaves than we can kiss goodbye the 170 billion we already gave. AIG will be viable again. If it failed, I am not expert but I would say it would be huge....

Doesn't matter. If you fail, (like as Stecz's enforcer:)), you don't get a bonus. Without the handout from Us, there would be no company, and therefore, no bonus....


The Gov's a bunch of paid off punks-ass-puzzies....:boxing_smiley:

[Ratickle]

Put the faces and positions of those earning bonuses on the news.


exactly

I may see if I can hire you away from Stecz if that happens...:)

[masher44]

Doesn't matter. If you fail, (like as Stecz's enforcer:)), you don't get a bonus. Without the handout from Us, there would be no company, and therefore, no bonus....


The Gov's a bunch of paid off punks-ass-puzzies....:boxing_smiley:

SBRT will never fail. We dont ask for anything, we take it.

[Ratickle]

SBRT will never fail. We dont ask for anything, we take it.

:26::26::03::03::26::26:


Nice......

[stecz20]

SBRT will never fail. We dont ask for anything, we take it.

poor fella doesnt get it..... little does he know hes on the list...

[Ratickle]

poor fella doesnt get it..... little does he know hes on the list...

But I just put a sensor on Chris. Now I know he's first......:sifone:

[masher44]

Stecz: Mr. Geithner?
Tim: Yes my King how are you?
Stecz: shut up punk, wire me 100 billion.
Tim: as long as masher doesnt get it all.
Stecz: F you ass wipe, send it now
Tim: Ok I am sorry sir

[stecz20]

stecz: Mr. Geithner?
Tim: Yes my king how are you?
Stecz: Shut up punk, wire me 100 billion.
Tim: As long as masher doesnt get it all.
Stecz: F you ass wipe, send it now
tim: Ok i am sorry sir

:26::26:

[GregP]

It's very simple. Just make a special tax rate for all bank, insurance and investment firm employees, like they currently have for hedge fund managers (who pay a special LOWER tax rate than anyone else in the country). Make them use 5 year average income, and have the tax for any income over 100k/year be taxed at 99.99%. That way we can get back the undeserved $ from the last four years when they were patting themselves on the wallet for creating this mess.

Simple and completely legal since they already created industry specific tax rates for "friends of Paulson & W".

-g

[LaughingCat]

this AIG story is getting old. It's time to collapse the holding company, sell off the other divisions and leave the government on the hook for all the ridiculous policies they have. AIG is becoming Vietnam quickly.

If it's not obvious, this is simply a welfare company providing jobs to people who lose money.

[Tommy Gun]

Stecz: Mr. Geithner?
Tim: Yes my King how are you?
Stecz: shut up punk, wire me 100 billion.
Tim: as long as masher doesnt get it all.
Stecz: F you ass wipe, send it now
Tim: Ok I am sorry sir

100 billion...maybe that's the level of payroll necessary to buy a World Series winner; $190 million doesn't appear to be enough.

[masher44]

100 billion...maybe that's the level of payroll necessary to buy a World Series winner; $190 million doesn't appear to be enough.

it was 200+ the last 3 years.... ecomony is killing us this year :26:

[stecz20]

it was 200+ the last 3 years.... ecomony is killing us this year :26:

yeah, were only gonna sell 3.5 million seats this year:26::26:

[stecz20]

100 billion...maybe that's the level of payroll necessary to buy a World Series winner; $190 million doesn't appear to be enough.

tommy, your hate is deep... love us....:03:

[masher44]

yeah A rod will only make 250K per game this year if he plays 120 games, tough times :26:

[masher44]

AIG up 85% today.

[Sea-Dated]

Stecz: Mr. Geithner?
Tim: Yes my King how are you?
Stecz: shut up punk, wire me 100 billion.
Tim: as long as masher doesnt get it all.
Stecz: F you ass wipe, send it now
Tim: Ok I am sorry sir

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Sea-Dated]

AIG up 85% today.

What, from $1.00 to $1.85?

