Obomo Upset with AIG

[Franco]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090317/...r_wh/obama_aig

This is a prime example of how naive our President is. AIG wants to pay 165mil in performance bonuses. That means revenue generators (sales) is doing thier job by bring in the dough. What O doesn't understand is that's how businesses work and make a profit. Something AIG is trying to do.

I'm againts all the bailouts but, if you are going to interfer with the free market, then don't berate them for paying thier producers. Government has no place in private business and should have never gotten involved to begin with. Businesses do NOT need an inexperienced President looking over thier shoulder!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...ses-dodd-says/

Dodd wants to tax AIG bonuses. Some one needs to tell him that Bonuses are already taxed at 40%! The Feds can't just pass an extra tax bonus on AIG employees and not tax all bonuses the same, for everyone. Of course, bonuses are rewards for producers and we can't have that in our new socialist economy.

[M Remington]

I was waiting for someone to criticize Obama for this. I'm happy that Obama has the balls that "W" never had in dealing with companies.

AIG is on the taxpayer tit for $170 billion and people deserve bonuses? Executives got greedy and tried to speculatively make money in the mortgage market. We're now paying the price.

If the the producers are producing, they should keep their job--that's bonus enough in an economy with 8% unemployment. If they are unhappy that they didn't receive a bonus, they can go look for another job in the financial services industry. I hear every financial firm is hiring!

So Mr. Booty, look for something legitimate to criticize the president about. You'd be the first person to get upset about raising taxes, yet you want to let AIG spend taxpayer money unwisely.

[Franco]

So Mr. Booty, look for something legitimate to criticize the president about. You'd be the first person to get upset about raising taxes, yet you want to let AIG spend taxpayer money unwisely.

Read the above, it is money well spent. And, I'm sure it is part of their compensation package so the Feds can't go back and say this is illegal or wrong. The bigger point is that govenment has no business in bailing out or getting involved with legal business practices. Ask the Europeans, Socialist Democracys don't work.

[labraiser]

The funny thing is how the adminstration is upset now. They knew that AIG had signed contracts to the employees for their bonus. So that means when our so treasury sec Timothy Geithner agreed to give them 30 billion more, he knew that they would be paid out. Some transparent adminstration they run. Now that the heat is on, watch them try to turn it around or blame someone else. But will the mainstream media report this. Hell no! The great one does nothing wrong.

[Marvin S]

I was waiting for someone to criticize Obama for this. I'm happy that Obama has the balls that "W" never had in dealing with companies.

BO's noise making carries little credibility - I'm willing to wait & see how it goes down. Empty headed noise making does not constitute balls, except maybe in academia.

[junfan68]

You do realize that the architech of the AIG bailout in August/September was a one Timothy Geithner while he was serving at the Fed. It was he who structured the deal the way it was, bonuses included.

This is the same Tim Geithner that has yet to put forth any concrete details of the banking solution, almost 5 months after the President was elected and 2 mos. after Hussein said his Treasury Secretary would give us all the details the next day.

Obama is hemorraging political capital. For it not so sad it would be funny.

[road kill]

I was waiting for someone to criticize Obama for this. I'm happy that Obama has the balls that "W" never had in dealing with companies.

Think President Obama will pay back his AIG bonus?

You know, the$101,000 they contributed to his campaign??


http://www.examiner.com/x-268-Right-...Bonus-from-AIG

What BALLS he has!!

Not 1 thin dime will be recovered!!

[Sabireley]

The scary part is the talk in Congress about taxing the bonuses at 100% to recover the money. Granted, AIG is 80% by governement, but that sets a dangerous precedent if congress can decide to tax individuals retroactively on money they are contractually entitled to. We may not like the bonuses, but it will cost the taxpayer more in legal fees and lost opportunity (congress could be concentrating on higher value issues) than the $170 million already paid out. Who is to say they won't decide the maximum bonus (or commission) anyone can achieve in any company? All it takes is a new law. In these days of irrational fervor and finger pointing, everything is on the table for consideration.

I hope every company, individual, and state/local government with their hand out looking for stimulus or bailout money is paying attention. Taking money from the government is making a deal with the devil. Next thing you know, you will have Barney Frank on your butt telling you what to do.

SB

[Matt McKenzie]

I was waiting for someone to criticize Obama for this. I'm happy that Obama has the balls that "W" never had in dealing with companies.

AIG is on the taxpayer tit for $170 billion and people deserve bonuses? Executives got greedy and tried to speculatively make money in the mortgage market. We're now paying the price.

If the the producers are producing, they should keep their job--that's bonus enough in an economy with 8% unemployment. If they are unhappy that they didn't receive a bonus, they can go look for another job in the financial services industry. I hear every financial firm is hiring!

So Mr. Booty, look for something legitimate to criticize the president about. You'd be the first person to get upset about raising taxes, yet you want to let AIG spend taxpayer money unwisely.

So you are in favor of the government voiding employment contracts with individuals after the fact? I suspect you would not be in favor of them voiding employment contracts with unions. Are some laws OK to break but others are not?

[Raymond Little]

The scary part is the talk in Congress about taxing the bonuses at 100% to recover the money. Granted, AIG is 80% by governement, but that sets a dangerous precedent if congress can decide to tax individuals retroactively on money they are contractually entitled to. We may not like the bonuses, but it will cost the taxpayer more in legal fees and lost opportunity (congress could be concentrating on higher value issues) than the $170 million already paid out. Who is to say they won't decide the maximum bonus (or commission) anyone can achieve in any company? All it takes is a new law. In these days of irrational fervor and finger pointing, everything is on the table for consideration.

I hope every company, individual, and state/local government with their hand out looking for stimulus or bailout money is paying attention. Taking money from the government is making a deal with the devil. Next thing you know, you will have Barney Frank on your butt telling you what to do.

SB

I would never want Barney on my Butt.

Hetero Only Regards