BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs

Subject: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Peter T.
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 10:14 AM

According to the New York Times, AIG execs stand to make $100 million dollars in bonuses this year. The new director says that this is necessary (1) because they are contractually obligated (then why are they bonuses?); and (2) so that they can continue to attract "the best and the brightest" (clearly never read David Halberstam on Vietnam).

That all seems reasonable if you are delusional.......


yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Alice
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 11:23 AM

I'm watching a discussion of this on MSNBC right now.

If they want to retain their people who are the "best and the brightest", ... wait a minute... if they had the best and the brightest working for them, how did they get AIG into this mess?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 11:39 AM

The wealthy still don't get it...

(But they never do, Boberdz...)

No, historically they always end up getting it... The hard way... Persoanlly, I'd rather not sede a repeat of history... Maybe Congress needs to step in and give Obama's Justice Department some reasonable laws to protect taxpayers from the Wall Street crooks... Oh, BTW, that also includes the SEC crooks who are in cahoots with the Wall Street crooks... How that came to pass is beyond me...

Yeah, me thinks that jail time is the alternative to armed revolution... Less messy and more human... Less costly, too... But if Congress won't act then, hey, the rip offs will continue...

"Sooner or later iot all comes down to money..." (Bruce Springsteen from "Big Muddy")

B~

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 11:42 AM

MAN! The government OWNS at least 36% of AIG! Don't that give them some say-so in who get what???? OWNS it! I mean, if I pay the piper don't I get to call the tune?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 01:04 PM

I don't begin to understand why the head honchos are still in place. But then, I also don't understand why those same honchos get/got million dollar bonuses upon leaving when the company under their purview never registered a profit.

Alice in Wonderland- that's me.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 01:07 PM

Change places! Clean cups! Clean cups!

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: gnu
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 01:13 PM

Ahhh... just been corrected... it's $450M.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 02:53 PM

Hmmmm. It appears that my post disappeared. I posted a slightly smaller corrected figure, gnu. Came to a total of $220M. (165M plus 55M, I think)

"A white paper prepared by the company says that AIG is contractually obligated to pay a total of about $165 million of previously awarded "retention pay" to employees in this unit by Sunday, March 15. The document says that another $55 million in retention pay has already been distributed to about 400 AIG Finance Products employees."

As found here

Notice in the article it says in passing there will be more bonuses for 2009.

Maybe it means that the aforesaid CEOs are the only jpeople who fully understand how small a percentage of a billion dollars a million dollars is.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:05 PM

"The wealthy still don't get it..."

That's the f##kin' problem. They KEEP getting it . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:10 PM

"$100 million bonuses to AIG execs"

How does one spell obseen/obbsceen/obsceene ?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: gnu
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:11 PM

And the poor keep getting....

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:15 PM

Peace, I like 'obbseen'.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:29 PM

Thanks, Ebbie.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: pdq
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:34 PM

I like Seldom Scene.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: heric
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:44 PM

Our government is failing us by not nationalizing AIG outright. Remember, Liddy says he is going to pay all of us back in a couple of years, while losing money at almost half a million dollars per minute, 24/7.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Stringsinger
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:51 PM

I agree with Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz. The US needs to nationalize the banks now.
Maybe not permanently but as FDR did for a while until they can reach solvency. It's
the only thing that makes sense to turn this economy around.

Also, institute regulations immediately. Paulson, A.I.G., et.al. have absconded with
taxpayer's funds. It's criminal. The so-called "moral hazard" has been effected.

The idea that there is a legal constraint on A.I.G. to pay bonuses and "retention awards"
to CEO's and investors is not only specious but shady. It blurs the line between A.I.G.
and Bernie Madoff.

Stringsinger

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: number 6
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:51 PM

"and (2) so that they can continue to attract "the best and the brightest"

AIG lost a record $62 billion in the fourth quarter of 2008.

so much for the best and the brightest.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:52 PM

♫ Nooooobody knows de trubble obscene...♫

"...contractually obligated (then why are they bonuses?"

Something like: 'If you show up 50% of days and have no prosecutable scandals in the previous 6 months, you get a bonus of twice your base salary.'

Only slightly facetious...

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 03:57 PM

Don't PAY the bonuses and let the bastards sue.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: heric
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 04:12 PM

That would be entertaining all right. Or force it into bankruptcy and let the government pay off creditors of its choosing. But I'll bet the creditors' potential claims are a number far too scary to be revealed, never mind politically palatable. (Plus the federal acknowledgement/guaranty would have to be done fast to prevent total collapse.) I think they need to nationalize it and wind it down more slowly over a couple of years.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: pdq
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 04:46 PM

"American International Group, the world's largest insurance company and one of the 30 stocks in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, is having a liquidity crisis. One thing the firm does is insure bonds tied to the mortgage market, which leaves them on the hook when mortgage defaults increase."

All the financial problems we are having now are interconnected. They all stem from the bursting of the real estate bubble, primarily in over-priced California. There are nearly 40 million people trying to live in that one state and, for many years, the housing demand was more than the supply, a major reason for the high house prices.

Also, California was considered the #1 place to move by people around the world. Many did just that: moved to California.

Most of the financial and insurance institutions were just doing "business as usual". There was no other choice. Everyone knew that an adjustment would come but "when" and "how big" was not known.

BTW, the $220 million, when spread around to 400 people is about $550 thousand each. That will not get you 3rd string outfielder in major league baseball.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 04:50 PM

Only a half million each? Poor guys . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 04:55 PM

The median income for US households is about $50,000. So each of these people will receive 11 times the median income as a BONUS?

Freakin' spare me. Send me half that amount and I promise not to return to this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: pdq
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 05:00 PM

I would not give any of these 400 executives one red cent in bonus money.

That should also apply to any executives in any company which accepted even one dollar in taxpayer's "bailout" money.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 05:08 PM

Man, this all get dirtier and dirtier, doesn't it?

I know you have worked hard for most your life, pdq, and I expect this kind of thing infuriates you. Man, dirtier and dirtier.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: pdq
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 05:36 PM

I may be "off topic", but the incompetence of the "bailout" and "stimulus" packages is worse than any thing these insurance executives have done.

My poor little state of Nevada needs only 1.5 billion to fund state government to the same level as last year. That means no raises, but it means all the teachers, firefighters, highway workers and such will still have jobs.

Instead of the feds giving us money to cover the shortfall, we are getting 1.2 billion and all of it must be used for make-work BS jobs. Yes, some of our quality state workrs will be fired and probably never return to their jobs, while we take untraind kids and have them stick new federally-funded flower pots on Main Street. This is BS.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: heric
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 05:40 PM

Slightly more than two years ago, I was talking to a guy who in casual conversation pointed up an amazing news tidbit about a trial judge on the east coast throwing out some creditor plaintiffs who were trying to foreclose in relation to a "securitized" mortgage instrument. The judge said come back if you show me your right to take possession of the property. I later found out the guy telling me the story worked for AIG.

I never read (<-present tense) about this anywhere. Did mortgage backed "securities" make mortgage loans unsecured?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: gnu
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 05:54 PM

Peace... "Don't PAY the bonuses and let the bastards sue."

That is the reason THE bastards give for paying... to avoid breach of contract lawsuits. Now, don't that take the cake?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: van lingle
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 06:22 PM

This is total Bullshit. I've emailed the Prez.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 06:44 PM

No, I guess the securities' holders (or their insurers, I guess) do ultimately end up in possession of the collateral. There's this from July, 2007:

"The local mortgage lender went bankrupt…the house was repossessed and sold for half the previous price. Then, rented out, its condition deteriorated. The paint flaked off. The concrete cracked. Possums moved in to the backyard.

And now, the proud owner is Bear Stearns (NYSE:BSC). The second biggest underwriter of mortgage-backed securities in the United States is rapidly becoming also a major owner of split-levels, neo-colonials, and Spanish-style bungalows. . . .

"Bear Stearns and its affiliates are listed as buyers of at least 53 homes so far this year in San Diego County, California, 48 in Maricopa County, Arizona, and 40 in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, according to a search of property records.

" . . . Merrill, the third-biggest securities firm by market value, and its mortgage unit, First Franklin, took possession of at least 87 homes this year in San Diego County, California. Citigroup and affiliates are the new owners of at least 47 homes in Clark County, Nevada."

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Slag
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 07:31 PM

Bonuses for WHAT????? When you give a contractor a bonus it's for meeting deadlines or exceeding deadlines. It's for accomplishing something above and beyond what would normally be expected. What did these Bozos accomplish? Driving the company into ruin? Man what a contract!! Such contracts should be illegal. They should be declared null and void, just on the face of the situation.

What about the contract with their stock holders? What about their contract with those they have "insured"? Shouldn't those contracts take precedence?

And MOST OF ALL why should the taxpayers, the rate payers, have to bear the weight of their criminal, fraudulent acts. And do NOT forget the SOBs in DC that helped make this all possible.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 08:05 PM

Don't forget the SOB in Texas.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Slag
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 08:10 PM

Top of the list. What a failure.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 08:38 PM

What a legacy.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Big Mick
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 09:07 PM

I am beyond rage.......

