|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rainbowfied Mouse Vice Captain
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:28 am
 |
|
|
 |
That's right, it's been in the news the past few days (and I recovered from my wisdom teeth surgery to talk about it!) So, AIG, and a few other companies that the American's bailed out are now using their money to pay bonuses to the executives of the department that caused the problems in the first place!!! The house is now requesting that the names be released, and are planning to give a 90% tax on the bonuses of the executives making over $250,000/year for the bad use of American Money. AIG lawyers and attourneys say releasing the names is a threat, after many vicious letters, and attacks on everyday workers at AIG.
Quote: The bill would impose a 90 percent tax on bonuses given to employees with family incomes above $250,000 at American International Group and other companies that have received at least $5 billion in government bailout money. It would apply to any such bonuses issued since Dec. 31.
[ x ]
Discuss-
Do you think the names should be released? Why?
90% Tax? Too much, or a good sin tax?
Socialism? America has put public money into companies, and now we're seeing control of them because of the money put into them... opinions? Is it moral to give money to these companies, or should we allow them to collapse?
I personally believe we should release them to the public, our money is in the company, we have every right to know who is receiving our money is such a way. Although I agree there may be risks, I trust Americans enough not to do something as stupid as kill an executive, aside from that, the names don't have to be released to the public, only to our congress and other key authorities in the matter.
As far as I'm concerned, give us the money we spent back! They don't deserve it, especially since they caused the problem.
Socialism, no. I think that it is just a way to help the company out, although I think we've learned our lesson that the government needs to let the company collapse in future cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:14 am
|
|
|
|
Rainbowfied Mouse Do you think the names should be released? Why?
no, they are private citizens and we already seeing these people being mobbed at their homes. The people that should be punished are the politicians who gave AIG the money in the first place.
Quote: 90% Tax? Too much, or a good sin tax?
Too much, the bonuses were in the contract, Geitner knew about them, congress knew about them and should've known better than to give AIG the money.
Quote: Socialism? America has put public money into companies, and now we're seeing control of them because of the money put into them... opinions? Is it moral to give money to these companies, or should we allow them to collapse?
This is socialism. We should allow them to collapse, congress should have never bailed out any of the companies in the first place. In order for capitilism to succeed, failing companies ought to be allowed to collapse, to make room for more successful company.
BTW, while we were so focused on congress's anger toward AIG bonuses, congress printed trillions of dollars, causing our dollar to sink even more. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rainbowfied Mouse Vice Captain
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:17 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:44 pm
|
|
|
|
Quote: Do you think the names should be released? Why?
Absolutely not. It's a public safety issue. They're incompetant workers, that doesn't mean they deserve to be the targets of public reprisals.
Quote: 90% Tax? Too much, or a good sin tax?
It's a bad idea for a number of reasons. First, it would be a bill of attainder and would, therefore, violate the Constitutional limits on Congressional power. Second, it would be an ex post facto law, also a violation of the Constitution. Finally, even if you could adjust the law to target everybody rather than just AIG execs, you would be punishing numerous innocent people for AIG's transgression.
So far government hasn't acted in an ownership capacity. When it does, it will be socialism. So far this is just a massive subsidy bill with poor oversight.
Quote: America has put public money into companies, and now we're seeing control of them because of the money put into them... opinions?
You haven't seen control yet. Control will be when TARP money is used as a pretext for requiring approval from Congress for business decisions. Right now this is a case of AIG taking TARP money and using it as they see fit, and Congress throwing a fit over it.
Quote: Is it moral to give money to these companies, or should we allow them to collapse?
Morality has nothing to do with it. The question is whether or not it's better to let large financial institutions collapse, or to try to subsidize them through the crisis. Neither option is good. TARP was an attempt to prevent the collapse of the financial sector of the economy. With manufacturing already in a shambles the loss of finance would leave us with another gutted sector of the economy. Particularly, we would be worse off when our shattered financial system is gobbled up by foreign banking institutions and systems. The would leave our manufacturing base in China and our credit base in some mixture of Europe and the Middle East. On the other hand more TARP money is basically paying to keep a dysfunctional financial system in operation without meaningful reform. Not to mention, we'll be making a very small, select class of incompetant people rich in spite of their own incompetance. If I had to choose, I'd rather save a major sector of the economy than see it placed into the hands of geopolitical rivals. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
