Jump to content

ANOTHER BONUS--I GIVE UP


BigStewMan

Recommended Posts

If the government is paying these individuals, should their names not be public knowledge? In some provinces and states, if you make over a certain dollar value, your salary is published. In Ontario, it's $100,000. If they want the money, they should step up to the plate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how about the example of the AIG insurance salesman. He gets a nominal salary of 18k and 3% of all term life sales he makes and 5% for all other insuracne products. Most AIG saleman from this pool average 50k in bonus. A few of them have the golden touch, truly great salesman, and are in the million dollar club.

So again, do you stiff these guys? cap em at 20K?

peace,

TommyK

I agree with you. Why did we bail out the company to begin with. It should have went bankrupt but they said it was to big. So when we gave them all that money with no strings attached aren't they suppose to keep doing buisness like they were before. If they were not suppose to keep doing buisness as before then why did we bail them out? How about the 93 BILLION that went out AIG's back door to European banks. Heck a couple hundred million is no big deal. These people had the contracts for compensation, don't they have to honor them. When this government thinks it can rewrite contracts just because it feels like it cause it looks bad we are all in for a lot of trouble. They have a little step from there to tell everyone what they can earn or make. That's called socialism again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the government is paying these individuals, should their names not be public knowledge? In some provinces and states, if you make over a certain dollar value, your salary is published. In Ontario, it's $100,000. If they want the money, they should step up to the plate.

i just read that AIG hasn't provided the names despite being asked. cuomo in ny is supposedly calling for an investigation as to why they haven't provided the names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AIG execs are arguing that the bonus are part of a contract.

Gee, it's funny how a contract didn't matter when it came to the pension funds they insure.

I want the names and addresses of the AIG execs who recieived bonuses. Anyone want to join me?

[li][6][W]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree the government should not tell any non-government subsidized company what they can pay...as soon as someone needs a handout from them they should be able to dictate some terms. Commissions are one thing and really separate from bonuses, people seem to have them confused.

I say bailout should then have pay scale to government rates. We cannot afford this junk with no compromises anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an absolute outrage, and slap in the face to the new administration. AIG is heartless and without dignity and self-respect. They are fully aware of their significance to the economy, and are flaunting it to us, the real tax payers, and to all gutless wimps on Capital Hill and the White House.

How could AIG be granted so much money, now over $60 Billion, without there being any contingincies to protect against this kind of crapp? How can this keep happening? The Lawyers on Capital Hill have proved themselfs quick on the draw when it comes to giving away record volumes of tax payer money, yet none are accepting responsibility for what is happening to us; Again!

How many more times does this have to happen before someone realizes there's a problem! Who's stepping up to the plate to make the tough decisions! This kind of politics and behavior pisses me off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

too funny. it turns out that geitner had this in the bailout plan since we CANNOT let aig fail (last year) and even dodd (this jan) added an amendment that allowed these rentention bonuses. either we lend them the money so that they can continue to do business or we don't. i had voted not but we did so now let them do business. if them not getting bonuses makes you feel better (how does them not getting bonuses improve your lot one itoa?), then you are well on your way to socialism. by the way, last time i looked, the good to excellent employees get bonuses....unless we start looking at things like marx. i guess we could do things the way the education system is done.

this is a great distraction. how much pork was in the last bill that was signed? 3.7 BILLION!!

it's working ain't it....where's my pitch fork....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IRT the bonus talk above...the way them not getting a bonus and it's affect on ME is that's $167 million less cash they needed, the cost to figure and distribute that, etc.

You can't say since 3.7 billion was wasted in one place, $167 million in another is ok. This is how all this stuff has been fluffed up to handing out billions at a time.

It's time we really look at costs and expenses and the write offs that go with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bodcow boy hit some good points. The execs say that the good talent will leave without getting it. People cry about that but the fact is, they really will leave. Some people where not happy with what they got this past year, and people just resigned. Like came in Jan 2nd, and left Jan 2. Others have left over the course of the new year. If you lose some top talent, it maybe hard to get people back, not that their is lack of talent poll currently, but I'm sure some people will still demand ridiculous salary even if they are jobless, just based on the position they want to fill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can walk then...good luck finding an equal position in this economy. There should be no reason a company needs a bailout if it's performing. It's it's not then bonuses are usually the first thing to go.

