It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

AIG "had to pay" bonuses... Disgusting.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 07:31 AM
link   
AIG Hadda, huh...



WASHINGTON – The head of insurance giant AIG goes to Capitol Hill this morning, where he'll reluctantly defend millions of dollars' worth of bonuses doled out to employees despite the company's need for a $170 billion government bailout. Edward M. Liddy, who took over AIG last fall, says the bonus payments, while "distasteful," had to be paid.


Oh, Brother. The company loses billions, but HAS to pay out bonuses. Maybe if they DIDN'T throw money around like a drunken parade member throwing beads at Mardi Gras, they wouldn't lose millions!




posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 07:56 AM
link   
There's a law on the books in CT that says if contractually obligated benefits and bonuses arent paid out the state can sue you for twice the value of the benefit or bonus. So yeah as it stands now not paying the bonuses would be breaking the law and cost them much more.

Right now CT is trying to kill the law.



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Glen Beck was talking about this last night.
This is a "damned if you do, damned if you dont" situation.
Now dont get me wrong, I am angry they got bonuses, but they did have valid contracts that stated they would get bonuses. The contracts were signed before the give out.

Here is the problem. You have a company that was run into the ground. Obviously the people running it are scoundrals. They get bailout money, and continue to spend like crazy, and give out bonuses. How does that make everyone look? Like we are bailing out people who mess up and leaving the people who dont behind.
On the other hand, you have contractual agreements that are lawfully valid. What does that say if the government is able to come in, and say that contract is not valid. That would mean the government can come in anywhere and say any contract is not valid, taking away the purpose of the contract and taking another step towards socialism.

I agree with Glen last night though, this is a distraction to take your attention away from the real problem. I wish I had a link to youtube for that segment, but I cant access it here at work.



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 07:59 AM
link   
Here guys, David posted this already in another thread. It describes what I said about them distracting us from the real issue.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


I'm aware of the law, but how is it even possible to word a contract such that even if the company is run into the ground, you somehow get a BONUS? Shouldn't a bonus be proportional to the profits made, or some other sensical requirement?



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   
I can't help but find it ironically amusing that these criminals, after having literally scammed the planet, are being granted continued legal standing.

I suppose that if I had a contract with Jefferey Dahmer to paint my house, they couldn't put him in jail until that 'contract' was satisfied....



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Id really like to see that contract by the way. I doubt very seriously it said that even if the business goes belly up that they will still receive their bonuses thanks to taxpayers handout to keep that POS afloat.

I say dont pay them and dam the torpedoes. When it went to court, the judge is a taxpayer, the jury is a taxpayer, everyone in that court is a taxpayer. Im sure after their financial portfolio's are brought into question, it will be shown that the measly bonus is a drop in the bucket to what they have already made.

In other words, you've got alot more money than 99% of the US population, you dont need any DAM more.

The company i used to work for sadly didnt line Obama's pockets with fat contributions so therefore, there was no bailout for them. I was promised all kinds of compensation with a handshake(cuz thats how honest PEOPLE do it) when i was first hired and when the owner walked in crying stating he was gonna have to close the doors, there was noone there to save us, pay us our bonuses and let us blow it all over countries that are NOT the US.

Im all for that mob that has formed outside AIG buildings. I say burn the places to the ground with the very contracts that say we have to pay those bonuses.


My .02¢

Silver



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Don't forget that not all activity by AIG was unprofitable and illegal. Some of the people who earned bonuses actually deserved them. If more people their had been doing the right thing the company wouldn't have gone under.

I suggest that upon investigation, those who broke the law, or otherwise scammed investors forfeit their bonuses.




posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
AIG is more than 80% owned now by tax payer, actually now the tax payer can come back and sue the AIG for mismanagement of tax payer money.

Is a big lie that they have to pay bonuses as they are no longer an independent privately owned company.

The government can overule all the companies policies when they fell.

So don't let the media and those that are defending the bonuses get to you.

Now Geithner is proposing to deduct the bonuses from the next round of bail out money that is due to them.

Isn't that interesting? that still more tax payer money is going to them?

That is because the company is already under the government management, as all those higher up employees that took money left the company as soon they took the money.



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by '___'eviant
 


You can make a contract say anything.

What should have happened is when the company was run into the ground it was left to die. Then should the bonuses not be paid let the state sue to further destroy the company.

But noooooooo

The fed had pull some BS scheme to hand these people a whole lot of our money.

Thank government.



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
They HAD to pay these bonus or what? Get sewed?
They should not have paid these money grubbing executives and let them try to sew. You know the old saying...can't squeeze blood from a turnip? Well, they managed to do just that



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


The only reason the company is still alive is because the fed gave them a bunch of the money they stole from us. If CT sued CT would have gotten all of our money.