The first time one might assume that they thought business as usual, the American public won't notice......blablablabla

But now, after the private jets, the no accountability, the outrage expressed already .... to do this at this point in the emergency, means that this way beyond "absconding". This is big money flipping us all the bird, telling us to get fucked, and believing they are beyond the law. Classic "let them eat cake" mindset. As history has shown, the best way to deal with that mindset is to erect the "National Razor" in the plaza and rid ourselves of these vermin. I am not sure if there is a deep enough hole to use as a cell for them.

Mick.....
Who has never been so disgusted and feeling moved to radical thought in his entire life.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 10:04 PM

Conrad Black is in jail. Peter Pocklington may follow. Do you not have a jail for these bastards as well?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Slag
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 11:48 PM

Let them eat greenbacks for the rest of their short sweet lives.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Don Firth
Date: 15 Mar 09 - 11:51 PM

If these scumbags are "the best and the brightest," then we're in really deep doo-doo!

When does the next shuttle leave for Mars? This planet's had it!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: jacqui.c
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 07:48 AM

I agree with Mick - I am so disgusted I want to go after these guys myself. By contrast Marie Antoinette looks innocent.

I heard, last night on the TV, that these people, supposedly, are the only ones who know how this mess was created and are the only ones that can unravel it - a bit like having the bomb makers disarm the bomb.

I hope, somewhere along the line, that there will be some sort of payback if that is the case.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 10:57 AM

It seems to be the fruition of the American get rich quick dream.

The President can not legally abbrogate someone's business contract.

This kind of thing has been going on and growing in its absurdity for twenty years.

Yep its absurd.


Absurdity is the American way.


Absurdity in its extreme forms come from the mouths of people like Dick Cheney who said today the Bush administration is clearly not at fault in any way for the economic crisis. He said it is all the fault of Barack Obama and his good friends like Barney Franks and Pelosi.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 11:04 AM

Where's DougR's defense of these slobs? Is he asleep at the wheel?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Stu
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 11:07 AM

This is the capitalist machine working exactly as it should do (that's why unregulated capitalism is crap).

"♫ Nooooobody knows de trubble obscene...♫"

Hey - how did you get those little notes?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 11:17 AM

jacqui got it right.

All of the villains of history will now have to take a step down to a lower platform at the EVIL award ceremonies, to make room for Wall Street wizards.


"Thank you ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the EVIL award ceremonies"
Laser light show and orchestral fanfare fills the auditorium...
Marie Antoinette, Louis, please step down to these lower platforms to make make room for Bernie Madoff and his lovely wife."
"Lets have a round of applause for all our award winning CEOs.
to the tune of Miss America... Here they are, all our CEO's. Here they come, all the scum...

Please make room for The winners and still CEOs
and stand next to the CEO of Enron"
Bear Sterns, Lehman Bros. Goldman Sachs, AIG (big applause and hoots) Merill Lynch, Bank of America, Citi Group, ...(goes on for 20 minutes)
"No Mr. Hitler you don't have to step down, but we would like you to share your platform with Dick. Dick this is Adoolf, Adolf this is Dick."

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Wesley S
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 01:11 PM

The President will try to block the bonuses

CNN Story Here

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 01:25 PM

See, Obama IS a goddamned Commie Socialist!

Subject: BS: This makes me sick
From: Jayto
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 01:48 PM

All US taxpayers should see this. We just paid AIG another big fat bonus. $165 million to about 400 workers to be exact.

AIG bonus handed out over the weekend

transferred from a duplicate thread.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Jayto
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 02:00 PM

oops I missed that lol.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 05:03 PM

While AIG has been getting most of the headlines, and is "resisting" meaningful replies to questions from both the Federal Government and the NY state Attorney General on grounds that they're "just complying with the contracts," Atty Gen Cuomo has also demanded similar accounting from Merrill Lynch regarding their similar bonuses.

Merrill Lynch says they're willing to provide the information if they're allowed to redact the names of those receiving the bonuses "due to privacy issues," and have demanded permission to remove the names before providing the information - or a court order prohibiting the Atty Gen from revealing them.

They believe that some recipients "might be embarrassed."

Now why would they be embarrassed?

John

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: DougR
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 06:48 PM

Alice: if you are relying on MSNBC to provide objective political reporting, I question that you are getting the "straight" story. Even CNN, I believe, is more objective.

It seems to me the problem might be that whoever drafted the document providing "bail-out" money to AIG, "they" did not stipulate that the federal money could not be used for such purposes (bonuses to folks who caused the problem in the first place).

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 07:07 PM

Question: ... whoever drafted the document providing "bail-out" money to AIG,

Answer: BuShite Republicans.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Big Mick
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 07:33 PM

Hey Doug..... aren't you and your boys in the capitalist system from the "just do the right thing" school? Aren't you one of those, "take out the reg's, the companies will police themselves" kind of guys? Aren't you from the "it doesn't matter if someone is watching, good Christian defenders of red, white, and blue branded Americanism" that would always be honorable?

If you had spoken out against this outright greedy theft, you might have gone some ways down the road of re-earning the respect of the loyal opposition. But you show yourself to be a right wing idealogue who isn't interested in what's right for the country, or what the right thing to do is, but only in being right yourself. Your response was nothing more than alibi'ing these bastards, looking for a reason to not say you were wrong.

There is but one reaction that is proper in this mess, Doug. And that is to be disgusted at these arrogant bastards that are stealing your, and your grandchildren's, whole future. How's your investments doing?

Mick

Shaking his head..........

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,BB
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 07:45 PM

Publish the names and amount for each one and let the people take care of them.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Leadfingers
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 08:37 PM

I always thought a Bonus shoukld be a share of profits !

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 09:29 PM

Good for you, Mick! But whyinhell it took you (and others) so long to see Douggie-boy for what really he is remains something of a mystery.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 10:07 PM

..And who negotiated and pushed for AIG to get their 'bailout' under the terms they got?????, Why its your very own Gietner!! This whole 'indignation' is a phony front!

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 10:13 PM

A news program on NPR today was "analysing" the entire AIG mess, and while they didn't dig too deeply into the whole quagmire they did make some interesting points.

The initial bailout money to AIG was made by the Federal Reserve, prior to any real authorization from Congress - or anyone else (so they said - we can look for confirmation).

AIG has provided a "sort of" list of where most of that money went. In fact, according to this NPR report, the bulk of it went to French and UK banks who had "insured" themselves against being stupid, in order to lower reserve requirements so that they could have more money available to do additional acts of the same stupidity. (Note that they were by no means alone - they just happened to be the ones who bought the most "insurance" from AIG.)

So in effect, the US taxpayers, by bailing out AIG have (inadvertently?) bailed out mostly French and UK banks - (so they said - subject to confirmation).

A comment, almost an aside, was that the French President called personally to Obama(?) or to the Chairman of the Fed(?) - - I was driving and couldn't make notes - - to "beg" that AIG be bailed out to protect French banks from complete collapse - (as we will know when someone is able to confirm that it actually happened?)

(NPR then played one of Beethoven's clarinet concertos, which also was lovely as usual.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 10:34 PM

And I belie that was Bush's Federal Reserve, was it not, John? I'll try to find the NPR report on-line.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Slag
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 10:44 PM

Well, come on now boys....and girls.... Let's be fair. As in every walk of life there are good guys and bad guys. Guys who work in the system and trying to do right and then there are guys who work the system, taking every thing they can and hedging their bets with OPM. How do we tell the good guys from the bad? The good guys are making a good living. Some are slowly getting rich. The bad guys??? well they are the ones FILTHY rich...getting rich quick...selling short.... speculating and manipulating the markets. Getting win, lose, or draw BONUSES which guarantee their take ahead of the honest investors. they are lobbying and bribing government officials and YOUR representatives to make the TAXPPAYER the fall guy when it all goes south. That's the ones.

Well, what are we gonna do??? (he asks). Piss and moan? Whine a little? Or demand justice? Are we going to take it or be taken? If you know how to write, NOW is the time to write YOUR representatives and let them know that you demand action be taken against these crooks (makes Nixon look like a piker...Hell, it makes Agnew look like a piker!). The Supreme court MUST intervene and declare these bonus contracts ILLEGAL as they are subterfuge and against stockholders interests, corporate interests, against fair and free market interests and against the TAXPAYERS interest. These guys are actually ROBBING the TREASURY of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. I can't believe this is going on!!!!


Change we can believe in?? Loose change, because if Mr. Obama or the US supreme Court does not act, that's all you are liable to wind up with...loose change, and precious little of that.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 10:48 PM

Treasury officials knew about this very problem last fall (as did the Fed.) I'm pretty sure Obama was not President then. It was that guy.

(I think part of the bailout philosphy encompasses protecting overseas investors and preserving their confidence as well.)

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 10:50 PM

News flash these bonuses have almost all been distributed as of last week.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 10:51 PM

NPR stories here:

http://www.npr.org/news/graphics/2009/mar/aig/

and here

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101948425

and yes, AIG failed last fall & was bailed out by the Bushies- not the Obama Admin.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 10:57 PM

I mean knowledge of the specific bonuses in question was last fall - NYT.