[Sean H]

What, from $1.00 to $1.85?

it was 100% for awhile, from .50 to 1.00. .85 right now.

[masher44]

What, from $1.00 to $1.85?

think it hit .30 two weeks ago

[clayinaustin]

I either want less corruption or more opportunity to participate in it! :mad:

[Bobcat]

Obama berates AIG and vows to try to block

By TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer Tom Raum, Associated Press Writer – 17 mins

Obama: AIG can't justify 'outrage' of bonuses Play Video AP – Obama: AIG can't justify 'outrage' of bonuses

* Call of the Wild: AIG Bonuses Play Video Video:Call of the Wild: AIG Bonuses CNBC
* Business Update: AIG woes increase Play Video Video:Business Update: AIG woes increase Reuters

Related Quotes Symbol Price Change
AIG 0.83 +0.33
BAC 6.18 +0.42
BCS 5.31 +0.89
DB 33.92 +0.05
GS 93.90 -4.90
A woman enters an AIG office building Monday, March 16, 2009 in New York. AP – A woman enters an AIG office building Monday, March 16, 2009 in New York. American International Group …

WASHINGTON – Joining a wave of public anger, President Barack Obama blistered insurance giant AIG for "recklessness and greed" Monday and pledged to try to block it from handing its executives $165 million in bonuses after taking billions in federal bailout money.

"How do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?" Obama asked. "This isn't just a matter of dollars and cents. It's about our fundamental values."

Obama aggressively joined other officials in criticizing American International Group, the company that is fast becoming the poster boy for Americans' bailout blues.

[masher44]

Devil's Advocate....

You get a loan to run your business from someone, they give you the money, if they said I am going to give you the money as long as I get to tell you how to run your company......

Piss off.....

The only strength AIG has left is people power.

OK let the flaming begin :leaving:

[sledge]

Devil's Advocate....

You get a loan to run your business from someone, they give you the money, if they said I am going to give you the money as long as I get to tell you how to run your company......

Piss off.....

The only strength AIG has left is people power.

OK let the flaming begin :leaving:

No flaming necessary...right on point. Look at who is leading the charge against AIG et al....frigging clueless people with Z E R O experience running a business, let alone a huge multi-national.

[MacGyver]

They lost 61 Billion, not million in the 4th quarter.

Thanks Masher, my bad. These numbers are too big to keep track of.

[old377guy]

my blood is starting to boil - i'm signing off!!

[LaughingCat]

Find me one person sympathetic to these people. They got a BS contract from executives who fried the company, then decided to contractually obligate the company to pay even more to these thieves. There should be an international tribunal, not a debate.

[Wardey]

Yeah, This sets my azz on fire too !!!:mad::mad::mad: I think they should have to give the Gov back every dime and fall on their azz !!! Dave

[Audiofn]

And I agree it is stupid but if we get pissed off over 100 million while our investment is 170 billion we are nuts. They do need to retain key employees. Sales agents, middle management etc etc. Upper management got them into trouble. Not the people doing their job and what they were told to do. Senior management??? I am not sure what that means? I have a feeling people are getting paid that shouldnt be but some of those people should. If all the talent leaves than we can kiss goodbye the 170 billion we already gave. AIG will be viable again. If it failed, I am not expert but I would say it would be huge....

Agreed. If any of that money when to the CEO, board.... then I say WTF. If the money went to a employee that met or exceeded his goals and was counting on that money to put his kids through school, pay for a home loan... then I am OK with that. Some people are paid with bonuses not checks. So I am willing to bet that most of this was more compensation for work then bonus payments. The "news" just loves to call it bonuses because it gets people all worked up like they are in this thread.

[BUIZILLA]

agreed. If any of that money when to the ceo, board.... Then i say wtf. If the money went to a employee that met or exceeded his goals and was counting on that money to put his kids through school, pay for a home loan... Then i am ok with that. Some people are paid with bonuses not checks. So i am willing to bet that most of this was more compensation for work then bonus payments. The "news" just loves to call it bonuses because it gets people all worked up like they are in this thread. +1

[glassdave]

correct me if I'm wrong but didnt the UAW have to make concessions and jump through hoops to get the auto industry bailout? These guys are above that?