Why is all the outrage directed at AIG and not at the fed who essentially circumvented the rules of the free market and awarded AIG for gross incompetency with my freaking money?



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 10:47 AM
link   
I understand that you CAN make a contract say anything, but why would an employer, AIG in this case, agree to "You will pay me an exorbitant bonus, in addition to my salary, this year NO MATTER HOW THIS COMPANY PERFORMS" ?

Obviously, they're smarter than that. After all, they got our money...



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   
They had an enforceable contract to get their bonus..

You want disgusting??????????

Look to the bailout itself.



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by ranhome
 



To me...now this is just me...ENFORCEABLE and BONUS are two words that do not seem to go hand in hand. What was the bonus for? FAILURE? or just breathing air?



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Just more lies. Congress is considering rewriting millions of mortgage contracts and nobody bats an eye. But we're told these AIG contracts are sacred.



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 06:37 AM
link   
Some of the things i'd like to know:

This bonus money, just what products were sold to generate the bonuses?
did the 90 or so individuals sell 10's of millions of Toxic assets?

If so, they actually produced a negative return for the Firm---and are not legally entitled to any bonus




I watched & listened to 'Kudlow' and other Bubble-vision personalities
argue that the Firm needs to keep/retain these knowledgeable 'specialists'
or the Firm could lose more money
...'



Here's my view/ counter arguement: ever since the first bailout $$..
The Firm is essentially in a 'Shut-down' mode...(something resembling closing the Blast-proof-door in a fallout shelter) to the rest of the thinking world.
in such a mode, the Firm typically suspends:
all paid vacations, all new hires, all over-time, all promotions, all raises, all bonuses.....(and a lot of other expenses)

By getting/accepting the needed 'bailout'...the top executives make it clear
to all personnel that: It's No Longer 'Business-As-Usual'
The Firms existance is in real Jeopardy, and belt-tightning & rolling-up one's sleeves is the Order-Of-The-Day... to save the Firm!

It occurs to me that these spoiled brat intellects... seen the bailout as an opportunity to hold-out-their-hands for extraordinary pay/bonuses,
because of the Largesse of the government...
and they thought the knowledge of bonus payments would get lost in the confusion...




A final thought:
President Obama, voiced the general theme i'm trying to say on Thursday afternoon-evening... he remarked that this small group of opportunists
had better rethink their obsession with their Culture-of-Greed...



[edit on 20-3-2009 by St Udio]



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by St Udio
 


He also hinted that he may not even consider the bill to tax the bonuses but this is only hear say so let see what happen next.

After all he has to pay back all those that put money in his pocket for campaign funds.

what a crock if he doesn't sign the bill.



posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Now that there is quite a public outrage at the 'Bonuses'
~Bonuses that had to be paid~


AIG is spinning & twisting their way in an attempt to dilute the public rage
by making known:



"NEW HAVEN, Connecticut - Connecticut's attorney general says documents turned over to his office by American International Group Inc. shows the company paid out $218 million in bonuses, higher than the $165 million previously disclosed."

~ bigger bonuses, see: www.msnbc.com...


Now, the acknowledgement that more bonus money was
disbursed seems counter-productive to the plight of AIG....


that's not the case - the devil or at least the deceptive nature of
AIG...is in the details, i will try to lay it out & you decide...


The original disclosure that AIG cut bonus checks in the ammount of
$116 or $165millions (depending on the source)...
One should note that those bonuses were for the executives
and brokers within the certain "securities development department".Alone!
This is the exact department, which is still functioning as the creator of the
toxic Swaps & derivative products which is causing much of the present Crisis !

What AIG is busy trying to decieve us with now, is that they are admitting
to another $50+ millions in bonuses....
but here's the reason for telling us this...
this other bonus money includes many of the average joes that type up & build spreadsheets for the rest of the corporations acdtivities...
i'd be very, very surprised if any of this other (suddenly revealed) Bonus money ammounted to more than a couple thousand $$
to over 10,000 lower positioned finance technicians throughout the vast company enterprise.
Go ahead an crunch the numbers.... 90-100 execs in the 'special products division' splitting up to $165million in the original bonus ammount reported.
((over $1.65 million each exec.))

versus the 400+ employees splitting the remaining $50+million 'as claimed'



The money isn't the real reason for this deflection/distraction...
the real
result that AIG wants is for the public rage to subside because 400 or so, average payroll employees also shared in bonuses..
making AIG appear less blatently focused on bending-the-rules-&-ethics for the top executives only.

==> think of this as an OP-ED , mostly OPinion


thanks,

[edit on 22-3-2009 by St Udio]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join