The only way to stop the carnage, with revenge as an aside, is to nationalize.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Big Mick
Date: 16 Mar 09 - 11:08 PM

Greg, good buddy, don't get too full of yourself about Doug. I have been doing battle with him for years, as have a few others. At some point, arguing with an idealogue becomes a meaningless exercise and you quit. I just jump and throw a few jabs now and again to remind him how wrong the policies of his heroes have now come to be understood. Once in a while he comes up with an original thought that deserves serious consideration, analysis, and debate/discussion. Most of the time there is no point.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 01:21 AM

BMick -

It looks to me like Heric is still talking about the bonuses, while Greg's post (with the links) was to the articles I heard quoted on NPR radio yesterday, about where the whole 190B$ bailout went.

The more informative one, if you want a quick read:

AIG Says Emergency Aid Used To Pay Other Banks

A "quicky" summary list of the top 20 recipients:

AIG's Payments To Banks

At the second link, near the bottom, you can find a .pdf of the full AIG report of what BANKS received money from the bailout.

There still has been no report (that I've heard of) of what people received money from the bonuses.

John

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Peace
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 01:28 AM

IMO, ten cents is too much.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Barry Finn
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 01:40 AM

Obama attempts to block bonuses is reported here. Weither or not he can is another story.

It's said that AIG is to big to fail that it was cause all the smaller banks & firms to go under with them. Give he money to the smaller banks & firms & let AIG fail.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 01:48 AM

Seriously? I'm supposed to get upset about this? After watching democrats on television telling me the 8.8 billion dollars in earmarks was only 1% of the last budget so it was no big deal?

I'm supposed to what, forget Geithner was the architect of the AIG bailout and that the current CEO who green lighted the bonuses was the guy put in charge by the government after the bail out?

What's the best way to rob a bank?

Own it.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Slag
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 03:40 AM

Oink oink! I must be a piggy bank 'cause it seems like Uncle Sweeetems owns me and every time he wants MORE of my money he just shakes (down) little 'ol you me, when ever he want for whatever he wants.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 09:42 AM

Hi, Mick-

Its not about me being full of myself (and I, too, tried "doing battle" with ol' Douggie for some years until I got tired of talking to myself).

Its about Doug being full of crap.

I didn't find Joe McCarthy amusing or entertaining, nor Strom Thurmond nor David Duke, nor Rush (the current buffoon at the head of the Republican Party, God help it).

And I find Douggie taking the same type of sideshow show on the road considerably more disgusting than diverting.

Best,

Greg

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: john f weldon
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 12:13 PM

There seems to be a certain amount of disapprobation here and elsewhere about these bonuses, but so what? There's a lot you can do with 100 million to help ease the sting of obloquy!

1) Hire some philosophers who will tell you that acquiring wealth for yourself is fundamentally good, regardless of the means.

2) Hire some economists who will tell the world that 100 million isn't very much, and that taxpayers shouldn't worry about it.

3) Get the same economists to say that spending 100 million on the arts would be a disgraceful waste of money.

4) Hire a ghostwriter to work on a self-serving autobiography.

5) Buy a TV network, and a newspaper chain.

6) Buy lots of friends.

7) (Optional) Hire a few songwriters to write songs about what a great person you are. Buy some radio stations to play the songs.   (Hey guys... ...trickle down??)

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 12:54 PM

Give them their cheques. In a stadium, with world media's cameras rolling, one by one, on a stage in front of an audience of the world's poor, homeless, 3rd world countries, single Mother's, etc.
BR

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Wesley S
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 01:34 PM

It would suprise me to see protesters outside AIG's headquarters. Has anyone seen or heard of any demonstrations yet? Shouldn't someone get them started?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: number 6
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 01:43 PM

News coming into CNN ...

AIG paid 73 employees bonuses of $1 million or more; 11 of whom are no longer there, according to NY Atty. Gen. Cuomo.

f&%k !!!

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 02:08 PM

For a million, you can even hire a bodyguard to protect you from angry citizens.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: jacqui.c
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 02:49 PM

Depends how angry the bodyguard is, Bill.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: heric
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 06:37 PM

Wesley:

A tidal wave of public outrage over bonus payments swamped American International Group yesterday. Hired guards stood watch outside the suburban Connecticut offices of AIG Financial Products, the division whose exotic derivatives brought the insurance giant to the brink of collapse last year. Inside, death threats and angry letters flooded e-mail inboxes. Irate callers lit up the phone lines. Senior managers submitted their resignations. Some employees didn't show up at all.

"It's a mob effect," one senior executive said. "It's putting people's lives in danger."

Politicians and the public spent yesterday demanding that AIG rescind payouts that they said rewarded recklessness and greed at a company being bailed out with $170 billion in taxpayer funds. But company officials contend that the uproar is scaring away the very employees who understand AIG Financial Products' complex trades and who are trying to dismantle the division before it further endangers the world's economy.

"It's going to blow up," said a senior Financial Products manager, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak for the company. "I have a horrible, horrible, horrible feeling that this is going to end badly."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/16/AR2009031602961_pf.html

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 07:01 PM

It sounds as if these people may need to be given protective custody, at least until the recession/slump/downturn/crunch is over.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 08:05 PM

There's a facility down at the East end of Cuba that is going to be surplus to requirements pretty soon. It might be just the place for these gentlemen to be kept safe from angry members of the public for the next few years, or for as long as seems advisable.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Bobert
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 09:27 PM

Ya know, I was down in the belly of my old hotel doing plumbing all day but I had public radio on and it seems as if that is all that folks were talkin' about today...

Seems as if I have heard every opionion that is imaginable but the one that sticks out in my mind is about contracts... I'm not asyin' that these contratcs couldn't have been renegotiated but they are contarcts....

As much as I hate to see these rich crooks get away with this there is a rationality toto it in that the entire concept of contract law remains intack.... If folks think they can break contractual agreements then I think we are opening a can of worms that would cost US many times more then these crooks got away with...

Just food for thought... Okay, maybe not words that would be well received by the emotional, but words none the less...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 09:41 PM

Yeah I agree that the BIG problems are more than quite a bit bigger than this one - but it's something everyone can bite into. Something less complicated like this is, well, a nice break for us all?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Slag
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 10:08 PM

"Contract with America" There's one. This is really great! Finally a topic that, for the most part, is uniting Americans again, left, right, middle.

From what I have heard today there were apparently some AIG folks in divisions who WERE doing their jobs correctly and their bonuses were more in line with industry standards. Then there were those who got "retention" bonuses for staying with the company, who were NO LONGER WITH the company? I have to wonder why at that one! What could motivate you away from such a sweet deal? Maybe it was the rising sound of deep waters headed their way! There were other bonuses pending too. Thank goodness that Uncle Sugar came along and made them happen. It's like what? Bankruptcy would have been worse?
As for the mob mentality, that mob is most all Americans of every stripe who smell the stench of a rotten deal.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: pdq
Date: 17 Mar 09 - 10:17 PM

Senator suggests AIG execs should kill themselves

"IOWA CITY, Iowa – Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley suggested that AIG executives should take a Japanese approach toward accepting responsibility for the collapse of the insurance giant by resigning or killing themselves.

The Republican lawmaker's harsh comments came during an interview with Cedar Rapids, Iowa, radio station WMT on Monday.

They echo remarks he has made in the past about corporate executives and public apologies, but went further in suggesting suicide.

'I suggest, you know, obviously, maybe they ought to be removed,' Grassley said. 'But I would suggest the first thing that would make me feel a little bit better toward them if they'd follow the Japanese example and come before the American people and take that deep bow and say, I'm sorry, and then either do one of two things: resign or go commit suicide.

'And in the case of the Japanese, they usually commit suicide before they make any apology.'

Grassley spokesman Casey Mills said the senator isn't calling for AIG executives to kill themselves, but said those who accept tax dollars and spend them on travel and bonuses do so irresponsibly.

'Senator Grassley has said for some time now that generally speaking, executives who make a mess of their companies should apologize, as Japanese executives do,' Mills said. 'He says the Japanese might even go so far as to commit suicide but he doesn't want U.S. executives to do that.'

The senator's remarks added to a chorus of public outrage over the disclosure that AIG intends to pay its executives $165 million in bonuses after taking billions in federal bailout money. President Barack Obama lambasted the insurance giant for 'recklessness and greed' on Monday and pledged to try to block payment of the bonuses."

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Amos
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 01:16 AM

American intelligence experts are analyzing a new terror video from the American International Group (AIG) in which the leader of the shadowy organization demands billions of dollars from the United States.

In the four-minute tape, which surfaced over the weekend and caused deep concern among U.S. officials, a man believed to be the chairman of AIG says that if his organization is not paid its ransom, "chaos and destruction will rain down on the American economy."

"If we are not paid billions more in bonuses and corporate golf retreats, America will be made to suffer," the man threatens.

Intelligence analysts said that the man, AIG chairman Edward M. Liddy, appears to be speaking at a luxury beach resort that offers few clues as to his exact location, although there is "good intelligence" pointing to the Ritz Carlton in the Cayman Islands.

"We have some reason to believe that he and other AIG executives are there, based on a series of intercepted room service orders from the all-day dining menu," one analyst said.

Reacting to the video, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano raised the nation's terror alert level to orange, meaning "taxpayers are about to get reamed again."

(From the Borowitz Report--a SATIRE site)

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 02:51 AM

AIG paid 73 execs $1 million bonuses

"Troubled insurance giant American International Group paid bonuses of $1 million or more to 73 employees, including 11 who no longer work for the company, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said Tuesday."

