A.I.G....unfreakinreal
 

“We cannot attract and retain the best and the brightest talent to lead and staff the A.I.G. businesses — which are now being operated principally on behalf of American taxpayers — if employees believe their compensation is subject to continued and arbitrary adjustment by the U.S. Treasury,”

how comforting that they have the top talent. they set the record for largest loss in corporate history, how much more would they have lost if they didn't have the top talent?

if the best and brightest drove them to need a bailout, are they sure they're the best and brightest? and while on the subject, just where the eff are the 'best and brightest' going to get employment if they leave due to 'arbitrary' adjustments? not exactly an employees market right now.

effin A.

If this was a Chinese company these LOSERS would've been staring down the barrel of an assault rifle months ago.

But here in this country we give them 'retention pay'.

Maybe Lehman Brothers needs some help.

code for swindlers and cheats ??:zz:

You ever see those hunting shows they put on the station next to TVG on Direct TV?

Basically - a bunch of hicks are on camera hiding in the woods and talking quiet - looking for an animal to shoot at. After they snipe it - they go rub it's fur and say "thank you Jesus" and stuff like that.

How's about giving the animals a break and just putting businessmen on that show? The AIG douchebags can be the first to get sniped off in the woods by hicks.

Seeing a hick in camo blast a corporate exec and say "thanks Jesus!" would be must see tv.

Really

I am sure when the government bailed out AIG that they knew exactly what was still left to pay. These were contracts already in place prior to anything happening. The government knew this or at least should have known it when it took an ownership stake in AIG. This is just a PR move by the administration to look better. Do you really think Obama and the administration didn't know what the compensation plans were of the current employees of AIG? If your answer is no, then we have a bigger problem on our hands because we are spending billions and billions of $ on things we know nothing about. On the surface it looks bad, but if I had a contract with my company and my performance in that company was superior and I deserved a bonus based on my current contract than I would expect to receive it. If someone buys the yankees, they still have to pay A-rod, etc. They have to deal with the contracts that are in place, unless they renogiate them. It definitely looks bad, but you have to see reality as well. It is very easy to bash big business and now it seems comon place that we are becoming a society that wants to tell everyone what they should and shouldn't make.

what confuses me is how a payment that a company is obligated to pay an employee can be called a performance bonus.

if there's a contract to pay a specific amount, isn't it just delayed compensation unrelated to performance?

.......would be the highest rated show in the history of " cable " television.......would have to be handguns, the rifles those hicks use have scopes which would limit the show to about 3 mins.

Oh now we're getting somewhere. The government didn't know. You know why? Because the government is just as incompetent as AIG. Throw in CITI and you have the three stooges.

For a bonus ... they deserve to die an undignified death ... hiding under rocks in the woods like hunted animals ... just waiting for Ted Nugent to snipe them. I say that based on performance of course.


A-Rod? Yankees? More like Duante Culpepper and the Lions at best!

I have more respect for 95% of the people in prison in this country.


They should have never been bailed out by taxpayers in the first place. Had bankrupcy happened - wouldn't these contracts have been discarded?



I like how the democrats like to point out "instead of spending money building roads, schools, and briges and hiring police in Iraq ... we could have spent that money here."

The way I see it - instead of dropping perfectly good bombs on buildings in Iraq - we could have saved them and dropped them on Wall Street and big corporations.

Instead of sending so called "terrorists" to isolated prisons and torturing them - we could have instead done the same thing to CEO's here. And I mean real torture ... not small stuff like waterboarding - but hard stuff like having every post Sumitas has ever made read to them repeatedly through a bull horn.

These guys at AIG are giving us the finger and saying "keep the cash coming. Baby needs a new walk in closet filled with shoes."

If I was in charge - I would look at each individual in "big business" and confiscate every single dollar they have if I deem them to be unsavory people. I would strip them of citizenship - and I would have them all rounded up and sent to Cuba in retaliation of Castro dropping the dregs of his socitey on us decades ago.

They would be treated kindly compared to what I would do with most from the Bush Adminstartion. Dangling decorations for lamp posts they would be.

Laws and constitution be damned. Nothing new there.

I'd have an easier time believing that the CEO Hank Greenberg could hit 58 home runs in an MLB season - then I would believing that he also isn't a crook.

For a sex addled wreck - Spitzer sure got a lot done as a politican.

As president - my hardline extremist anti-business agenda probably wouldn't get off the ground because I'd spend all day betting horses ... while somehow finding time to mix in a little internet porn - and also somehow manage to satisfy my horsey board obsession and get my daily masturbation fix.

the hypocrisy is running really deep on this, they all knew, or should have known about the bonuses.

Chris Dodd now wants to tax away the bonuses when he himself put in an ammendment into the stimulus bill that specifically protected those contracts.

i guess actually reading the bill before you sign it might not be such a bad idea after all. Congress has already debated this relatively meager issue much more than the stimulus bill which is roughly a 5,000 times larger blow to the taxpayer.

and then there is the Republican senator who said those guys should take a deep bow and commit suicide. Grassley should be taken away in a straightjacket.