[rbhudelson]

And I agree it is stupid but if we get pissed off over 100 million while our investment is 170 billion we are nuts. They do need to retain key employees. Sales agents, middle management etc etc. Upper management got them into trouble. Not the people doing their job and what they were told to do. Senior management??? I am not sure what that means? I have a feeling people are getting paid that shouldnt be but some of those people should. If all the talent leaves than we can kiss goodbye the 170 billion we already gave. AIG will be viable again. If it failed, I am not expert but I would say it would be huge....


Agreed. If any of that money when to the CEO, board.... then I say WTF. If the money went to a employee that met or exceeded his goals and was counting on that money to put his kids through school, pay for a home loan... then I am OK with that. Some people are paid with bonuses not checks. So I am willing to bet that most of this was more compensation for work then bonus payments. The "news" just loves to call it bonuses because it gets people all worked up like they are in this thread.

That is the story no one wants to tell. It is contingent income for employees that met their numbers.

Here is the latest "Rep. Peters said his bill would create a 60% surtax on bonuses over $10,000 at any company where the U.S. government has an equity stake of 79% or more in the company.

"Currently, AIG is the only company that meets this threshold," Rep. Peters said in a statement. "The legislation I'm proposing will get taxpayers their money back. "It is beyond outrageous that the very people who brought AIG to its knees and helped create the current financial crisis are scheduled to receive hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses while tax dollars keep their company afloat," he said."

Now that scares the crap out of me. Who's company employee's are they going to go after next?

[masher44]

The more I thought about it the more it is BS. MONTHS later our retard politicians want to come in and run the show after already loaning the money.

EVERY SINGLE media person has jumped on the bandwagon too. Now they want to tax the crap out of them and pay people who got screwed by Madoff. What a joke.

F the government, Dems and GOP, all a bunch of jerk offs that know nothing about anything, especially about how a real company runs, never mind a real company that made some bad decisions and is now fighting for its life with 180 billion of our money.

AIG insured BILIIONS of the loans that government policy and mis management forced down peoples throats....

Now they all say we should have let AIG fail. retards

[Geronimo36]

If that's true that Treasury signed off on this it's total b.s. The government own's 80% of AIG and if they want to sue the federal government so be it let them start the freaking processs... Either way paying bonuses or commissions when your insolvent and need taxpayer money just to stay afloat is ridiculous.

That's why most of these companies should be forced into bankruptcy if they are insolvent...otherwise your going to keep rewarding people who helped bring them down....who's to say that most of these so called bonuses or commissions aren't tied to failed policies that we (the actual people paying the government) are having to bail out...total b.s. in my book...

Rewarding failure seems to be the Democratic way these days and I can't say that I agree with it one bit....just my $.02...

And if the government would have let them file for bankruptcy I bet they wouldn't have been obligated to honor those contracts..... Before handing over the money the gooberment should have done their due diligence so something like this didn't happen...

Shame on AIG and double shame on the moron's running our country...

[Geronimo36]

i dont know where the bonuses went, and i agree they should have just let AIG sink, BUT as devils advocate, what if the bonuses went to employees who individually hit all there goals and bench marks and worked their buts off selling loans, in sales arent most jobs and job contracts tied to some sort of incentives for personal success....

still BS either way, but there might be more than we know

Depends how the bonus' are structured... In most cases a bonus is tied to personal performance and corporate performance usually on the order of 60/40 or some variation... so if the person meets their goals they get the personal bonus but not the corporate bonus... If we're talking sales people, the bonus is part of compensation and strictly given based on sales figures... If they meet their figures they have to pay or they can sue...

The media does not address what/why/how the bonuses were paid so it might be more media BS....

[rbhudelson]

NEW YORK—Seventy-three employees of American International Group Inc. received bonuses of more than $1 million dollars out of the more than $160 million in bonus payments that sparked widespread outrage this week, according to New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.

