73 AIG executives - including 11 who no longer work for the company - were each last week given bonuses worth more than $1m [with total payouts at 165 million dollars].
Problem is AIG have already received 170 billion dollars in Federal money, and are due to receive another 30 billion. Obama has sucker written all over him even as AIG vacuums up billions.
So what's the spin on this? Well, instead of throwing AIG another 30 billion, they'll deduct a bit of money from that figure, and rush through some legislation to tax the bonuses at 100% or some some nonsense.
So basically, AIG symbolically pay back 165 million out of 200 BILLION, and the Democrats are happy?
The real nonsense is that Government money keeps the fat cats going, and we can argue all we like about how it may have been government policy that fueled this, or any number of other reasons, but the real issue is how much the State will use such events to interfere with business. It's the wrong way to "fix" things.
As an aside, those bonuses were effectively contracted retention payments. With AIG viable, can they simply break contracts because Obama didn't clarify how the money was to be spent?
If AIG had gone into receivership, these people would be lined up to receive 2 cents in every dollar over 5 years, as some sort of "generous" compensation scheme, like genuine investors are being offered in some of the spectacular finance company crashes here in New Zealand (and I doubt staff did that well either).
Here's the real challenge to Obama - check who still has loads of money at the end of your first term in office. They'll probably be the only people able to afford to contribute to your re-election campaign. Will you accept their money then, or insist they pay their taxes?
Related Link: US Government to force repayment
Related Link: An ideal time for bonuses is right before an election campaign, not right after one
Problem is AIG have already received 170 billion dollars in Federal money, and are due to receive another 30 billion. Obama has sucker written all over him even as AIG vacuums up billions.
So what's the spin on this? Well, instead of throwing AIG another 30 billion, they'll deduct a bit of money from that figure, and rush through some legislation to tax the bonuses at 100% or some some nonsense.
So basically, AIG symbolically pay back 165 million out of 200 BILLION, and the Democrats are happy?
The real nonsense is that Government money keeps the fat cats going, and we can argue all we like about how it may have been government policy that fueled this, or any number of other reasons, but the real issue is how much the State will use such events to interfere with business. It's the wrong way to "fix" things.
As an aside, those bonuses were effectively contracted retention payments. With AIG viable, can they simply break contracts because Obama didn't clarify how the money was to be spent?
If AIG had gone into receivership, these people would be lined up to receive 2 cents in every dollar over 5 years, as some sort of "generous" compensation scheme, like genuine investors are being offered in some of the spectacular finance company crashes here in New Zealand (and I doubt staff did that well either).
Here's the real challenge to Obama - check who still has loads of money at the end of your first term in office. They'll probably be the only people able to afford to contribute to your re-election campaign. Will you accept their money then, or insist they pay their taxes?
Related Link: US Government to force repayment
Related Link: An ideal time for bonuses is right before an election campaign, not right after one