AIG should use the Obama's earmark defense.
"Oh those contracts are last years business, we've got to move forward now. We'll make sure it doesn't happen next year"

I was listening to NPR and they were talking about AIG switching from an insurance company to something else under the watchful eye of x-42.

It does not matter at this point whether the government
knew or not. The fact is we are led to believe this business,
which delved deeply to the edge of illegal derivatives,
was giving performance compensation bonuses BEFORE there was a horrible
performance. This is how big businesses are run that get so
huge and convoluted that no one had any idea how to mind
the store. This company was run as inefficiently as anything
in government. And they cheated. I am sure there are very
competent people in that company that deserve to be paid.
But it is pure folly to take government money while
the rest of the country suffers.
This company was essentially insuring investments without
the funds to back it up. Good luck with that.

I heard this morning that they have worked a deal to get the money back and the Government has already earmarked all $165 million for a study of the Cockoo bird (coo-coo, coo-coo) . Whew, glad that worked out! Yea, Government.

Almost makes sense as they are known to just give their eggs away...

"The opinion is held by some observers that Nature has not intended the Cuckoo to build a nest, but influences it to lay its eggs in the nests of other birds, and intrust its young to the care of those species best adapted to bring them to maturity."

actually, they toss the other birds' eggs out of the nest, and then move their own to the now empty nest. the victim of the crime then unwittingly raises the offspring of the murderer. damn cuckoos.

back to the subject at hand however...i've been wondering why d.c. has been provoking such outrage over these bonuses-of course they are outrageous, but there's always more to the story. and then i found this.

an excerpt:
and this:

Obama received over 100K from AIG
 

wonder if he'll give his back or Baney Frank will speak out against him and Chris Dodd. LOL NOT. :(

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

Is McCain giving his back?

steve - maybe everyone on here should be reminded that Sen Dodd got a mortgage on his house, houses from Uncle Angelo that was not availble to you , me , blackthoartwind or anyone else on this board. He was part of a club called friends of angelo

to just blame bush blame bush is not going to solve the countries problems

washington is broken because of BOTH parties and it will be too late before the majority of the people in this country see this , it's not going to end well , everyone should read up on Roman history and Nero

I would hope so... Although they got no return from him like they did Obama. (Don't think they got much 'thinking or reform' from McCains think tank.)

didn't aig get their bailout in the last administration? with no strings attached? how is that a return from obama?
hoping doesn't make it so. i doubt mccain gives anything back.

sadly this is far more than a hope,


"This was three days after the Obama administration had already announced a new commitment of an additional $30 billion for AIG."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...adminis-1.html

and you're right they did get $85 Billion from Bush

but isn't the additional money going to aig (and presumably on to other banks and institutions just like previously) part of the original bank stimulus passed before obama took office? only half that money was distributed at the time with the rest held back. why no care was taken as to how that money was spent is beyond me-and i believe that was a huge part of the complaint originally when they first spoke about bailouts. more slipshod work by the legislative and executive branches.

i was referring to your 'hope' that mccain would return the money- a contention i find laughable.

He's got houses he doesn't even know about. Cindy needs more reconstruction?

Don't worry..."Bailout Barack" will fix everything. Yes he can...LOL

she's got houses he doesn't know about.

sure it matters because they're all running around saying that they just discovered the bonuses this week. okay maybe some of them aren't lying, like Geithner, just incompetent.

there's plenty of folly, but the majority of it is due to our corrupt and inept elected officials. they're going to save the world by managing all businesses now, good luck with that.

the current bonues as I understand it are primarily retention bonuses, not performance bonuses.

Then why have at least ten employees who helped build these derivatives
leftwith bonus checks in hand if retention was supposed to occur?

Where is the outrage when business "leaders" take government money
and walk? I will tell you why I think some of these guys at AIG are
getting the hell out- Because they dont want to be found when
all this false crap they built up is out in the open and they are
subject to jailtime... Retention my arse.

I am sure there are some very good minds at AIG that want to
try and sort all this mess out and do what is best. But there
are clearly a good number of crooks.

I can see the problem the Obama adminstration might have in
trying to sort out who really needs to be retained to help clean
the mess and who made the mess to begin with and have no
desire to fix anything. Some are in full retreat to the Bahamas.
Great patriots that they are. Obama's financial group has made
it clear that some employees at AIG are absolutely essential
to repair and moving on. They know the govt. cannot possibly
repair this without help from company officials.

don't know because I don't know how the contracts were written. if there was nothing precluding them from leaving then there is nothing to say. if they violated the contract then by all means, prosecute.

listen, when the government does the buying, they get taken every time.
i'm against the government involvement in the first place because then it becomes a circus like we have now.

they could have addressed this BEFORE the bonuses were paid, but I think they wanted to have the issue, and make Wall street the bad guy again, only it seems to have back-fired.

Yes.
Leave it to business and the free market
and it will all work out.

BS.

Did the govt. invent derivatives?

It aint late breaking.
It broke before Bush was out of office.