In a letter Tuesday to Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services, Mr. Cuomo detailed some of the bonus payments that AIG paid out to members of its financial products subsidiary last week.

Mr. Cuomo urged Rep. Frank to use the information, compiled as a result of his office's ongoing investigation into executive compensation at AIG, when the committee takes up the issue at a scheduled hearing Wednesday.

"These payments were all made to individuals in the subsidiary whose performance led to crushing losses and the near failure of AIG," Mr. Cuomo said in the letter. "Something is deeply wrong with this outcome," he said.

The highest bonus was $6.4 million, with six other employees receiving more than $4 million, and 22 individuals receiving bonuses of $2 million or more, according to Mr. Cuomo. In addition, he said, 11 of the individuals who received "retention" bonuses of $1 million or more are no longer working for AIG.

Mr. Cuomo issued a subpoena to AIG on Monday seeking the names of individuals who received the bonuses. In a letter to AIG Chief Executive Officer Edward Liddy earlier on Monday, Mr. Cuomo demanded the names of the employees, their positions, their job descriptions, information on their performance, and details of their employment contracts.

According to Mr. Cuomo, his office has also obtained the contracts under which AIG decided to make the payments, which include a "shocking" provision that required most individuals’ bonuses to be equal to their 2007 bonuses "despite obvious signs that 2008 performance would be disastrous in comparison to the year before," he said.

AIG has argued that it had to pay the bonuses because of existing contracts. AIG declined to comment.

Again, I don't want the government to be able to single out my company and levy additional taxes on my employees because we make more than they think we should - under any circumstance.

[Tommy Gun]

Do you think it logical that the Lender (the taxpayers) has the right to know the names of those that received the funds from the Lender? Geez, can you imagine what would happen if that info. was made public?

I have a feeling that the IRS may be interested in the bonus recipients.

[rbhudelson]

Do you think it logical that the Lender (the taxpayers) has the right to know the names of those that received the funds from the Lender? Geez, can you imagine what would happen if that info. was made public?

I have a feeling that the IRS may be interested in the bonus recipients.

No - I don't. But I also don't believe that the Lender in this case equates to (the taxpayers), even though the taxpayers supplied the funds. The lender is the government. I don't see it any different than your local bank. I'm a depositor but I don't classify myself as (the lender) on all the loans the bank makes.

The IRS should have no more interest in them as in anyone that receives a paycheck.

[Audiofn]

Seems like the Gov. is now on a witch hunt. They are trying to make it out like they did not know this was going to happen. They probably figure that this will make them look better if they go after big bus.. I think it makes them look like a bunch of fools for giving out the money with out an understanding of how it was going to be spent. After all didn't they promis us that......

[masher44]

Fvcking commie bastards. SBRT is making a donation to the AIG stripper and coke party fund

[Dude! Sweet!]

As much as I hate to admit it, I agree with the Mash... (Strippers and coke and the more boring part...)

You know, it doesn't matter if the bag is red or the bag is blue, if the bag is full of sh*t, its still just a bag of sh*t...

[sledge]

Check my math, but $170mil is 0.10% of $170bil. Should these people have gotten this kind of bonus, probably not. But if you want something to b!tch about, figure out what the value is of giving AIG $170Bil, and $90Bil of that going to other financial institutions. Instead of f*cking with the tax code, the congressional weazels should be putting the screws to Gaytner (sic) to get that money back. Heck of a lot better ROI there...

[Ted]

Speaking of ROI, it looks like AIG got a huge return on their investment of $101,332 in Barak Hussein Obama. Seems to me like that 101k turned into BILLIONS with no strings attached. I'm thinking O and some of his Congressional homeboys better think about giving back their "bonuses" from AIG too, and then start explaining why they were SO hip to send OUR cash that way.

http://www.examiner.com/x-268-Right-Side-Politics-Examiner~y2009m3d17-Obama-Received-a-101332-Bonus-from-AIG

[Sean H]

think it hit .30 two weeks ago

1.34

[masher44]

My position was at .67 and sold at .84. Almost timed it perfect but I'll take it

[masher44]

Now they're talking about a 100% tax on the bonus payments to recover the payouts. Scary.

