AIG and the Nazis

[Ishmael]

Idiot.

The amendment was offered on the floor of the senate, passed the senate, sailed through conference, and was signed into law by the president. The amendment as inserted by Sen. Chris Dodd.

In reality I have no argument with the amendment as passed. It merely explicitly prohibits ex post facto tampering with contracts in place. What I do find amusing is that the individual who put that amendment in place is among the handfull making the most noise to the press about the whole affair.

And the absolute disengenuous lies by the politicos, and parroted by a willing, or abysmally stupid press, that they 'were taken completely by surprise' by the whole thing. The contracts have been a matter of public record for over a year now.

And as it turns out the contracts were exactly what I suggested might be one of the alternative reasons in the OP. That being that the contracts were executed as a 'stop loss' contingency. When the decision was made by AIG last year to colse down that division key individuals were offered contracts to stay on to insure an orderly shut down of that business unit. Without those contract those individuals would have, and rightfully so, left the company immediately to seek new employment. That would have left AIG without ANYONE that understood the business operations of that division and probably would have resulted in the complete collapse of the "company too big to fail."

And now the president, the congress, and the press want to confiscate the monies to be paid to those individuals under contracts written to prevent a complete meltdown of the company. They, and anyone that buys into the rationale of the confiscation, look like petty little thieves.

If they are successful in their attempts you are going to see shockwaves ripple throughout the entire financial sector that are ultimately gong to fuck you over even more than you're getting fucked over by these clowns in government today.

Ishmael

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

UD, what percentage would you say the Democrats are culpable for in this mess?

0%?

50%?

Right or wrong, doesn't "The President" get the blame for what occurs on his watch?

(Indirectly, I voted for Obama by NOT voting for McCain.)

I say it takes two to Tango and I'm looking around for Republicans to blame and the only one I really see is Bush who was panicked by his Democrat Treasury Sec and aided and abetted by a Democrat Congress which vowed to never, EVER let BushCO & WMDs spook them into getting stuck on stupid again...

And yet, here we are, stuck on stupid because everyone is following the Bush plan including Obama who is content with doubling down on stupid.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

UD???






Answer the question, give us a percentage...

 

[unregistered]

 

[Lavared]

Senator Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) on Monday night floated the idea of taxing American International Group (AIG) bonus recipients so the government could recoup some or all of the $450 million the company is paying to employees in its financial products unit. Within hours, the idea spread to both houses of Congress, with lawmakers proposing an AIG bonus tax.

The bonus recipients are already being taxed on their bonuses. It's called income tax and, as anyone who has ever received a bonus or lump sum payment can tell you, the money is taxed at a hefty rate. If you receive a $1,000,000 bonus, payroll taxes are calculated as if you received that amount weekly and that shoves you into the highest tax rate possible.

 

[TurdFergeson]

Tell the truth:

The AIG BOZOS...

...will pass the costs down.

Just like always.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Tell the truth:

The AIG BOZOS...

...will pass the costs down.

Just like always.

Takes one to know one...

 

[TurdFergeson]

Takes one to know one...

Since I know you are connecting via the "interwebby" , thia UBoob are thouest:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njBgG9ZOoQI

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Since I know you are connecting via the "interwebby" , thia UBoob are thouest:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njBgG9ZOoQI

What the fuck is that gibberish? I am connected to a land-line...

 

[miles]

Yawn. This is just small potatoes.

Obama will need a diversion soon. Look for a rocket attack or the capture of a high-level terrorist.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Yawn. This is just small potatoes.

Obama will need a diversion soon. Look for a rocket attack or the capture of a high-level terrorist.

He's going to have Cheney arrested?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Ishmael]

Now Congress is contemplating a piece of legislation that singles these people out for special punishment...without a trial. This is a Bill Of Attainder in my opinion:

Definition: A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

The Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed."

And for those who think that a bill of attainder only applies to the life of a person or group of persons, I give yo the words of John Marshall Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in Fletcher v Peck 1810:

"A bill of attainder may affect the life of an individual, or may confiscate his property or both"

Which gets right back to my statement that if the congress takes the proposed actions, and the president signs the bill, you might as well take the constitution and burn it.

Ishmael

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

This is just the Obamanation's warm-up act, and it should come as no shock or surprise because he told us exactly what he intended to do and people chose not to hear it, they chose not to believe it, or they chose to believe that no matter how bad a President he was, he HAD to be better than a Republican, especially one dumb enough to have someone as inexperienced and stupid as Sarah Palin on the ticket; a smart "experienced" socialist was OBVIOUSLY the best choice over another Bush term.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Which gets right back to my statement that if the congress takes the proposed actions, and the president signs the bill, you might as well take the constitution and burn it.

Ishmael

Again, Obama repeatedly indicated his disdain for the Constitution and the Supreme Court, still no surprise on my part.

 

[Lancecastor]

Contract law can get really convoluted in the detail, so maybe someone with more contract law experience than I have will chime in.

In a contract of two parties any one party can attempt to change the terms of the contract. But unless the second party agrees to it, it's probably going to end up in court. If BOTH parties agree to reopen the contract for modification, then they may do so. And that is pretty much what's happening with the UAW and the auto makers. The Union members themselves have no contract, the contract is held by the union. You, as a union member, don't have a leg to stand on. You can leave the union, or join with your fellow members to sue the union, although I don't have a clue as to what you might win if you prevailed in the courts.