"According to the attorney general's office, the top individual bonus was more than $6.4 million, and the top seven received more than $4 million each."

AXIOM OF EFFECTIVE PROPAGANDA #1: Give people permission to hate something, and it takes their minds completely away from what you're really doing.

Used effectively and apparently intentionally by the past administration, but in this case possibly "inadvertent." (The "permission" (from Obama) came only after the hatred had already erupted.)

At least one other company receiving a large bailout convinced its executives to accept $1/year base salary and to waive similar "retention bonuses." (Other "deferred compensations" may remain, but haven't been reported.) One wonders if AIG even asked if it's execs would agree to waivers.

Given the complexity of the scams involved, it may actually be to the advantage of the citizenry to have persons key to their creation and operation close at hand to assist with unravelling them. I'd confess to mixed emotions about whether they should be retained as employees or as "enemy terrorists" (Note: "enemy terrorists" has been shown to be so loosely defined as to include "anybody we don't like," so it's probably appropriate.)

At the very least, the specific identities, functions, and contract details should be made available to Congress, the Administration, and to NY Atty General Cuomo (who seems to have b*lls enough to prosecute if an excuse can be found).

(Another article indicated that most(?) of those receiving the largest retention bonuses may have been in the UK subsidiary of the company, and might be out of reach for Cuomo, if they can show that they didn't directly affect business in NY.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 12:01 PM

"Geithner, who has come under fire from Congress over the AIG payments, said in a letter to lawmakers last night the government will recover the money by requiring it be repaid from company operations and deducting the amount from the next $30 billion in aid being provided to the insurer."


hee hee hee

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 01:07 PM

The following is not meant to scare you but if well understood will give you a better idea why AIG needs to be nationalized at the peril of a possible crippling inflationary spiral when other global banks end up taking losses that AIG prentended they could insure.

Banks have books. They have more than one book. They just don't have 2 sets of books but many.

The first book that AIG is said to be trying to unravel is the credit default swap book. This book of derivitive sales of bundeled bad mortgages is only the smaller part of their depraved scam.
This is somewhere around a 3 to 4 trillion dollar loss.

The second book is their insurance polices on banks that were encouraged to invest in fake junk with borrowed money.
This book that is rarely if ever dicussed stands at a potential 4 to 8 trillion dollar loss.

The third AIG book is the corporate swap book. This most secret book of all is secret in the sense that only two parties know about the insurance bet that was placed...the seller of the insurance on a puirchase of a corporate bond and the buyer of the insurance on the bonds they bought to not lose thier value.

When GM goes bankrupt, all the insurance that was sold to people who bought bond insurance will want their money. AIG never had the money to pay. Somme of these 2 party deals have a whole list of coprporations that need to fail for the "bet" insurance to be paid out.
Lots of corporations are going under and the insurance adds up to more money than the world has. The players were mostly hedge fund types that could play in the playground with no rules.
The worst case scenario for this bank book is more loss than the first two books put together.

I contend that it doesn't take a genius to understand or "unravel" this mess. AIG needs to be nationalized, split up and resold because the hope of unraveling these crimes so that all the buyers of these financial insurance buyers and the uncapitalized insurance sellers will never add up. Unless the tax payer pays for these bets tto be settled for the hedge fund investors for the next 100 years.


When and if AIG is nationalized the bettors around the world will want their money and be so pissed that they will sell our treasury notes and discredit the value of the dollar.

THis will hurt but the hurt will not last as long if we don't "kill" AIG.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 02:18 PM

I watched the CEo of AIG testify before Congress.

Here is a brief summary


Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God?

ceo Liddy: "fagettaboutit"

thank you



ceo Liddy: I'd like to read some remarks first... I look around and see you have a nice country here. It would be a shame if anything happened to it. By the way, I'm new here, the boss you want is long gone.


{women in pink hold up signs saying Crook! Thief! Crooked Casino owner!}

Chairman " Before I call the next Congressman I want all those signs surrendered to the Seargent at Arms o you will be physically removed from this chamber...

{women hold up their signs and give them to a security guard}

Barney Franks: "thank you Mr Chairman, in regards to the way you handled that situation it is a good thing those signs were not on T shirts. Now Mr. Liddy I would like you to give me the names of those who both got those retention bonuses as well as those who givae them back.

ceo Liddy: I can not do that unless I have full confidentiality,

Barney Franks: I can not guarantee that so I move that we supeona the names.

Liddy: (reads sample death threats) Don;t forget we already have 100s of billions of your dollars. Ot would be a shame if anything happened to it.


Barney Franks
I see, Supeona please!

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: heric
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 02:18 PM

Thank you Donuel for yet another brilliant recap. My "understanding" is essentially the same as yours. I don't know about the quantities involved or the probabilities of long term results, but they sound feasible as you have presented them.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 03:11 PM

When ceo Liddy tries to explain he always adds "given market conditions...or... We have an exit plan to pay back the USA although even those plans are subject to extremely volitile markets.


Listen to Liddy say that only certain people can UNWIND some of these books. (by the way AIG has between 18 to 24 "books" as explaind by CEO Liddy).

Unwind, what does it mean. It means you get a guy who will meet with the head or board of a bank or firm who expects to get a pay out with money AIG doesn;t have. THe AIG guy asks "What will it take to get you to forget about this debt or take less than half owed?"

Will it take an Italian Villa on the shores of Corsico? For everyone on the board? A personal Swill, I mean Swiss bank account that no one will ever know about?

When he gets a nibble then all they are talking about is how much.


--------Now you see why it takes a special James Bond kind of guy to do these kinds of "unwinding" procedures.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 05:54 PM

Sen Chris Dodd did it


He is going to eat crow or fall on his sword

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 06:16 PM

Dodd says the Treasury dept. added an amendment to the bill about 'abrogation of contracts', designed, as I (and he) understood it, to prevent problems...AIG officials just used it to 'justify' the bonuses. Dodd says he had no idea that the amendment was fraught with loopholes.

(paraphrased)

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 07:29 PM

There seem to be no legal problems with freezing the assets of foreign countries identified as enemies. Applying the same approach to the assets of people like these would seem pretty fair.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 08:29 PM

The Treasury dept can not add ammendments or pass legislation.

Dodd said yesterday that he had nothing to do with the change of his original wording to not allow bonuses.

Today he said that he did change it at the request of the treasury dept.


Obama said today "don't blame democrats or republicans, blame me."

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 10:02 PM

oh dear.

This is bad for going forward - with Dodd on point.


"On Monday, Mr. Dodd criticized bonuses given to executives of American International Group Inc., the huge insurer that has received $173.3 billion in federal aid. "This is another outrageous example of executives -- including those whose decisions were responsible for the problems that caused AIG's collapse -- enriching themselves at the expense of taxpayers," he said."

His story is hard to follow. He says he didn't know about any existing bonuses back then (February? or whenever Fed employees "forced" him), but that makes no sense - did he think he was approving new bonuses, yet to be granted with the bailout money???

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 10:11 PM

Oh he just means he didn't know the bonuses to anyone were really, really big.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 10:24 PM

Dodd is toast. Will the Obama Administration follow?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: bald headed step child
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 01:56 AM

It would be nice if there were only 3 or 4 sets of books.

I heard on the radio today, and I'm sorry I didn't catch who was speaking, that some unidentified source inside AIG estimates there are at least 10 LAYERS of bundles involved that could total as much as $400 trillion on only $4 trillion value.

If those numbers are right, I don't think anyone can truly comprehend what the effects might be of just letting them go under, but it sure wouldn't be a pretty sight.

BHSC

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 02:32 AM

"Obama said today "don't blame democrats or republicans, blame me."" Donuel

As you know, Obama did not say that. He said: "Washington is all in a tizzy and everybody is pointing fingers at each other and saying it's their fault, the Democrats' fault, the Republicans' fault," he said at a town hall meeting Wednesday. "Listen, I'll take responsibility. I'm the President."

"He also make clear that it isn't really his fault. "We didn't grant these contracts," he said.

"But he added: "So for everybody in Washington who's busy scrambling, trying to figure out how to blame somebody else, just go ahead and talk to me, because it's my job to make sure that we fix these messes, even if I don't make them."

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 03:03 AM

Liddy's appearance was something like a blackmail threat ending in a death threat crossed with an apology for killing the golden goose & then eating it & if you want it back, wait & make me puke.

Barney Franks, my hero

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 06:38 AM

Dodd: Administration pushed for language protecting bonuses

Story Highlights
NEW: Dodd tells CNN he put bonus provision in bill, despite earlier denials

Treasury Department official says administration pushed for the language

AIG under fire for doling out big bonuses after taking bailout money

Rep. Barney Frank says execs shouldn't get bonuses if they are "incompetent"

   
(CNN) -- Senate Banking committee Chairman Christopher Dodd told CNN Wednesday that he was responsible for language added to the federal stimulus bill to make sure that already-existing contracts for bonuses at companies receiving federal bailout money were honored.

Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut, appears on CNN's "The Situation Room" on Wednesday.

Dodd acknowledged his role in the change after a Treasury Department official told CNN the administration pushed for the language.

Both Dodd and the official, who asked not to be named, said it was because administration officials were afraid the government would face numerous lawsuits without the new language.

