Senator Charles Grassley recently remarked that AIG Insurance executives should do like the Japanese and go before the American people, bow and apologize and then maybe go commit suicide.....
(CP Notes: I am all for that but could they please repay the bonuses first? And come to think of it, cancel their life insurance policies too...or perhaps name the taxpayers as beneficiary?)
Please send comments, subscribe, share with your friends, and support our sponsors. Join us at Ahh Coffee! in Eastport almost every Thursday from 8-9 am.
Bay Daily on Hiatus
-
Congratulations to Bay Daily creator, Tom Pelton, who has accepted a
position with another organization working to make the world a better
place. In his ab...
10 years ago
8 Comments:
High level executive often have corporate paid life insurance policies. In this case, those policies are probably through AIG, and the payout will cost more than the bonuses
As usual, our government officials have failed to consider the unanticipated consequences of their actions.
Plus, the thought of taxing the bonus back is also a bad idea. It just sends a message that contracts, an important part of our system, can be voided at the whim of political populism.
Bob McWilliams
How does one consider an unanticipated consequence?
I don't want to appear as if I'm defending the bonuses... but the chatter I've seen on numerous blog sites suggests that many of those upper level managers of AIG were going to leave the company. Why? Fear that they wouldn't have a job in a year. CEO's rarely know what's going on in their companies at a highly detailed level. It's the managers directly below him that keep the company maintained. The CEO is pretty much just a face on tv that represents the company.
Without those managers, AIG would fail because they are the ones that know how tangle the web of money is. The upper-upper management obviously don't want them to leave, especially if the managers left to go work for a competitor where they'd squeal about all the problems that AIG was facing. All those top-level fat cats probably don't even know how to read monthly status reports. So to avoid losing their precious managers, AIG simply paid them bonuses to entice them to stay with the company.
Now yes I would agree that in light of all that is happening in our economy, giving a bonus is disgusting. BUT... without the managers in place, it could be much much worse.
The way you consider an unanticipated consequence is to think things though beyond your own personal benefit or agenda.
Also, you "listen" to alternate points-of-view.
In short, you perform an act of public service, based on the facts and common sense, rather than just pandering to whoever you perceive might further your own personal political career.
The problem is that many of our politicians just don't appear to be all that smart. Many of them have no real world, or business experience that would allow them to anticipate the consequences of their actions. And, these days, much of the press has given up on demanding accountibility in favor or promoting their own favored political agenda.
Hearing Frank and Dodd demagogue this bonus thing is nausiating. Although they have a lot of company, those two guys are more responsible for this whole mess than just about anyone.
Bob McWilliams
Bob That's nauseating, not nausiating! But anyhow, I guess you're right. Bush and the Republicans and a whole atmosphere of deregulation and unbridled greed had nothing to do with any of this. And certainly you're not in the least partisan, biased or with any pretense of an agenda. Heavens no.
Thanks so much for your thoughtful voice of deliberate reason as always. (I will agree with you on one thing---politicians do need to have "real-world" experience as in outside of law, politics and the Beltway....)
Just to be accurate, it was Frank and Dodd who resisted regulation of Fannie and Freddie. The Republicans in congress were warning that these GSE's were creating a problem.
Your statement tapping Bush and the Republicans for the whole blame is simply incorrect. As I stated, there's lots of blame to go around. Your comments fail to recognize this.
By the way, what's the preoccupation with spelling. I'm all for good grammar and spelling. But, the zeal with which you point it out, is a bit odd. It comes across as a way to stroke your own perceived intellegence by attempting to degrade others. I don't see how it contributes to any discussion.
Bob McWilliams
Darn it Bob, you misspelled intelligence. And what do you mean by saying this is a preoccupation or an attempt to degrade others?
I better be kareful or I could end up in Irak.
Bob McWilliams
Post a Comment