The AIG contracts were personal contracts. Each recipient of the bonuses had their own contract and while most of them were boiler plate, they were contracts executed between the company and the individual. Unless the various individuals consent to reopen the contract, it is what it is and the company is compelled to live up to their portion of the contract.

Back to the UAW, the auto workers, and the government. The reasons the government wants to keep the companies from going tits up are two fold, the first is a payoff to the unions, the second is to try to preserve a segment of the economy, and last, but not least, is the fact that the government would have to pick up ALL of the retirement accounts from those companies, albeit at a reduced payout rate. The government doesn't want to absorb those retirement responsibilitites.

This is a case of a union being far too successful in their collective bargaining tactics. The companies agreed to contracts that were unsustainable in the long term. It's been known for decades upon decades that the auto industry was very vulnerable to the effects of economic downturns. Over 20 years of uninterrupted economic growth spoiled everyone. The unions, the companies, and the government can all step up and take their turn in the dunking stool. They're all to blame.

Ishmael

That's all good common sense, which is really what most contract law and basic economic theory boils down to.

Anytime I've received a large bonus, it was contracted for....that's usually the only way you can get it from an employer anyway; otherwise they usually try to hang on to "their" cash.

You make your targets, fulfill your contract, you get your bonus. Simple.

When Federov first went to the Red Wings, he was offered a 29 mill bonus if the Red Wings won the Cup that season....now Russians really don't care about the Stanley Cup, but they do care about American Dollars, so Federov went out and practically single-handedly lifted the Wings to their first Cup in decades and got his 29 Mill...and he's never played that way since, likely because he's never been paid that way.

And yeah, a big bonus gets taxed at source, so you rarely get more than half of it anyway; the government gets the rest....so 100 million in bonuses paid by AIG sends 50 mill to the Gov right away.

As for the UAW...$55./hr to run an air wrench? No wonder the American auto industry is dead.

Personally, I'm looking forward to a Chinese Chev Malibu for $10,000.

 

[hogjack]

You make your targets,
fulfill your contract,
you get your bonus.
Simple.

Incompetence and failure are not traditional bonus goals but what the hell, rewarding ineptitude has plenty of precedent.

Leave the stupid fuckers alone. They'll all blow the wad somewhere else anyway or the Federal government would have burned through it in a flash.

 

[unregistered]

 

[the_tom_cat]

How Can they Fool Us Today?

How Can they Fool Us Today?

Am I the only person who wonders about all this AIG crap and how the BO govt is trying to fool us again?

They say “Hey! A little bit of this money went to corporate bonus’s – get mad!!!!”

They do not tell you how much money they got in campaign donations… How come no one is demanding all the campaign contributions get sent back???

How come no one is wondering why this same government that gave out all the money did not do the Constitution requirement of oversight?? ( Dems – that means they were suppose to manage how it was spent… )

How come no one mentions that Tim Geitner was the person who set up the payout while working in New York??? Yet no that the tax cheat is running the IRS we have to pretend Obama and staff new nothing about it…

How about Chris Dodd 1 year ago agreeing the future bonus’s had to be paid out legally and all of sudden he forgets??? Also, Sen. Dodd was AIG’s largest single recipient of campaign donations during the 2008 election cycle with $103,100, according to opensecrets.org.


Since Obama and Dodd got HUGE campaign contributions lets just call them bonus’s and tell them to give them back!!!


The same Chris Dodd that wanted HIS mortgage to be a gift while Rome was burning and he was saying along with Barney Frank that all is well at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack and those evil Republicans are just trying to stop the poor black people from getting home loans… Credit worthy or not –

Now the the Democrats destroyed are entire economy they want to give away trillions of dollars to hide their MULTIPLE BLUNDERS and blame Bush and SOON you are about to have to pay for this… Each and every one of us is going to have our taxes ESCALATE…

Hold on to your ass – they are coming after you and your freedoms… You do understand every time they create a new law and a new tax our freedom diminishes??

You do understand that correct??

 

[off2bed]

Now Congress is contemplating a piece of legislation that singles these people out for special punishment...without a trial. This is a Bill Of Attainder in my opinion:

Definition: A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

The Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed."

And for those who think that a bill of attainder only applies to the life of a person or group of persons, I give yo the words of John Marshall Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in Fletcher v Peck 1810:

"A bill of attainder may affect the life of an individual, or may confiscate his property or both"

That's a good definition of social justice. Not being a lawyer, I didn't realize it was already illegal. Marx and the Democrats are all about Social Justice. Fuck 'em.

 

[unregistered]

 

[off2bed]

It won't last much longer.

 

[the_tom_cat]

Defend the Constituion???

You have to be kidding me...

IN the last 20 years it has been nearly demolished and we sit back and watch...

I do think all the tea parties across the nation do show that some people are finally tired of being kicked around...

 

[rosco rathbone]

There's a firestorm of populist rage in the NYT editorial "comments" section re AIG/Geithner.

 

[Slowlane]

Funny, isn't it? How all the folks who jumped on Bush every time they thought he did anything even slightly shady are more than happy to defend the democrats and their blatant theft?

If the bonuses are in the contract (as they seem to be) then what the dems are doing is nothing short of theft, much like a windfall profits tax ix theft.