[masher44]

Freddie and fannie are paying huge bonuses this year too. We will see how much coverage this gets. They said F and F lost 108 billion last year.

[sledge]

Small correction to my calcs based on listening to CEO Liddy's testimony:
AIG owes only approx $80Bil to US, so the retention bonuses amount to 0.2% of federal aid.
The bonuses also represent 0.01% of the $1.6Trillion portfolio that Liddy is trying to keep from blowing up.

Blarney Frank(D.MA) wants the names of the recipients publicized. How did this guy get, and stay elected?

[sledge]

BofA says they'll be able to pay back $40Bil in TARP by end of year. A few more announcements like that from FIs and we may just be back on our feet...

[rbhudelson]

Blarney Frank(D.MA) wants the names of the recipients publicized. How did this guy get, and stay elected?

He sucks a lot of co<k .

[masher44]

He sucks a lot of co<k .

He said he wants to tax HR companies in OK that have gay owners too :26:

[rbhudelson]

He said he wants to tax HR companies in OK that have gay owners too :26:

Technically, we're not an HR company - we're an HR Solutions provider. :sifone:

And due in part to the Obama administration - business is good. :03::03:

[nortech4play]

Seems like the Gov. is now on a witch hunt. They are trying to make it out like they did not know this was going to happen. They probably figure that this will make them look better if they go after big bus.. I think it makes them look like a bunch of fools for giving out the money with out an understanding of how it was going to be spent. After all didn't they promis us that......

Yeah that's what they were trying to do until today when Sen Dodd admitted to changing the language in the bill to allow the bonuses....Seems some unnamed Treasury Department person and the Big "O" administration wanted it to be allowed...

On one stage you have Barney and the other is Barry decrying these bonuses....funny thing it's their people and bills that allowed it to happen...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090318/pl_politico/30833

Seems like Sen. Dodd has his finger prints on all kinds of things that are hitting the fan these days... Fannie and Freddie and now AIG....

[masher44]

we're an HR Solutions provider. :sifone: :03::03:

Tammy: Mr. Delson I was sexually harrassed
Delson: Did you swallow? :26:

[rbhudelson]

Tammy: Mr. Delson I was sexually harrassed
Delson: Did you swallow? :26:

Tammy: ewwh - no I spit.

Delson: you're fired.

[masher44]

tammy: Ewwh - no i spit.

Delson: You're fired.

:26:

[Sea-Dated]

Tammy: ewwh - no I spit.

Delson: you're fired.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

You are a dirty old man........

[Sean H]

my position was at .67 and sold at .84. Almost timed it perfect but i'll take it

1.65

[Ms PatriYacht]

I am not in favor of people getting huge bonuses when the work most of them did would have resulted in a bankruptcy with out the bailout. But this is another example of how the government manipulates the truth and the media goes along with the parts that make good sound bites. What has finally come to light in this thread is the treasury department knew about the bonuses when negotiating the loan bailout. The CEO of AIG made that comment yesterday during his testimony and I swear I only heard one newscaster just whisper it because if that fact becomes widely known, it might look bad for our current government. Hypocrites, their suddenly now up in arms by this news, just an example of why they should not be telling anyone how to run a company. Isn't it a bit scary how they can re-write the tax laws in a few days to get that money back. This less than truthful president that is backed by a Democrat majority is what I fear more than anyone that will get bonuses from AIG or Fannie and Freddie.

[masher44]

1.65

hit 2.00 early :seeya::boxing_smiley:

just as easily could have hit .01 :ack2:

[MarylandMark]

90% tax!!!

[Ted]

Wow, if that doesn't scare the p!ss out of everyone it should. Now they can tax whoever they want for apparently any reason. And this time they did it to cover for their own f*ck up. If the Supremes don't knock this down, our Republic is DONE.

