DuckSouth.com

Now I don't claim to be a rocket scientist but for an ole country boy I ain't no slouch either... but.. can someone please explain to me how our Democrat Government can bail out AIG for the second time and allow them to still pay their top executives million dollar + bonuses? AIG claims they are obligated by law to pay the bonuses.

Now if I'm not mistaken... aren't bonuses at most companies based off of your job performance and/or profits that the company made at the end of the year? So...how can these executives get these bonuses when AIG lost... and I stress LOST $67 BILLION....... Yeah that's right... $67 BILLION .....last year...WTF???? ....

It's gonna get bad boys..... I hope everybody is ready for this.... Hell I wish the feds would bail my small company out...I need a F$$king Bonus!!!

Sorry for the rant guys... but the more I watch the news.... the more ammo I buy.

as pete said in my favorite movie o brother where art thou?

dat don't make no sense!

about as much sense as tits on a boar.

And still he (that tiger woods guy) can do no wrong. Anybody that speaks a harsh word is labeled as a racist. When you hand out money, no strings attached, you are gonna get screwed

RDB wrote:I need a F$$king Bonus!!!

+1

Still ain't got my christmas bonus

hey, psst....What the h3ll is a bonus???

they are obligated. these people signed contracts that stated part of there pay was a bonus. dont be mad about that. they should get their bonuses. However, THEY SHOULD BE FIRED! They have run the company in the ground. ANy of us do that and we would be fired.

Duckdawg10 wrote:they are obligated. these people signed contracts that stated part of there pay was a bonus. dont be mad about that. they should get their bonuses. However, THEY SHOULD BE FIRED! They have run the company in the ground. ANy of us do that and we would be fired.

This is correct. They signed contracts that obligate this action. Look at your new government who just had to get this bailout passed. They didn't take the time needed and you see what happens. The bonuses should be handed back over as a "showing of good faith" but you can blame Obama and his peeps for this mess. One of the many, many, many unintended consequences you will see at the hands of these idiots.

Think I have money w/ them. If so, I'm gonna pull it all!! Any ideas where I should put it, besides in yo pocket???

I understand that the bonus was part of the pay. However, it is my understanding that the US Government now owns 80% of AIG. Did they actually buy into the company as-is, without any stipulations? Can congress not override the previous contracts? I know everyone is saying lawsuit if execs don't get their money, but what could they actually get? How about we offer to let them keep their jobs........that will be this years bonus. Well, maybe for Christmas we can get them enrolled in the jelly-of-the-month club.

Deagle wrote:I understand that the bonus was part of the pay. However, it is my understanding that the US Government now owns 80% of AIG. Did they actually buy into the company as-is, without any stipulations? Can congress not override the previous contracts? I know everyone is saying lawsuit if execs don't get their money, but what could they actually get? How about we offer to let them keep their jobs........that will be this years bonus. Well, maybe for Christmas we can get them enrolled in the jelly-of-the-month club.

Do you want Congress to be able to override existing private contracts? If so, do you consider yourself to be a socialist? Because that is what you are if you think congress should be able to dissolve private contracts. If we allow Congress to arbitrarily dissolve private contracts, they essentially have the right to do whatever they want, including dissolve your mortgage and kick you out on the street as your house may better serve a "needy" family.

This is the problem and the lines are being cleverly blurred by the politicos and the MSM. Should they get bonuses, no. Do they deserve them, no. But to allow congress to dissolve private contracts creates a much larger problem...one not unlike communisim, in fact that is what it would be.

When the congress gets involved in private business, this is what you get. AIG should have been allowed to file bankruptcy, cut some fat and re-organize. At the very least, the government should have made it part of their contract with AIG that no bonuses be given within a specified period of time.

Deagle wrote:Can congress not override the previous contracts?

I know it makes sense in this case but do you really want to give the government that much power?

I think this is what makes the parties and America kind of weird on the whole government strings attached thing. Repubs want drug testing and tube tying for drug users on welfare but the dems say no go as that violates peoples rights. Then repubs want to "cling to our guns and religion" calling it a right but the dems say that its a privilage given by the government and they can take it away. Kind of like how Barbour was against the spending plan but then took all but $50mil (because of the stipulations)...of course he's not going to pass up free $$$ for his state but thinks other state govts are using it stupidly. We all hate restrictions that apply to us but also hate seeing other people with no restrictions. I agree that AIG is acting ridiculously and that Obama is an idiot but to not recognize some of our own inconsistencies would be the sin that does the most direct harm individually.

Email i got today
> Snope this !!!!!!!!!
>
> Remember when the economic crisis hit and the giant
> investment banking
> firm of Bear Sterns filed for bankruptcy? The company asked
> for
> financial assistance from the government but Congress
> decided (wisely)
> that private businesses make their own decisions and should
> be held
> accountable for them. Consequently, Bear Sterns went out of
> business.
>
> Then several months later AIG, the huge insurance company,
> announced
> it too was in financial difficulty. Congress did a 180 turn
> in their
> philosophy and provided bailout money for AIG. Why the
> change of
> heart? Was it out of concern for the tens of thousands of
> citizens
> who might lose money? Or perhaps Congress was suddenly
> concerned for
> the economy as a whole. Well, it was nothing that
> complicated.
>
> AIG INSURES THE PENSION TRUST FUND FOR MEMBERS OF THE
> UNITED STATES CONGRESS
>
>

farmerc83 wrote:

Deagle wrote:Can congress not override the previous contracts?

I know it makes sense in this case but do you really want to give the government that much power?

In this case, YES! I know the lawyers will say that it sets precedents, but so did bailing them out......twice.

I can remember when everybody accused the Government of being in bed with the oil companies. Looks like the new President has a new group of friends.

Boy am I glad I sell insurance for AIG! Maybe some of your tax dollars will make its way into my wallet.

they are obligated. these people signed contracts that stated part of there pay was a bonus. dont be mad about that. they should get their bonuses. However, THEY SHOULD BE FIRED! They have run the company in the ground. ANy of us do that and we would be fired.

Ok.... well why not fire them based on job performance so you won't have to give them bonuses???

What are they gonna do? Sue a bankrupt company? Good luck getting blood out of a turnip!!!

I think I'll ask Congress for my bailout for my company... as a small business owner I ought to be entitled to a huge bonus...That's what I promised myself when I started it 20 years ago.... Thank you Federal Guvment..I'ze finully gonna gets wats I gotz commin tuz me!!!!!