Dodd, a Democrat, told CNN's Dana Bash and Wolf Blitzer that Obama administration officials pushed for the language to an amendment designed to limit bonuses and "golden parachutes" at those companies.

"The administration had expressed reservations," Dodd said. "They asked for modifications. The alternative was losing the amendment entirely."

On Tuesday, Dodd denied to CNN that he had anything to do with adding the language, which has been used by officials at bailed-out insurance giant AIG to justify paying millions of dollars in bonuses to executives after receiving federal money.

He said Wednesday that the "grandfather clause" language "seemed like innocent modifications" at the time. "I agreed reluctantly," Dodd said. "I was changing the amendment because others were insistent."

Dodd said he did not speak to high-ranking administration officials and the change came after his staff spoke with staffers from Treasury.

The White House did not immediately respond to CNN's request for comment.

At a town hall meeting in Costa Mesa, California, about an hour after Dodd spoke, President Barack Obama didn't directly address the language change -- but said he'll take responsibility for the bonuses being awarded.

"We didn't draft these contracts. We've got a lot on our plate. But it is appropriate when you're in charge to make sure stuff doesn't happen like this," he said. "So we're going to do everything that we can to fix it."

Dodd said later Wednesday in a written statement that his amendment allows the Treasury Department to review bonus contracts like AIG's and seek ways to get the money back for taxpayers.

AIG's derivatives branch is in Dodd's home state. Many of the bonuses in question were awarded to executives at that branch. But in the written statement, Dodd said he had no idea the legislation would impact the company.

"Let me be clear -- I was completely unaware of these AIG bonuses until I learned of them last week," he said.

Dodd also said in the statement that his comments on Tuesday and Wednesday to CNN did not conflict.

"I answered a question by CNN [Tuesday] night regarding whether or not [an exemption before] a specific date was aimed at protecting AIG," he said. "When I saw that my comments had been misconstrued, I felt it was important to set the record straight -- that this had nothing to do with AIG."

According to a transcript of the Tuesday interview, Dodd was asked about an executive-compensation provision "that exempts everything prior to February 11, 2009 -- any contracts prior to that date."

He said that language was not in the version of the bill that left the Senate and that he was not one of the negotiators who hammered out a compromise between the House and Senate versions of the plan.

"I can't point a finger at someone who offered a change at all," he said.

Asked whether he had later been able to figure out who added the language, he said, "I really don't know."

In Wednesday's interview, Dodd never said his Tuesday comments had been misunderstood.

"Going back and looking, I apologize," he said when questioned about his words from the day before.

On Capitol Hill Wednesday, AIG chief executive Edward Liddy called the roughly $165 million in bonuses "distasteful" but necessary because of legal obligations and competition.

"We have to continue managing our business as a business -- taking account of the cold realities of competition for customers, for revenues and for employees," Liddy told a House Financial Services subcommittee. "Because of this, and because of certain legal obligations, AIG has recently made a set of compensation payments, some of which I find distasteful."

Pennsylvania Rep. Paul Kanjorski, the hearing's chairman, responded to Liddy's statement by arguing that AIG should have refused to pay all the bonuses -- regardless of its contractual obligations with the bonus recipients.

"Let them sue us," said Kanjorski, a Democrat.


more
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/18/aig.bonuses.congress/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 10:20 AM

So there's nothing much here (in Dodd's story) unless and until the 2/11/09 date is shown to have been a manipulated date, rather then a reasonable /standard cut off date in terms of the timing of the legislation? That will be interesting, though.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: SINSULL
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 10:31 AM

A bill is being proposed to tax 90% of these bonuses. Aren't they taxable?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 10:42 AM

Yeah but apparently they can legitimately create legislation specifically directed at someone in the form of a punitive tax, if they are careful.

It seems to me they could have pushed the grandfather clause back earlier, to when AIG (or others) applied for bailout funds, under the theory that negotiating such bonuses at that time or thereafter was of questionable good faith by the recipients.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 11:47 AM

In September, 2008, the Federal Reserve bailed out AIG with an $85 billion loan, effectively nationalizing 80 percent of the company. On Oct. 8, AIG received another $37.8 billion in loans,and quickly burned through most of it.

In the previous two financial quarters, the company had announced $13 billion in losses and $20 billion in write-downs, acknowleding a need for $20.3 billion worth of capital injections.

Anyone who "negotiated" a lucrative bonus after NO LATER THAN September, 2008 was not acting in good faith, and the legislation could easily have made the grandfather clause back to then or earlier, as opposed to February 11, 2009. They didn't need to fear prospective litigation from that any more than they will need to fear litigation on the punitive tax proposals.

There is a rotten stench emanating from that 2/11/09 date, regardless of the legislation's chronology.

A trial judge apparently ruled that Cuomo can learn and release the recipient names. We will eventually know when they negotiated the deals from this company we "control."

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 11:58 AM

(A distinction needs to be made as to the date the bonus was "negotiated" versus when the right vested, but I'm not sure how to apply that yet. The news reports it as "agreed on" - the stinkiest result.)

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 12:01 PM

What the lesson is in all this is that: It takes a LOT of clever planning, anticipation and work to outwit those who are trying to manipulate the system & the rules for their own benefit!

Short form: The crooks work harder than the regulators to find loopholes and divert the money flow.

It will take awhile to get THIS administration set up to monitor all the shenanigans which the former administration didn't bother with...or actually abetted.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 12:09 PM

There ~may~ be, however, a further lesson in public corruption yet to come, depending on how this shakes out.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 12:18 PM

(Dodd, for example, will have a hard time reconciling his two versions. He can't persuasively merge that he forgot he was responsible with his new version that he was pressured into doing something he did not want to do.)

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 02:00 PM

Maybe I'm a little harsh here, but it strikes me that the idea that a company is "too big to be allowed to fail" merely encourages the executives of that company to go right ahead be idiots. If they were on their own, and as a result of their stupid decisions, they suddenly found themselves standing out in an open field in nothing but their jockey shorts, it might encourage other company executives to try to get their act together.

Don't give the "bailouts" to the companies, give them to the people left unemployed or otherwise left holding the bag when the company goes belly-up from crookery and bad management.

. . . simplistic, I know, but. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Amos
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 07:03 PM

"There is an interesting opportunity that I believe our Congress missed.
As mentioned below the core issue is the CDS obligations. Ideally AIG
would have been able to simply "return" the CDS fees they received and
cancelled the insurance. Instead, we propped up AIG with $100B+...AIG
made good on their CDS obligations and paid the billions to Goldman,
etc. (who then proceeded to pay those billions in bonuses -- far more
than what AIG allegedly paid out).

A potentially better approach would have been to create a corporate
excise tax (like the bonus tax being proposed) on all proceeds from CDS.
Make the tax so onerous that if AIG then simultaneously offered to allow
the cancellation of a CDS obligation in return for a refund of fees..the
cancellation of the CDS instrument would be better financially for both
parties. Such a move would effectively cancel out the CDS market as it
stands today. Furthermore it would stop the cycle of funneling money
into AIG simply to reward the folks that betted in the casino. As a
reminder it is the CDS market that is described as a >$50trillion
outstanding liability hanging over all our heads so cancelling this out
is a requirement to eliminate the opaque risk present in the system.

Sadly - this would have been very valuable to do in November. I do not
know how much more AIG will payout on CDS's....it would be nice to know
if Congress is even tracking that."

(A correspondent)

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: heric
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 07:23 PM

Some CDS purchasers may have been seeking gambling entertainment but most ( <- I have no idea the relative %) were purchasing insurance for its intended purpose: Risk management on their investment portfolios. These include huge pension plans etc.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 08:07 PM

At least one article puts the "cause clause" that created the bonuses in question back to a law passed by Congress several years ago that imposed a tax penalty on corporations, for "salaries over $2 million." That law "forced" the companies to look for more "creative" methods of "compensating" executives.

While the "trigger" change was signed by President Clinton, it seems hardly fair to blame him alone for upsetting things, since the change had been proposed, amended, withdrawn, returned, obscured, and obfuscated through at least three prior administrations, any one of which might have made this "innocent" change.

No administration, including Clinton's and all since, has bothered to look for "unexpected consequences" from the change - until now.

Hardly anyone, with the exception of a few CEOs, will argue against the proposition that CEO "rewards" are obscene and abusive. Even some overpaid CEOs already have agreed to waivers of some "contractually obligated" rewards for incompetence.

Senator Dodd has reportedly been a principal beneficiary of funding from AIG for many years, and anything he says about them has to be at least somewhat suspect. One article claims that he introduced an amendment to the bailout bill that would have blocked the AIG bonuses. I haven't been able to verify the actual content of any such amendment, but it should be noted that under Senate rules the original author of an amendment pretty much has the unilateral right to withdraw it at any time, and early introduction is a common method of "sheltering" something. The original author can discourage similar amendments by others, but can then withdraw his/her own amendment at the last minute - thereby preventing the issue purported to be addressed from ever being considered. Of course Dodd can claim that anyone who offered an opinion has "pressured him" and there's unlikely to be any demand for proof. He can choose to blame "the scapegoat of the day" with impunity.

I haven't found clear evidence that Dodd acted in this issue with a purpose of this kind in mind; but it's consistent with what I've seen of his prior record for similar manipulations.