The last 3 years we recieved no bonuses. This year our matching 401K contribution was pulled. We are a top 10 homebuilder. We are doing what's right for our company and not going to the government.

Commissions are still paid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can the US Govt 'own' 80% of a company and not have a legal right to control it. 80 is more than 50 isn't it?

Because owning common stock on grants you rights to assets and earnings. Nothing to do with day-to-ay operations. Each share gives you a vote at the board-meetings. What is traded on the market is common stock. You also have preffered stock, which is different. In terms of what the gov't had originally, and converted over to common.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can walk then...good luck finding an equal position in this economy. There should be no reason a company needs a bailout if it's performing. It's it's not then bonuses are usually the first thing to go.

Wall streert works in 'weird' ways. If the division of the company you work for(says 10 people), say ABC, made 2 billion this year for the company, yet a differenet division lost 10 billion. What incentive does the company have to keep you if both divisions are on equal footing. This is one of those arguements.

How about this. So instead of getting a bonus at year end, lets call it an 'overtime' check. Or what if they take what they made as base+salary last year, and that now becomes you base. No more bonus's, but you still make the same.

Tons of ways to play games.

I'm not saying I for any of it or agree, but this is just stuff I see, and stuff I think of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well the news is out now....73 that don't even work for AIG anymore + were in the very areas that led to the crushing losses AIG suffered recieved 1 million dollars or more out of this bonus pool.

One can defend this all they want, but at the end of the day it just keeps pushing our dollar down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well the news is out now....73 that don't even work for AIG anymore + were in the very areas that led to the crushing losses AIG suffered recieved 1 million dollars or more out of this bonus pool.

One can defend this all they want, but at the end of the day it just keeps pushing our dollar down.

We have no grievance against the people that got the bonus. They had contracts signed over a year ago. We need to be mad at CONGRESS who voted for the bail out and the language in the bill which allowed them keep their contracts. Be mad at Chris Dodd senator from Conn.whose admendment in the stimulus bill that made sure that AIG had to honour those contracts. Be mad at Geitner (tax cheat treasury secretary) who just handed over 170 BILLION to this company and didn't see this in the bill. Blame Obama, he said the stimulus bill had to be passed before it could be read.

Blame yourself if you voted for any of the congressmen that voted for the stimulus bill in the house or the senate or if you voted for Vladimir Obama the new Kruschev of the USA.

This is the problem with socialism, when the government tries to run buisnesses they do dumb sh**. Like worring about a little 165 million when you just handed them over 93 Billion to waste as they saw fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO the bipartisan system we have is outdated. It may have worked well when our population was very centralized in a few major cities...but now it's just a machine that keeps old ideas moving forward.

People's money is the most absolute sacred thing in our world. We use online banking, credit cards, etc. All electronic and all absolutely tied to a person, tie in biometrics and you should be sure of who is casting the vote.

Since there is also far too much to vote on manually, things are bundled together. This works great for lobbying....get a unpopular item on a popular ticket and just don't focus on it. Get people to vote for the 'good' issue.

I say we open up the voting electronically and everything is single issue. You vote on an item or not. Heck even keep a running tab so people know if their vote may matter. People worry about someone buying votes...it happens rarely as the amount of money it would take to generate enough movement to be influential just isn't going to happen. No more electoral college, popular vote takes the power...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean you'd rather have that wannabe cowboy and his sidekick hannibal lecter aka dick cheney reaming you at the pump.

Quote Obama in the campaign when gas was $4.00/gallon " The problem isn't that it is $4.00 per gallon it is just how fast that the price incresed to there."

Which means He doesn't mind you paying $4.00 per gallon as long as a big percentage of it is tax. Look at cap and trade, just a way to tax all energy consumption in the US. The rich the poor and everyone in between will pay as the price of all goods and services rise to cover the tax. The little secret is also that it does not cut the production of any CO2 either. There is also no definitive proof that you need to cap CO2 emission either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...