http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2009/03/maloney-tax-aig-bonuses-at-100.html Looks like this idea might work, get a bill passed soon so that when next year’s tax season comes around the people who recieved bonus get those payments taxed at 100%!! Tax any bonus at 100% when recieved under a firm which is more than 50% owned by the government and recieved TARP funding. ingenious!!.. you can’t sue the government under any grounds if it’s pass under the legislation. Lets hope that bill works out.
In China these executives would have been executed by now. It seems like American democracy is a big farce…so much for all the hoorah about Communism.
“extreme justice is injustice” - cicero i don’t like the situation, but at least the government doesn’t have free rein to make me disappear - therefore, I prefer the United States of America any day over China no matter how inefficient we are
sublimity Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > “extreme justice is injustice” - cicero > > i don’t like the situation, but at least the > government doesn’t have free rein to make me > disappear - therefore, I prefer the United States > of America any day over China no matter how > inefficient we are how would you know. Maybe US just does a better job at PR and cover up. I am sure the Chinese can learn and do a better cover up as time passes.
Well, how many American execs have been executed for fraud, etc.? How many US gov’t officials have been executed for incompetency? We have our Constitution and Bill of Rights - that were unfortunately trampled on during the Bush years and the Patriot Act. Another few years of Bush + Republican controlled Congress + supreme court (or an equally long time with Obama + Democrat controlled Congress + supreme court just the same) and any of us are at risk to disappear very efficiently at a whim.
sublimity Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well, how many American execs have been executed > for fraud, etc.? > How many US gov’t officials have been executed for > incompetency? > > We have our Constitution and Bill of Rights - that > were unfortunately trampled on during the Bush > years and the Patriot Act. > > Another few years of Bush + Republican controlled > Congress + supreme court (or an equally long time > with Obama + Democrat controlled Congress + > supreme court just the same) and any of us are at > risk to disappear very efficiently at a whim. You are right in that regard, but maybe executing these people are better. I mean afterall, there’s death penalty for murders who often just ruin the victim and their families’ life. but here you have madoff and all these other execs ruining tens and thousands of life. So maybe the Chinese are actually a little bit more fair in that regard.
yeah, i could see that i really do think madoff and incompetent execs do more harm overall to more people than a murderer who kills “just” one or several people well, i’m glad i don’t have to decide in this regard
> Sorry. but that’s BS. These employees have no > where to go. I am still waiting to read about one > employee at Merill or AIG that walked out to a > better position at a competitor firm. > > These guys are overpaid clowns who add no economic > value to the business and they are the first to > know that. Here’s a link to your first article on that issue. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/17/business/17sorkin.html?hp And let’s not forget “technically bankrupt” is not legally bankrupt. They have been nationalized, which is a different category. Perhaps there was a chance to strike the bonuses when they were nationalized, but we should remember (1) that was done under the Bush regime (2) as much as I like heaping insults on the Bushies, the fact is that they had much bigger things to worry about during those negotiations than these bonuses, which are great for stoking populist outrage but are effectively a minor stink in the context of the overall financial cesspool that AIG became.
Has the concern of setting the precedent of allowing the government to step in and abrogate existing, privately negotiated legally binding contracts been discussed? Or is that of no concern to you people? If Sorkin is arguing to let them keep it, you know the world as gone upside down.
NakedPuts Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Has the concern of setting the precedent of > allowing the government to step in and abrogate > existing, privately negotiated legally binding > contracts been discussed? Or is that of no > concern to you people? This is happening as we speak with GM and UAW. They are asking the UAW to give up most of their benefits to get bailout money. You would think that the least they could have asked of AIG is to give up their bonuses to get bailout money. I believe it’s a perception issue, these clowns are using everything in their power to convince the public that they are making US a favor by accepting to be bailed out. You have to remember that 90% of people in this industry add no economic value what so ever, they simply move capital from one place to another and get their cut, so they’re masters at manipulation and marketing, that’s what they do. Poor UAW and auto execs, got grilled because they flew to DC on private jets, while Paulson was pumping up the Armageddon scenario at every occasion.