[MarylandMark]

Cut & paste from USA Today-

Article I of the U.S. Constitution- Congress cannot pass any "Bill of Attainder" or "ex post facto" law.

A Bill of Attainder is an act of the legislature that singles out and punishes a group or individual without trial.

Wonder if that would work? I don't support them getting bonuses but I'd rather they keep the $$ than the Gov't be able to do this

[Ms PatriYacht]

Sen. Dodd Admits Adding Bonus Provision to Stimulus Package
Sen. Chris Dodd says Treasury forced him to add language to the stimulus bill last month that specifically excluded executive bonuses included in contracts signed before the bill's passage.

Read the rest of it here

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/18/sen-dodd-admits-adding-bonus-provision-stimulus-package/

[Ms PatriYacht]

another good article


March 19 (Bloomberg) -- Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd said the Obama administration asked him to insert a provision in last month’s $787 billion economic- stimulus legislation that had the effect of authorizing American International Group Inc.’s bonuses.

Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, said yesterday he agreed to modify restrictions on executive pay at companies receiving taxpayer assistance to exempt bonuses already agreed upon in contracts. He said he did so without realizing the change would benefit AIG, whose recent $165 million payment to employees has sparked a public furor.

Dodd said he had wanted to limit executive compensation at companies that got money from the government’s financial-rescue fund. AIG has received $173 billion in bailout money. His provision was changed as the stimulus legislation was negotiated between the House and Senate.

“I did not want to make any changes to my original Senate-passed amendment” to the stimulus bill, “but I did so at the request of administration officials, who gave us no indication that this was in any way related to AIG,” Dodd said in a statement released last night. “Let me be clear -- I was completely unaware of these AIG bonuses until I learned of them last week.” He didn’t name the administration officials who made the request.

No Insistence

An administration official said last night that representatives of President Barack Obama didn’t insist on the change, though they did contend that the language in Dodd’s amendment could be legally challenged because it would apply retroactively to bonus agreements. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity.

That provision in the stimulus bill may undercut complaints by congressional Democrats about the AIG bonuses because most of them voted for the legislation. No Republicans in the House and only three in the Senate supported the stimulus measure

“Taxpayers deserve better than this from their government, and this is just the latest reason why legislation must be transparent for all Americans to see before it is recklessly signed into law,” said Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House.

The new law, approved by Congress Feb. 13 and signed into law by Obama the next week, effectively authorized bonus arrangements at companies receiving taxpayer bailouts as long as they were in place before Feb. 11. The AIG bonuses qualified under that provision.

Obama and many lawmakers who voted for the legislation, such as Senator Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat, are demanding AIG employees surrender their bonuses.

Schumer Letter

Schumer yesterday sent a letter to AIG Chief Executive Officer Edward Liddy warning him to return bonuses or face confiscatory taxes on them. The letter was signed by Senate Majority leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, and seven other senators.

Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Schumer, said the senator “supported a provision on the Senate floor that would have prevented these types of bonuses, but he was not on the conference committee that negotiated the final language.”

A House vote is planned for today on a bill to impose a 90 percent tax on executive bonuses paid by AIG and other companies getting more than $5 billion in federal bailout funds.

“I expect it to pass in overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, told reporters yesterday in Washington.

Republican Attacks

Republicans seized on the provision in the stimulus bill to paint Democrats as hypocrites.

“The fact is that the bill the president signed, which protected the AIG bonuses and others, was written behind closed doors by Democratic leaders of the House and Senate,” Iowa Senator Charles Grassley said in a statement.

AIG donated a total of $854,905 to political campaigns in 2008, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group. AIG employees as a group represent Dodd’s fourth-biggest donor during his career, the group’s research shows. The company’s political action committee, employees and immediate family members have given Dodd more than $280,000, the group said.

Dodd said the provision was written to give the Treasury Department enough discretion to reclaim bonuses as necessary.

“Fortunately, we wrote this amendment in a way that allows the Treasury Department to go back and review these bonus contracts and seek to recover the money for taxpayers,” he said.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told lawmakers in a letter this week that department lawyers believe it would be “legally difficult” to prevent AIG from paying bonuses.