Since the total of all of the AIG bonuses, obscene as they are, is roughly the equivalent of the purchase price of one mid-sized corporate jet, in the overall picture this is not an issue that significantly impacts the intent and purpose of the funds being doled out. It is, and is being used as, a diversion that is preventing attention to the other uses that many corporations may be making of funds already dispensed.

Put three good lawyers on the case. Forget about it until they get something done. And get another thousand lawyers busy trying to get consistent and effective rules for the use for the other few trillion bucks that may be going down somebody's piss-hole while everybody is worrying about this little group of chiselers.

How about a look at whether AIG should pay off on "insurance" several hundred times to each of several dozens of "insurers" who each got coverage for the same risk. One estimate places the AIG "obligation" at close to $200 trillion for insurance on $2 trillion in actual money, since each person who traded the same 2 trillion insured it for the same amount. Once they sold it, they have no remaining "insurable interest," yet they're getting paid.(?)

John

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 11:52 PM

"A.I.G. itself revealed the bonus plan in regulatory filings last September.

In November, when the bailout of A.I.G. was restructured, Treasury and Fed officials negotiated the terms under which A.I.G. could make the retention payments. And in December, Democratic lawmakers sought a hearing about the payments. . . .

A.I.G. executives have insisted that they informed the New York Fed about the bonus plan, and that they assumed the New York Fed was informing the Treasury.

Treasury officials have suggested that the New York Fed and the Federal Reserve Board in Washington failed to alert the Treasury staff until March 5. . . . "

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/20/business/20bonus.html?hp

It's pretty clear that alerting Treasury earlier (taking at face value that they didn't) would not have mattered. Everything now is just political shit-storm control, assuaging the masses, unless those September disclosures weren't accurate.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 19 Mar 09 - 11:54 PM

OR unless there were dirty dealings by Dodd, done dirt cheap.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 12:18 AM

Sounds like Geithner's head is on the chopping block(good!)...He and Dodd, and Frank should be out of a job, and in prison!...and that's just for starters on the list!!!..Others should be removed from office! ..and all the ballyhoo about $100 million or so, as I posted before, is just a smokescreen to hide the BILLIONS laundered overseas. Pelosi ran California absolutely bankrupt, and now the crazy bat is doing it to the nation. Bush, and the rest, just handed off this corrupt ball, to the rest of the corrupt pieces of shit, who are lying through their teeth..and getting caught...though, I'm sure, that doesn't even phase the pom-pom bearers!...Kumbayah!!

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Peace
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 02:44 AM

HOW GREAT. Alberta finally made the BIG TIME.

Our Premiere has said that the Government of the Province of Alberta will NOT be spreading $40,000,000 in the form of bonuses around to government bureaucrats this year.

"Alberta puts brakes on civil servant bonuses
KATHERINE O'NEILL

March 19, 2009

Edmonton -- Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach has suspended a controversial and pricey bonus program next year for provincial civil servants.

However, he said despite tough economic times, more than 6,000 government managers will still be eligible to receive payouts for the current fiscal year ending March 31. The program is worth about $40-million. Opposition party politicians are outraged the Tories are still planning to go ahead with the current round of bonuses in light of news the province is expected to run its first deficit in 15 years."

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: number 6
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 01:09 PM

Here's a rather large company that has gone bankrupt.

Eight executives want a bonus to keep the company morale up.

Nortel seeking bonuses

I can't beleive all this is happening ... legally we must pander to the upper executives who have literally screwed tings up ... while they layoff the employees.

All this stinks. The arrogance, the total screw everyonejust give me what I want attitude of these guys is sickening.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Kampervan
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 05:30 PM

I thought that I heard on the news today that the US had introduced a special tax of 90% on any bonus paid to a member of a bank that had been bailed out using Government (i.e. OUR) money.

This sounds like a bloody good idea.

How about it Gordon?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Jayto
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 06:11 PM

I don't eve know what to say about this! Audacity? Stupidity? Greed? All of the above and more?

AIG sues the US Government!!!???

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 06:53 PM

Jayto -

Just business as usual. Given the complexity of their business, it is quite possible that they did "overpay" their taxes, and any "recovery" is part of what they should be doing to get their business back in shape.

Unless you're argument is that once you've kissed her she can't complain if you beat the crap out of her?

For anyone who can get past the "indignities" and might actually be interested in the whole picture of what might be going on, it may be possible to get your own personal copy of the entire American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Read it for yourself and see if any of it makes sense.

A warning: the governement websites that directed me to this are full of "circular links" that instead of going where they say the go just open a new copy of the same page where the link appears, and the document declined to download using the customary "right click and save target" for .pdfs. (The link at the last site where I finally got to it has a .http end, rather than the correct .pdf, but apparently got redirected.) I think you can right-click and save target as from my link, or the link should open the pdf in your browser, from where you can save it for future reference. The default name is "getdoc.pdf" so you'll want to rename it if you save.(Apparently not all Federal agencies are up to speed with Obama's love for the internet.)

Second warning: the document is 400 pages, about 1.1 MB, so those on dial-up may want to allow time for it to open fully before trying to save. (Sometimes a save attempt while the download is still working will hang your browser.)

Thus far, my cursory review of the act shows that virtually every "benefit" that's been highly publicized includes a sub-paragraph with the limitation "except if you've used the name JohnInKansas." This is really an expected result, and I've sort of gotten used to it, but ...

^!%@$#!!

An example is the much touted "$800 per family rebate" that, in the act is limited to "the lesser of ... 6.2% of earned income."

Since Social Security payments are not "earned income," and payments from a retirement plan are not "earned income" and withdrawals from a 401k or IRA are not "earned income" - according to normal IRS rules - this limitations appears to exclude virtually all working-class retirees from receiving this rebate. (Unintended consequences?)

This, and several similar "benefits" will require additional analysis.

John

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 08:36 PM

As far as I can tell, they're not giving me any tax breaks but they are reducing my withholding anyway, to "stimulate" the economy I guess, then I can find some extra money next April to pay them back. (I'm not sure if that is the plan, but I think so.)

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 09:06 PM

"Change"??...Well, you might have bought into that line of bullshit...but, as the name suggests, I'm from Sanity!

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Janie
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 09:18 PM

I literally felt ill this afternoon as I listened to an NPR interview with David Viniar of Goldman Sach about the AIG payouts to them. Listen here, if you missed it..

Corporate narcissism apparently knows no bounds. We average joes are being forced to sacrifice as well, but we are also being asked to willingly sacrifice even more for the common good. And most of us understand and accept that imperative. These big corporations and the people who run them will sacrifice only what they are forced to sacrifice. The notion that there are both times and circumstances when their responsibility as corporate citizens should carry some measure of more weight than their perceived responsibility to their bottom line a notion that simply does not exist within their internal paradigm. They will make only forced sacrifices - forced by the market or by the government - .

I am pretty dumb about economics, but I do understand that it is in the best interests of all of us for business to do well. At least well-enough. But it is clear that many of these corporate types see it all as a one way street, and the rest of us are supposed to be pleased with what trickles back down the gutters and storm drains.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Janie
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 09:32 PM

I ain't done yet:>)

I'm also disturbed at the way Congress is refusing to thoughtfully debate and lead. Our congressional members are reacting to the passions of the day. Looking for someone to blame. Pointing fingers. Afraid to thoughtfully weigh options and then make decisions.

The American people have to accept a good bit of responsibility for that. We need to give our executive and legislative branches space to try to find their way. This is uncharted territory. There is going to have to be some trial and error, and time to guage effects and results without putative reactions on the part of voters.

What is needed is response and feedback. Not legislative reaction to the emotional reaction of the populace. I am disturbed that the bill to tax the bonuses went sailing through with no discussion or debate, because it is such an example of what we don't need.

I don't think there was much choice but to go ahead and quickly vote on the TARP legislation. But since it was so fast, it should be expected that glaring flaws would come to light once the funds started being distributed. Let's give our duly elected representatives some time and space to figure it out before we start threatening to lynch anyone. Let's give them feedback and opinion, but also time, and some forgiveness when errors are made.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 09:51 PM

as the name suggests, I'm from Sanity!

Might we say, perhaps FAR FROM Sanity?

(That's a tweak - not intended to offend.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 10:07 PM

Janie, I tend to agree with you..you may note, though, not one republican voted for the bailout.(I guess they did enough damage, in the previous administration). You must note, that this stupid bill passed, with most 'Representatives' claiming, that they never even read it!!!!...Including the President!!!! During the campaign, I repeatedly said, (as several others), that Obama, has had no....NO, executive experience...but that didn't seem to matter to all those who were so anxious to elect a pop celebrity icon, to be the Chief Executive of our country..(I guess to show that they were so 'tragically hip'! Can you imagine any executive signing or making a corporate decision, without even reading it????????!!!!!!!!???..What a jerk-off!!! Then blaming Libby, who they put in, who they got out of retirement, and blaming him???? Now they are caught in a pack of lies trying to back peddle, as to when they knew about the exec bonuses...This is complete and utter incompetence!..Even the pom-pom bearers have to admit that...at least in the privacy of what little brains they have. Now its coming out that 'Turbo Tax Cheat' Geithner, not Poulsen, was the one who was the original 'architect' of the A.I.G.'s bailouts..Obama, had he ever been in the military, or knew ANYTHING about the chain of command, would have to concede, that when something goes wrong, and you're the one in charge, it is ultimately YOUR fault! This whole thing stinks to high heavens!..RAH RAH..and Kumbayah!!

