should we quit bailing out aig? take the money back?

with the news now coming out about aig putting the money given to them by the government in hopes to help steady them from floundering into foreign market banks and still honoring huge million dollar bonuses to several employees who left after the bailout mess who were responsible for them needing bailouts in the first place, is it time the government put a stop to the bailouts to them? maybe order them to return the bailout money they were given?

not to start a line mine topic but what do you think?

we never should have given them money in the first place.

I actually have mixed opinions on this subject. People are all up in arms about bonuses, but that's just how that sort of business works. I think people are being duped into hating the soldiers rather than the generals on this one.

That said, I'm not big on bailouts in general, and taxpayer ownership of corporations brings up a whole mess of issues, not the least of which are the anti-trust opportunities and the obvious conflict of interest regarding fair capitalist competition from companies that don't happen to be supported directly by the taxpayers. But, I've been drinking, so what do I know, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForrestBlack

I actually have mixed opinions on this subject. People are all up in arms about bonuses, but that's just how that sort of business works. I think people are being duped into hating the soldiers rather than the generals on this one.

---

I'm not sure there are soldiers and generals in this one. When you say "That's how that sort of bussiness works", we're talking corporate culture, and culture is passed on between the people that accept and go with it on every level, not so much ordered to exist by a small central authority. A sudden clash of interest between that culture's insiders and a new group with a reasonable stake in change is an opportunity to change such things if anything ever is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raza

I'm not sure there are soldiers and generals in this one. When you say "That's how that sort of bussiness works", we're talking corporate culture, and culture is passed on between the people that accept and go with it on every level, not so much ordered to exist by a small central authority. A sudden clash of interest between that culture's insiders and a new group with a reasonable stake in change is an opportunity to change such things if anything ever is.

---

Corporate culture is hierarchical. The bonus system people are primarily objecting to is equivalent to what you pay your star sales force (soldiers) at the end of the year for making their numbers. Those guys did make their numbers. Burning them on their bonus because the guy four levels above them set all the money on fire really isn't fair, and letting the masses chase after them with torches and pitchforks while the generals sit by the fire (see above) is unbelievably misguided.

And people receiving "huge, multi milion dollar bonuses" are really 'soldiers' in this hierarchy? Not more like, colonels?

Someone at the bottom of the hierarchy doesn't get a bonus at the end of the year merely for having done the job they already got paid for adequately. Working from that, I don't see why anyone in another layer of said hierarchy should, and if those bonuses are being funded by tax money then the tax payers looking critically at the value of that method is quite justified. The bonuses' recipients don't have to be personally at fault for the company's current predicament for the immensely disparities in work vs reward that favor them and emphasise said corporate hierarchy to be (even more) poorly warranted when money is scarse and borrowed.

apparently now liddy is urging the people who received these bonuses to give back half of the bonus, is that really a reasonable compromise?

The same thing happened before back in 2002 with the airline bailout.

I seen my job go the way side while the CEO's got their million dollar bonuses for the year. And no body even batted and eye over it.

White collar crime and greed is worse then crack addict crime and greed anymore in my opinion.

Did any one see that Jon Stewart -vs- Jim Crammer Daily show interview? Jon Stewart totaly proves my point in that episode about white collar crime and who should be held responsiable.

Its like there are no good guys left in the universe or something. Its just all greedy people trying to fuck you and everyone else over for a buck.

:-(