mo34 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is happening as we speak with GM and UAW. > They are asking the UAW to give up most of their > benefits to get bailout money. You would think > that the least they could have asked of AIG is to > give up their bonuses to get bailout money. Do you understand the difference between private negotiations and government abrogation? UAW could tell GM to go pound sand, but they don’t because they’ll realize this will result in BK, and it just so happens BK is an established place where the government (courts) can alter contracts as they see fit. They certainly should have asked AIG to give up those bonuses pre-bailout, and “asked” would be the polite term. They didn’t, and here we are. > I believe it’s a perception issue, these clowns > are using everything in their power to convince > the public that they are making US a favor by > accepting to be bailed out. Really? Where? You have to remember > that 90% of people in this industry add no > economic value what so ever, they simply move > capital from one place to another and get their > cut, so they’re masters at manipulation and > marketing, that’s what they do. This has been trotted out before, and it’s stupid, wrong and ignorant. Besides, if you believe it what are you doing here? You’ve found the special 10%?
NakedPuts Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mo34 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > This has been trotted out before, and it’s stupid, > wrong and ignorant. Besides, if you believe it > what are you doing here? You’ve found the special > 10%? I am definitely in the 90% and I am not proud of it. Hopefully, I’ll make enough money quickly to cover my kids education and go back to teaching or engineering or something of value. If you fail to recognize that you add absolutely no value to society then you’re the Special One. It’s all one big scam starting with subprime loan peddlers in the Inland Empire to Real Estate agents ( Realtards - house prices double every 10 years) to finally end with the fancy bankers (middle men) selling CDOs, and CDSs to pension funds and insurance companies. In the middle you have clowns on TV ( See Jim Cramer, Fast Money, …) peddling stocks and options, scamsters ( see Bernie Madoff, Stanford, …), speculators of all kind, and the list go on and on.
Spare me your Yahoo Finance rant. Just because you’re disaffected, doesn’t mean you’re right.
NakedPuts Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Spare me your Yahoo Finance rant. Just because > you’re disaffected, doesn’t mean you’re right. Just curious maybe you can share with us what is it you do of value Mr. Nakedputs ?
NakedPuts Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Has the concern of setting the precedent of > allowing the government to step in and abrogate > existing, privately negotiated legally binding > contracts been discussed? Or is that of no > concern to you people? > > If Sorkin is arguing to let them keep it, you know > the world as gone upside down. I don’t understand why anybody would not be outraged by the bonus payouts. I could give a dman for precedent. Don’t let them get those bonuses. I don’t care how.
If your firm has become the govies biatch then your bonus will be 100% taxed by the govies. That idea makes a lot of sense and I like it, a lot. Hit everyone who got bonuses on date > date handout deal was estabilished. Hit everyone, not just AIG, agencies too, and hit them hard. Our government needs that money, bad.
purealpha Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If your firm has become the govies biatch then > your bonus will be 100% taxed by the govies. I would say tax these fockers 300% - make it go back a few years. Destroy their lives, as they have destroyed others.
thepinkman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don’t understand why anybody would not be > outraged by the bonus payouts. I could give a > dman for precedent. Don’t let them get those > bonuses. I don’t care how. That’s some dangerous thinking. I don’t want people thinking I’m okay with this - the more I read about it, the more flagrant it becomes. However, at no point will this justify “mob justice”.
People will call you a blood thirsty maniac but I think it makes sense. The reason this stuff happens is cause the top guys know they can get away with it. We all knew way back in 02 when I was in subprime that these people were gonna choke when their ARMS reset, but when you are making money hand over fist, and securitizing this crap away, it is hard to say no. They figure well, this is risky *for the company*, but *I’m* gonna get big bonus in these years, and later I’ll be rich and long gone so who cares about when this subprime crap blows up. I assume the same was true at AIG. CFA curriculum calls it the agent problem or something… So it makes perfect sense to go back and hit these retards at 300%.