> > Only you could defend AIG and their bonuses. > What's to defend? The bonuses were established well before the bailout, Chris Dodd introduced amendments to TARP explicitly exempting them, Congress put no strings on the money, the Treasury Secretary (a tax cheat and incompetent to run TurboTax) failed to oversee the dispensation of the funds, and as far as I know it's not illegal for companies to pay bonuses based on any number of circumstances.
The assumption that these executives were to blame for the failure are belied by the fact that the Banking Committee doesn't even know who they are---how now can you blame them whom you do not know? I'd rather like to see your defense of the Stalinist moves to breach private contracts ex post facto---that's to me the real purpose of this manufactured controversy, to establish that the government can willy-nilly and retroactively change private contracts, and confiscate 100% of receipts under private contracts. The radical nature of this may not be evident now, but when we're reduced to a third world hell hole in a few years and people are scratching their heads wondering, "What happened to hope and change?" they'll have nothing but their own intellectual laziness to blame. - Bob > BTW, another facet of this outrage is the fact that the bonuses were > mainly > what are called "retention bonuses". Such bonuses are given to > employees who > have been notified they're losing their jobs in order to compel them to > stay > on long enough to stabilize the company, usually after a hostile take- > over. > I guess you could call the takeover by the US Govt. hostile. > > - Bob _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