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,Guest from
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 10:16 PM

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 10:18 PM

John, I'm a bit dizzy...are we in Kansas, yet?

(..and no offense taken,..wink)

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 10:46 PM

The bonuses to executives are universal.
In the Canadian news today, Nortel Telecommunications is paying $7.3 million to 8 executives (five in the U. S.). The Nortel incentive package is $US 23 million, for 92 staff members. The company is under creditor protection, but the courts (Ontario CA and Delaware US have ruled the payments are legal. Compared to AIG, Nortel is small potatoes, but it is typical of industry practice.

It is doubtful that US Congressional bills to claw back the money are legal, they probably will be overturned in the courts.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Janie
Date: 20 Mar 09 - 11:33 PM

GfS,

While I often find myself wondering if Obama's inexperience is showing, there are no objective indications that a more experienced national politician would be any more effective. I am not too inclined, this early in the game to point fingers. I'm not convinced that Geithner has made any missteps that anyone else would not have made, given the urgency.

Where the lack of experience in the administration may show, is in their ineffectiveness at giving it the proper "spin" that we in the citizenry seem to require. That may also be the result of their attempts at transparency. The American people are going to have to decide if we are mature and thoughtful enough to tolerate transparency. Transparency, after all, means that there is less effort devoted to obfuscation of missteps.

We citizens really need to understand that the effect of demanding perfection is a reduction in honest accountability.



Again, it is easy to point the finger at Congress or the administration. Let us remember that all of these folks are mostly interested in maintaining their power base and getting re-elected. I'm going to sound like an elitist snob here. So be it. A truly effective, conscientious politician must find a way to both pacify his/her constituency and lead that constituency. That is going to require some pretty fancy footwork. It is easier to manipulate than honestly lead. It is harder to sway people with truth and reality, which acknowledges both cost and benefit, and requires a thinking person to weigh options and priorities, than it is to manipulate people with lies, half-truths and soundbites that tap into closed-system paradigms that exclude all objective evidence that challenges that paradigm. The voting population does not want to have to think objectively or acknowlege realities that do not fit with their individual paradigms and self-interest. Those paradigms and areas of self-interest vary a great deal. The politician has got to somehow find a way to integrate all of this and stay in office to be effective.

Where Obama's lack of experience may really hurt is if he is unable to use his still high approval ratings to leverage Congress. It is not his fault that he has so little time and so much pressure as the result of assuming office during such a crisis. But it is still his job to find a way. What I keep in the back of my mind, however, is this question: "Can I think of anyone else that I objectively think could do any better with this current crisis and climate? At least if they are trying to operate with transparency?

What I think, at this juncture, is there are politicians with a clear agenda and devotion to either a philosophy or a monied constituency who might be more effective in getting their agenda passed. However, I am less interested in an intrenched philosophical agenda, and more interested in what does it take to find effective solutions that generally work for a large and diverse society.

We can focus on blame, or we can turn our attention to figuring out what works. The two tasks are mutually exclusive.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Mar 09 - 12:08 AM

Janie, I really appreciate your 'considerate' response! However there are just a few things to consider, about this present administration. Transparency? Like, no lobbyists in his cabinet. That is a lie! Time line for who knew what, in the bailout, structuring?..another lie. Raising the deficit, and borrowing from the 'future(?), as he is doing?....okay, solving the problem, by doing what was done to get us into the whole mess, in the first place...('Change' we can believe in'?) Dumb! Violating the constitution by reneging, on the contracts, and interfering with private contracts..The President is not a law unto himself..ask Nixon. Running up OVER TWO TRILLION deficit, in the first months of taking office?? Come on!... and the talk (read: trial balloon) of making vets pay for service related injuries(which he had to back down from, so far) absolutely brain dead! Imagine, a Vietnam vet, drafted(forced to serve, or go to prison), getting injured, and now forced to be off VA medical treatments???..This guy is so locked up in his very far left agendas, he can't see straight! Signing bills that he hasn't even read, that is breaking the back of the economy?? This is a 'little more' than just inexperience! Listen to Gibbs, stutter, and him and haw, at almost tough questions, put to him, by the press, at the press briefings....listen carefully, this is getting too hard to ignore! Look, I didn't vote for him, but when he took office, I was willing to support him, being as he is our president, but this is beginning to be a circus of incompetence, bordering on treason! Sorry, if I sound wary, but, I am...and for good reason, which seems to unfold daily...sometimes hourly. Everyday, another scandalous tidbit of news, comes out about this guy, and his band of clowns(Keystone Cops), trying to smooth over another incident. One third of his appointees, are tax cheats! If he wants to stop his slipping credibility, he needs to tell Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, Barney Frank, Geithner, Axelrod, to get lost, and stand up to them, and rid his cabinet of the lobbyists that he made exceptions for....and for Pete's sake, throw away that damn, teleprompter...and speak what is really in his head! Other than that, he's just great!!...Kumbayah!

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 21 Mar 09 - 01:40 PM

-- American International Group Inc., whose compensation policies before and after its U.S. bailout are being investigated, turned over information on its executive bonuses to Connecticut's attorney general, who said the insurer paid out $218 million.

That amount is more than the $165 million in bonuses previously disclosed by the New York-based company. The insurer provided a list of bonus amounts and contract terms to Blumenthal, who said the information supports his view that the basis for paying the bonuses is "completely unjustified," according to a statement he issued yesterday.

"These contracts rip the rug from under AIG's excuses -- revealing no basis under Connecticut law for these mega taxpayer-funded bonuses," Blumenthal said. "AIG's own documents reveal that it turned an emergency bailout into a meritless handout, paying windfalls to employees as reward for financial failure."

Blumenthal said he asked AIG's lawyers to explain the difference in total bonus amounts.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 21 Mar 09 - 04:56 PM

The bonuses reported to the Fed were in response to a demand to identify all who received bonuses "of more than $XXX amount," since the concern was about "excessive awards" to high ranking executives.

The larger amount reported to Connecticut's AG quite probably included all the bonuses, down to the guy in the mailroom who got a cup of lukewarm coffee, a stale donut, and a free ballpoint pen. (They called those bonuses at a couple of places where I've worked.)

The two different answers probably were because two different questions were asked. (Asking the right questions - or even remembering what one asked for - seems not to be a common talent in our Federal government system.)

The "binding contract" that AIG claims required them to pay the huge "executive bonuses," according to several reports, included the agreements in individual contracts that bonuses for 2008 "would not be less than 2007 bonuses" regardless of performance during 2008. Sort of a "minimum wage agreement" for executives. If the company had lost a little less, the bonuses quite probably would have been more - possibly "really big." (note: sarcasm intended)

John

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Folkiedave
Date: 21 Mar 09 - 06:53 PM

The wrath of the almighty (small "a" deliberate) has started. Manchester United are sponsored by AIG. They have lost their last two games.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 21 Mar 09 - 07:05 PM

Well - they do have to emulate the ideals and morals of their sponsors, don't they?

Please assure us that the team still got their "after game" brew ration. (?????)

John

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Mar 09 - 07:19 PM

AIG is just ther scapegoat de jour... This stuff has been going on for a long, long time... When stuff, bad or good, goes on on a long, long time it becomes part of the "culture"... Ronald Reagan started this hate-government thing in the 80's and regulations dropped by the wayside... Now we are collectively suffering from 30 years of piss poor governemnt and folks are surprised?!?!?!????????

Beam my up, Scotty...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,DannyC
Date: 21 Mar 09 - 07:22 PM

We don't have to hunt 'em. We know who they are:

Sherman (D - Calif.) Speaking Out

PS: What's with these aggressive CNBC "interviewers" speaking over every guest with whom they differ? CNBC has become as partisan as FOX and, accordingly, useless as a reliable source of information.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 12:30 PM

Ronald Reagan started this hate-government thing in the 80's and regulations dropped by the wayside... Now we are collectively suffering from 30 years of piss poor governement and folks are surprised...

The BuShite Repubs aren't only surprised, they're in absolute denial. They're PROUD of their record of the last 30 years, despite the fact that its their fault the country is completely fooked.

Oh, ye generation of morons.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,DannyC
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 10:31 AM

This article (from Matt Taibbi - Rolling Stone) gets into a bit of depth on the issue and highlights the origins of the problems.

The Big Takeover

It has left me feeling a pronounced sense of outrage. These people must be brought to account...   hunt 'em... all of 'em.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 11:29 PM

THERE IS NO AIG

All their signs have been removed from NYC office buildings.

they changed their name to American International Underwriters.

Granted its like turning the G on its side - AIU
Its as though the risky6 casino driven Derivitive group has disapeared, like our 180 billion.
for a comparison... A manned mission to Mars would cost about 18 billion.
The Queen Elizabeth ocean liner was just sold for $20 million.
A developed Island with mansions costs 40 million.

but true to form of most evil corporations, a change of name makes the turd smell more sweet.