Other Democrats who voted for the stimulus bill have ramped up criticism of AIG’s bonuses, including Massachusetts Representative Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, who told reporters, “I think the time has come to exercise our ownership rights.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at

[rbhudelson]

Huh, who could have predicted this? Nice Job Federal Government...



NEW YORK (Reuters)—Several more employees are leaving the controversial financial products unit that brought American International Group Inc. to its knees last year, according to a person with knowledge of developments there.

The resignations are in addition to the “handful” of senior AIG Financial Products executives who have already given notice, said the person, who could not quantify the total number of departures.

To date, AIG said the situation at the financial products unit remains “manageable,” despite the departures. But if too many employees quit, Chief Executive Edward Liddy has warned it could be disastrous for AIG and, ultimately, for U.S. taxpayers who are the insurer's majority owners.

The financial products division incurred heavy mark-to- market losses on credit default swaps, a type of derivative that guarantees underlying debt against default, after the downturn in the U.S. housing market, leaving AIG so severely short of cash the U.S. government had to step in with a rescue that has since grown as large as $180 billion.

The credit default business was only a part of the financial products division, which is being shut down.

Employees there were promised retention payments more than a year ago, on condition they stayed long enough to wind down their areas of business, effectively working themselves out of a job.

But now some have changed their minds, fed up after 10 days of ridicule and scorn from lawmakers who broadly derided the bonuses, demonstrators picketing outside AIG offices and a threat by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to publicly name anyone who did not return the bonuses.
The employees still working are not the ones who caused the large losses and “are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials,” wrote Jake DeSantis, an executive vp for the Wilton, Conn.-based financial products unit, in a resignation letter printed by the New York Times on Wednesday.

Mr. DeSantis said in the letter announcing his intention to quit the company after 11 years that many employees felt “betrayed” AIG asked them to give back the bonuses after numerous assurances the payments would be honored, and made no mention of revisions to pay and bonus agreements before the matter became a maelstrom on Capitol Hill.

Mr. Liddy “deeply appreciates the frustration expressed in this letter and believes that the recent vilification and harassment of AIG employees is grossly unfair and unwarranted,” said an AIG spokeswoman.

Mr. Liddy, appointed to run AIG after it received the federal bailout last September, last week told a Congressional subcommittee the reason the company paid to retain employees was to prevent “an uncontrolled collapse of that business,” which still has $1.6 trillion in trading positions to unwind before it can close its doors.
“The financial downside for taxpayers is potentially very large and it's very real. And that's why we’re winding down that business as quickly as possible,” he said, adding that to “prevent undue risk exposure in the meantime, AIG has made a set of retention payments to employees.”

As of last month, the financial products unit employed about 370 people at offices in Connecticut, London, Paris, Hong Kong, Tokyo and in India.

[03darkshadow]

i kinda blame AIG for this. but the govt could have said here is the money, you can only use it to better the company, no bonus's or anything to the employees, except salaries.

[Ratickle]

i kinda blame AIG for this. but the govt could have said here is the money, you can only use it to better the company, no bonus's or anything to the employees, except salaries.

AIG should have been put out of business. Technically, the people, you and I taxpayer Joe, own 80% and can do anything we want to. If they want to sue us over loss of bonus, let them...

[DonziGirl]

I think it's sad? (I can't seem to find the right word) that people still expect their bonuses even though a company is failing.

I was promised 15% of my salary in bonuses this year. Have a I received it? No. Will I by June? Probably not, unless a miracle happens. Am I happy? Obviously not but I understand that we aren't taking in the money we used to and have to make cut backs. On top of that, I didn't receive any retirement this year.

It disturbs me how many people still think that they're entitled to things even though a company obviously can't pay for them.

[03darkshadow]

AIG should have been put out of business. Technically, the people, you and I taxpayer Joe, own 80% and can do anything we want to. If they want to sue us over loss of bonus, let them...



well mine was if the insisted that they keep the company in business. btw, i didnt wanna buy stock in them, i think i can find better companies.