Even small time rotten swindlers do this when ever things get too hot.
Phillip Morris became Atria and then Atria was changed to... guess.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Sawzaw
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 11:53 PM

I don't think a turd smells sweet at all.

You could say a name change could make the turd smell less stinky.


What's in a name?

That which we call a turd by any other name would smell as foul.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Sawzaw
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 12:17 AM

Top Two AIG Campaign Contribution Reciepiants:

Barack Obama         $104,332
Chris Dodd         $103,900

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 12:26 AM

AIG headquarters is in the American International Building, NY.
AIG has not changed its name.
The federal government now owns about 80% of the company, and has given it some $170 billion to keep it afloat.

American International Underwriters is a member company of AIG, handling their overseas property casualty operations, and formed for that purpose years ago.

AIG is an interesting company, started in Shanghai in 1919 by Cornelius Vander Starr (born in California), following a year as a steamship company clerk in Japan and work for several Shanghai insurance companies 1918-1919. The The C. V. Starr East Asian Library at Columbia University and the C. V. Starr East Asian Library at University of California are named for him; founded with money from the Starr Foundation. Starr died in 1968. For a time he was also an Office of Stratigic Services operative.

Before failure, AIG assets were some $850 billion. The eventual outcome of the federal government takeover probably will have some interesting twists and turns before the end is reached.

Donuel, whoever that is, is an ever-spouting fount of mis-information.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 12:28 AM

Strategic!

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 12:34 AM

He's talking about the Water St. building.

AIG will now call its property and casualty insurance company "AIU Holdings LTD," which is quite distinct from its former brand, of which they were so proud.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 02:08 PM

The change is largely to emphasize the American International Underwriters part of the business, the global property-casualty arm, whose headquarters operations are from the building where the AIG sign was taken down.
'Holdings' is being added to further distinguish the AIU arm, which soon will offer 20% in the form of a public stock sale. Sections are AI Holdings Inc. and AI Holdings LLC, the former for U. S. operations.

Other parts of the business are taking their original names, e. g. AIG Direct (automobile insurance) is changing back to 21st Century. Other arms are being separated according to function as part of the reorganization; some may be sold off (American Life Insurance, American International Assurance, are two now placed in a 'Special Purpose Vehicle').

The U. S. government regulators, of course, are involved in these changes and their outcome.

Chairman Liddy has said that AIG may abandon its overall name because of the public foofaraw, but no decision has been taken yet.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 07:52 PM

I have photos of the AIG yacht that no one else has. Not even AP or Getty.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Barry Finn
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 09:08 PM

Donuel, can you tell where that yacht lies & what her name is cuz I want a ride on my new investment. Even though my tax input amounts to next to nothing it's a lot like telling the prostitute, when she quotes you a price for a blowjob & saying you'd like a nickles worth.

who's the whore here & who's the pimp & guess who's getting fucked?

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 09:20 PM

Fallout on the side:

Rehab centers seeing surge in bankers

Addiction takes a toll in industry where confidence is the name of the game

Reuters
updated 4:53 a.m. CT, Tues., March. 24, 2009

NEW CANAAN, Connecticut - Cocaine and martinis On Wall Street? Nothing new there. Masters of the Universe admitting they have an alcohol problem? Not so common.

Experts say more and more people in finance are seeking treatment for addiction as the global economic crisis sinks its teeth into a high-stakes industry where confidence is the name of the game and nobody wants to admit to a weakness.

"We absolutely do see more people coming in naming either a job loss or huge financial reversals or big investments with Bernie Madoff," said Sigurd Ackerman, medical director at Silver Hill Hospital rehabilitation facility in New Canaan, Connecticut.

"They're being admitted with depression or increases in substance abuse, or both."

... .... ...

Sort of a "fluff" piece, and no mention about "guilt feelings" as a contributing factor.

John

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 09:21 PM

Barry Finn on his yacht
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7yfISlGLNU

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,DannyC
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 10:08 PM

Matt Taibbi, the author of the Rolling Stone article "The Big Takeover" (see above link) is a guest tonight on The Rachel Maddow Show (USA Cable - MSNBC).

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 11:02 PM

An AIG group (Maritime General Agency) is a big insurer for marinas, yacht clubs and commercial and private yacht owners; in line with these services it would not be unusual for them to support yachting and to own one themselves and participate in yachting events. Good advertising!

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 11:34 PM

Thanks DannyC for that remakable Taibbi primer. But:

"When investment banks write CDS deals, they hedge them. But insurance companies don't have to hedge. And . . . AIG did[n't]."

That . . . just . . . doesn't . . . sit . . . right.

I can't say what's wrong, but I keep coming back to that point. I think something - something big - is missing in relation to those two sentences.

I understand that they were essentially unregulated, but this is the world's largest insurer with a long, long history. It employs uncounted actuarial and risk geniuses. Insurers set reserves as job 1. Sure, it's a regulatory requirement, but to think they would lose total control over risk concepts, like an unsupervised kid drinking himself to death on Coca-Cola, is just, well, too hard to swallow.

Similarly, going to town insuring people or entities with no insurable interest presents the same phenomenon.

My guess is that the answer comes from the short, four or five question list written up by Spitzer in Slate:

"What was the precise conversation among Bernanke, Geithner, Paulson, and Blankfein that preceded the initial $80 billion grant?

Was it already known who the counterparties were and what the exposure was for each of the counterparties?

Why weren't the counterparties immediately and fully disclosed?"

They used to say the counterparty make up wasn't disclosed because it would be too scary, and shatter the world markets. But some also said that the CDS market largely balanced out, so that it is not in reality a several $trillions issue.

Who are those remaining CDS creditors out there? Why don't we know?

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,DannyC
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 11:42 PM

Liddy made the admission before the House that the AIG brand has been damaged too severely to operate under the AIG name going forward. Under this scenario, the company has squandered any advertising benefits from prior affiliations and/or advertising initiatives.

Taibbi made a good point on MSNBC... that "too big to fail" logically translates into "too big to exist". So, we're back to busting robber barons and enacting anti-monopoly legislation. The Roosevelts' sagacity shines like a distant beacon thru a fog of short-sighted greed.

Liddy refused to name names. There are legitimate concerns about the personal safety of the bonus beneficiaries and their families.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 11:53 PM

Hey were all 80% owners right?

I think if a whole buncha folks went on board the AIG yacht and her out for a weekend its not like were stealin.

Besides its the AIG yacht. They company changed their name to AIU.
Its like borrowing the trash they threw out.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: GUEST,DannyC
Date: 25 Mar 09 - 12:13 AM

My read (I am no expert --- look, I'm reading Rolling Stone articles to gain insight) on the investment bank/insurance company differentiator is that the investment bank is compelled by regulations/regulators to account for their exposure in a CDS arrangement - so they buy a hedge to show a limit of their exposure.

I take it that the insurance cos. did not incur the same regulatory governance and so could write as much business as they could find - with no oversight (@ $500 Billion, it looks like they were successful in finding loads of exposure --- $64 Billion in sub-prime loans - for f#*k's sake). Perhaps AIG could only operate like this due to the weakness and scarcity of resources within the Office of Thrift Supervision (AIG had apparantly manipulated the system to fall under the weak OTS's governance.)

There are some 19th Century German philosophers who confidently predicted that these sort of cataclysms would eventually occur under our current economic structures... we'll see if the West can or will recover.

<< Thanks DannyC for that remakable Taibbi primer. But:

"When investment banks write CDS deals, they hedge them. But insurance companies don't have to hedge. And . . . AIG did[n't]."

That . . . just . . . doesn't . . . sit . . . right.

I can't say what's wrong, but I keep coming back to that point. I think something - something big - is missing in relation to those two sentences. >>

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Barry Finn
Date: 25 Mar 09 - 02:19 AM

Heric, thanks for the boat ride. I couldn''t finish it though, halfway through I bailed

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: heric
Date: 26 Mar 09 - 04:16 PM

While the Standard & Poor's 500 Index is recording its best monthly rally in 17 years, Roubini predicted it will not be sustained as the U.S. economy will continue to contract through this year and investors will start "discriminating" between solvent and insolvent financial companies.

"People are going to be surprised to the downside," Roubini said.

The government is conducting stress tests of banks to determine how much more capital each will need. Roubini said once those were completed it will be evident that some banks will need to be taken over and have their good and bad assets separated before being returned to the private sector.

Geithner's Plan

Critics of Geithner's plan including Krugman, a professor at Princeton University, say the government should take over banks loaded with devalued assets, remove their top management, and dispose of the toxic securities. Sweden adopted the temporary nationalization approach in the 1990s.

Roubini, who also runs his own economics consultancy, estimates a total of $3.6 trillion of loan and securities losses in the U.S., including writedowns on $10.84 trillion of securities and losses on a total of $12.37 trillion of unsecuritized loans.

With "deflationary forces" lingering for as long as three years, Roubini said U.S. government bond yields were going to remain relatively low and that American house prices would fall as much as 20 percent more in the next 18 months. While the dollar will benefit as investors seek safe havens, it will ultimately decline as the U.S. trade deficit has to shrink, he said.

Subject: RE: BS: $100 million bonuses to AIG execs
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 26 Mar 09 - 05:23 PM

Ups and downs will continue, but look for recovery in 2010. It will be led by the execs who are being denigrated now.