[Von Bongo]

The rush to judge by the masses is scary.

I am not sure how many this applied to but I know the Exec VP that resigned today was paid a base salary of $1 over the last 12 months and his "bonus" was a retention payment that was paid to him to stick around and assist with the sale of his deparment that he ran that has been profitable.

Do you expect people to stick around and work for free for a company that may fail? Even banks that are closed, people are paid to stick around, someone has to run the day to day business.

Apparently none of you have worked for a company that has been acquired. Why stick around and work for 3-6 months or a year unless you are going to be well compensated? You know you have no job when its done and you aren't going to get anyone to come to work for the company knowing they will be out of a job in 6 months without being paid a lot of money.

Now I am not for the AIG bailout at all, nor was I for TARP, our bank didn't need it and it rescues the weak, but man, I am amazed at how fast this county is embracing socialism. Now since the government is changing the game, no one wants a part of TARP or TALF. At least some people are starting to see what BO and his socialist agenda.

[rbhudelson]

The point is this; Regardless if our government should or should not have "bailed" out AIG the fact is they did. AIG can not operate/liquidate without key employees. AIG offered these (key) people a deal - if you stay on and help (do whatever) we will pay you this. And sure, to some people it sounded like a lot of money - excessive even. But, if those people leave and AIG just collapses then where are we? We are right back to where we were before we spent 100 or so Billion dollars. AIG failing. Thats the point.

I will pose you all a question. If I could fart and save the country a Billion dollars, would anyone have an issue with them paying me $10 million? Oh sure the media will make it out like me farting is no big deal and nowhere worth $10 million, a few House members will talk about what an outrage it is to pay me $10 million just to fart - they might go as far as saying I should commit suicide. Farting is easy and everyone does it but we all don't get $10 million. He is just lucky that when he farts it saves the country a Billion dollars - he should just fart for free.

I'll take a stand - if you say yes you would have an issue - then you are stupid.

You have to understand that when things go south for a business - it is the good employees that (can) leave first. The bad one's you can't beat away with a stick. They made a deal with the people that could help protect the $100 Billion investment the taxpayers made. I don't blame them one bit for saying a big F U and packing their boxes. So oh boy, we got those greedy asswipes and saved our 160 million. who cares if the thing implodes and costs us 100 Billion. We got them...

[Audiofn]

The point is this; Regardless if our government should or should not have "bailed" out AIG the fact is they did. AIG can not operate/liquidate without key employees. AIG offered these (key) people a deal - if you stay on and help (do whatever) we will pay you this. And sure, to some people it sounded like a lot of money - excessive even. But, if those people leave and AIG just collapses then where are we? We are right back to where we were before we spent 100 or so Billion dollars. AIG failing. Thats the point.

I will pose you all a question. If I could fart and save the country a Billion dollars, would anyone have an issue with them paying me $10 million? Oh sure the media will make it out like me farting is no big deal and nowhere worth $10 million, a few House members will talk about what an outrage it is to pay me $10 million just to fart - they might go as far as saying I should commit suicide. Farting is easy and everyone does it but we all don't get $10 million. He is just lucky that when he farts it saves the country a Billion dollars - he should just fart for free.

I'll take a stand - if you say yes you would have an issue - then you are stupid.

You have to understand that when things go south for a business - it is the good employees that (can) leave first. The bad one's you can't beat away with a stick. They made a deal with the people that could help protect the $100 Billion investment the taxpayers made. I don't blame them one bit for saying a big F U and packing their boxes. So oh boy, we got those greedy asswipes and saved our 160 million. who cares if the thing implodes and costs us 100 Billion. We got them...

You can only fart for 10 million because you use a Apple :D:D:26::26:

[rbhudelson]

You can only fart for 10 million because you use a Apple :D:D:26::26:

It's an Apple but nevertheless :sifone:

[Audiofn]

It's an Apple but nevertheless :sifone:

Maybe that is why it smells so nice :26: