Should the names of the AIG bonus receivers be made public ?

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's not stupid. If you reward people who are responsible for wasting those trillions of dollars, you encourage this to happen again. These people should be in jail, not getting bonuses.

I dunno...in a way I agree but mostly I feel like this is just a dog and pony show designed to throw people off track...

I just don't like the hoopla over something that we all should have seen coming.

I think when Obama and Co say they are "shocked" about these bonuses I think they are full of shit.

Nothing that these AIG crooks and their ilk do should be shocking anyone anymore.

 

[nageov3t]

at any rank, can an argument really be made that the rank and file AIG workers are the ones responsible for the mess?

if the CEO of my company makes some batshit insane decisions, there's not much I can do about it as a line worker but continue trying to work my hardest.

 

[Deeko]

Absolutely not, there is no way in hell anyone should even consider making these names public. Anyone that thinks the answer is yes is wrong. There is no other option, there is no disagreeing with that. I am appalled that 35 people voted yes in this poll. You all should be ashamed of yourselves.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's not stupid. If you reward people who are responsible for wasting those trillions of dollars, you encourage this to happen again. These people should be in jail, not getting bonuses.

I'm getting a bonus from my company at the end of the month. If the executives made poor decisions and the company was going to go bankrupt, and the government made a decision to bail them out, should I have my bonus revoked and my address made public? Keep in mind I signed this agreement a year ago. and had nothing to do with said decision.

As per my previous post - if your answer is yes, you have serious mental health issues and should seek immediate medical care.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: KGBMAN
I am a strong proponent of transparency and Sunshine laws. :sun:

All taxpayers should have the information to know where our money is going.

I agree.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's not stupid. If you reward people who are responsible for wasting those trillions of dollars, you encourage this to happen again. These people should be in jail, not getting bonuses.

I'm getting a bonus from my company at the end of the month. If the executives made poor decisions and the company was going to go bankrupt, and the government made a decision to bail them out, should I have my bonus revoked and my address made public? Keep in mind I signed this agreement a year ago. and had nothing to do with said decision.

As per my previous post - if your answer is yes, you have serious mental health issues and should seek immediate medical care.

You seem to have a few problems yourself if you think a totally bankrupt company can afford to give bonuses.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's not stupid. If you reward people who are responsible for wasting those trillions of dollars, you encourage this to happen again. These people should be in jail, not getting bonuses.

How many of those that got bonuses are responsible for AIG situtation?

You dont know do you?

You do know it was mainly the department dealing with credit and derivatives that took AIG down. Last I checked AIG had departments and division that made money.

Most bonuses on Wall Street are for bringing in money. A few years ago someone get IIRC a $57million bonus, and he wasnt an executive.

And now Obama plans to regulate ALL executive pay for banks, wall street, and "other companies."

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's not stupid. If you reward people who are responsible for wasting those trillions of dollars, you encourage this to happen again. These people should be in jail, not getting bonuses.

I'm getting a bonus from my company at the end of the month. If the executives made poor decisions and the company was going to go bankrupt, and the government made a decision to bail them out, should I have my bonus revoked and my address made public? Keep in mind I signed this agreement a year ago. and had nothing to do with said decision.

As per my previous post - if your answer is yes, you have serious mental health issues and should seek immediate medical care.

You seem to have a few problems yourself if you think a totally bankrupt company can afford to give bonuses.

If the govt didnt step in the profitable parts of AIG would have been snapped in up bankruptcy and those people in them would have still gotten bonuses.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's not stupid. If you reward people who are responsible for wasting those trillions of dollars, you encourage this to happen again. These people should be in jail, not getting bonuses.

I'm getting a bonus from my company at the end of the month. If the executives made poor decisions and the company was going to go bankrupt, and the government made a decision to bail them out, should I have my bonus revoked and my address made public? Keep in mind I signed this agreement a year ago. and had nothing to do with said decision.

As per my previous post - if your answer is yes, you have serious mental health issues and should seek immediate medical care.

You seem to have a few problems yourself if you think a totally bankrupt company can afford to give bonuses.

If the govt didnt step in the profitable parts of AIG would have been snapped in up bankruptcy and those people in them would have still gotten bonuses.

Maybe at 10 cents on the dollar.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's not stupid. If you reward people who are responsible for wasting those trillions of dollars, you encourage this to happen again. These people should be in jail, not getting bonuses.

I'm getting a bonus from my company at the end of the month. If the executives made poor decisions and the company was going to go bankrupt, and the government made a decision to bail them out, should I have my bonus revoked and my address made public? Keep in mind I signed this agreement a year ago. and had nothing to do with said decision.

As per my previous post - if your answer is yes, you have serious mental health issues and should seek immediate medical care.

You seem to have a few problems yourself if you think a totally bankrupt company can afford to give bonuses.

Do you have a job? Do you know what a bonus is? I know the word implies that its some kind of prize for a good deed - but in the business world, its simply a part of your contract. An employee signs a contract saying they will receive x amount of money. A bonus is a lump sum paid for a specific purpose, sometimes for joining a company, sometimes for staying with a company, sometimes for personal performance, sometimes for company performance.

If the criteria set forth in the contract are met, the company legally CAN NOT rescind the bonus. If they do, they'll be successfully sued into oblivion.

By bailing out AIG, the government gave them money to fulfill their obligations and keep running as a company. This includes paying their employees what they are legally obliged to pay them. If we think that because AIG was bankrupt, they shouldn't be paying their employees, they shouldn't have been bailed out & they should have gone under.

Under corporate law, when a company is dissolved, the first people to receive payment on liquidation is employees, before any creditors. AIG absolutely did the right thing from the law's perspective. There is no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

However, I digress - this thread is not about whether or not they should have paid the bonus. This thread is about whether or not we should make employees addresses public. The answer to that is a complete, emphatic, NO! Not only would that be HIGHLY illegal, its ethically stupid. I would estimate 99.9% of AIG employees that are receiving money had nothing to do with the company going under - why on earth should they be subjected to death threats and public humiliation?

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's not stupid. If you reward people who are responsible for wasting those trillions of dollars, you encourage this to happen again. These people should be in jail, not getting bonuses.

I'm getting a bonus from my company at the end of the month. If the executives made poor decisions and the company was going to go bankrupt, and the government made a decision to bail them out, should I have my bonus revoked and my address made public? Keep in mind I signed this agreement a year ago. and had nothing to do with said decision.

As per my previous post - if your answer is yes, you have serious mental health issues and should seek immediate medical care.

You seem to have a few problems yourself if you think a totally bankrupt company can afford to give bonuses.

Do you have a job? Do you know what a bonus is? I know the word implies that its some kind of prize for a good deed - but in the business world, its simply a part of your contract. An employee signs a contract saying they will receive x amount of money. A bonus is a lump sum paid for a specific purpose, sometimes for joining a company, sometimes for staying with a company, sometimes for personal performance, sometimes for company performance.

If the criteria set forth in the contract are met, the company legally CAN NOT rescind the bonus. If they do, they'll be successfully sued into oblivion.

By bailing out AIG, the government gave them money to fulfill their obligations and keep running as a company. This includes paying their employees what they are legally obliged to pay them. If we think that because AIG was bankrupt, they shouldn't be paying their employees, they shouldn't have been bailed out & they should have gone under.

Under corporate law, when a company is dissolved, the first people to receive payment on liquidation is employees, before any creditors. AIG absolutely did the right thing from the law's perspective. There is no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

However, I digress - this thread is not about whether or not they should have paid the bonus. This thread is about whether or not we should make employees addresses public. The answer to that is a complete, emphatic, NO! Not only would that be HIGHLY illegal, its ethically stupid. I would estimate 99.9% of AIG employees that are receiving money had nothing to do with the company going under - why on earth should they be subjected to death threats and public humiliation?

I reject the obviously faulty notion that one needs to have a "bonus" to do what one is paid to do. That is what your salary is for. Continuing to work for a successful company that can pay that salary and provide you with a stable job is your incentive to do a good job.

As such, asking a bankrupt company to pay million dollar bonuses is totally and completely ludicrous.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: sciwizam

Originally posted by: chess9
We don't know anything about the people who received the bonuses. Did they single-handedly, or in concert, bring down the American economy or some constituent part? Probably not. But, even if they did, disclosing their names would not help the government or us, and would subject them to the possibility of physical harm. Who wants that on their conscience?

So, no. This is a very very bad idea.

-Robert

For more clarity on who's receiving the bonuses and if they are responsible for the mess and how are they receiving a retaining bonus if they have left the company, here is a clip form the AIG hearing yesterday.

Text

Drag the slider to around 4hrs 22mins and wait till the questions were answered which ends around 4hrs 29min.

Various parts to the story, but it looks like a witch hunt, doesn't it? Still, witch hunt or not, this entire thing is a silly distraction away from many hundreds of billions, truly a magnitude of many thousands more than these bonuses.

Those names are all available. But Americans are kinda screwed. The British part of AIG was what stole all the Money. = Bank of england = Rothschild. Almost all the people involved are Britts. The top gog I would say has less than 60 days of life befor its rightfully taken from him by citizen law . Which now is above government law in eyes of masses.

Just google british bastards and you can find all their names. For AIG to say they won't hand out list is pure BS. List of names go to AIG british arm. and top executes = list of names.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

I reject the obviously faulty notion that one needs to have a "bonus" to do what one is paid to do. That is what your salary is for. Continuing to work for a successful company that can pay that salary and provide you with a stable job is your incentive to do a good job.

As such, asking a bankrupt company to pay million dollar bonuses is totally and completely ludicrous.

I get a regular bonus as a part of my job. A bonus is just another form of compensation. REGARDLESS - its illegal and ethically wrong to even consider releasing the names of those people. They're just doing their jobs.

Your last paragraph is a moot point. Bankrupt companies legally must pay employee contracts first, don't you understand that? There is ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL RECOURSE TO NOT PAY THE BONUS. Once the contract was signed, it was done. You can dislike the contract, but that does not change the fact that once signed, it must be followed.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

I reject the obviously faulty notion that one needs to have a "bonus" to do what one is paid to do. That is what your salary is for. Continuing to work for a successful company that can pay that salary and provide you with a stable job is your incentive to do a good job.

As such, asking a bankrupt company to pay million dollar bonuses is totally and completely ludicrous.

I get a regular bonus as a part of my job. A bonus is just another form of compensation. REGARDLESS - its illegal and ethically wrong to even consider releasing the names of those people. They're just doing their jobs.

Your last paragraph is a moot point. Bankrupt companies legally must pay employee contracts first, don't you understand that? There is ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL RECOURSE TO NOT PAY THE BONUS. Once the contract was signed, it was done. You can dislike the contract, but that does not change the fact that once signed, it must be followed.

Those people are known . To all that matter. They are dead people. They stole trillians from retiring americans. They will die. They should be killed. Their scum.

http://business.maktoob.com/Ne...robe_into_AIG_unit.htm

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

I reject the obviously faulty notion that one needs to have a "bonus" to do what one is paid to do. That is what your salary is for. Continuing to work for a successful company that can pay that salary and provide you with a stable job is your incentive to do a good job.

As such, asking a bankrupt company to pay million dollar bonuses is totally and completely ludicrous.

I get a regular bonus as a part of my job. A bonus is just another form of compensation. REGARDLESS - its illegal and ethically wrong to even consider releasing the names of those people. They're just doing their jobs.

Your last paragraph is a moot point. Bankrupt companies legally must pay employee contracts first, don't you understand that? There is ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL RECOURSE TO NOT PAY THE BONUS. Once the contract was signed, it was done. You can dislike the contract, but that does not change the fact that once signed, it must be followed.

Where does it say that taxpayer money should be used to pay bonuses? I must have missed that part.

Give them their bonuses at the rate of 10 cents on the dollar(or whatever it works out to), but just because the taxpayer is bailing out the company to expect the taxpayer to make good on a contrtact it had nothing to do with is unethical and immoral IMO. Fave it, the bonus is bogus.

 

[Deeko]

It doesn't work that way. The government gave them bailout money to fulfill their fiscal obligations. The first fiscal obligation for any company is to pay its employees. If you don't want taxpayer money going to pay AIG employees, don't bail out AIG. Its that simple.

You legally cannot do your 10 cents on the dollar nonsense. The employee could sue for the other 90%, and would win. As long as the company exists, the company must pay its employees as their contracts are written. Period. I don't know why you think there is a way around that.

Again, this is digressing from the topic, which is the release of those names. That is illegal and wrong on all levels, and if you disagree, you are wrong, and frankly a poor excuse for a human being.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Here let me help AIG out . A hidden name .

Joseph Cassano.

http://voices.washingtonpost.c...he_man_who_brough.html

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Here let me help AIG out . A hidden name .

Joseph Cassano.

http://voices.washingtonpost.c...he_man_who_brough.html

He hasn't been with the company for over a year. What in the hell does that have to do with this thread?

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: Deeko
It doesn't work that way. The government gave them bailout money to fulfill their fiscal obligations. The first fiscal obligation for any company is to pay its employees. If you don't want taxpayer money going to pay AIG employees, don't bail out AIG. Its that simple.

You legally cannot do your 10 cents on the dollar nonsense. The employee could sue for the other 90%, and would win. As long as the company exists, the company must pay its employees as their contracts are written. Period. I don't know why you think there is a way around that.

Again, this is digressing from the topic, which is the release of those names. That is illegal and wrong on all levels, and if you disagree, you are wrong, and frankly a poor excuse for a human being.

You're the miserable excuse for a human being if you can't see (or don't care) that the taxpayer doesn't WANT TO PAY BONUSES. That is not what the bailout is for, it's so people can continue to have jobs. They need to learn to live on less, a LOT less. Just like the rest of us.

I personally could care less if they bail out AIG. I think all the whizbangers need a reality check on what it really takes to earn a buck. Their heads have gotten so big it's truly pathetic.

Good luck with druming up support for million dollar bonues. Your going to have to do better then insults and innuendo to convince anybody other then fellow bonus hogs.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: Deeko


You legally cannot do your 10 cents on the dollar nonsense. The employee could sue for the other 90%, and would win. As long as the company exists, the company must pay its employees as their contracts are written. Period. I don't know why you think there is a way around that.

LOL. Sue a beggar and get a louse. In case you haven't noticed, the mighty AIG has been reduced to being nothing but a beggar in this pony show.

 

[JD50]

Obviously these people should be forced to work for free.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Deeko


You legally cannot do your 10 cents on the dollar nonsense. The employee could sue for the other 90%, and would win. As long as the company exists, the company must pay its employees as their contracts are written. Period. I don't know why you think there is a way around that.

LOL. Sue a beggar and get a louse. In case you haven't noticed, the mighty AIG has been reduced to being nothing but a beggar in this pony show.

If they had the money to pay the bonuses, obviously they would have still had it, had they been sued.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Deeko
It doesn't work that way. The government gave them bailout money to fulfill their fiscal obligations. The first fiscal obligation for any company is to pay its employees. If you don't want taxpayer money going to pay AIG employees, don't bail out AIG. Its that simple.

You legally cannot do your 10 cents on the dollar nonsense. The employee could sue for the other 90%, and would win. As long as the company exists, the company must pay its employees as their contracts are written. Period. I don't know why you think there is a way around that.

Again, this is digressing from the topic, which is the release of those names. That is illegal and wrong on all levels, and if you disagree, you are wrong, and frankly a poor excuse for a human being.

You're the miserable excuse for a human being if you can't see (or don't care) that the taxpayer doesn't WANT TO PAY BONUSES. That is not what the bailout is for, it's so people can continue to have jobs. They need to learn to live on less, a LOT less. Just like the rest of us.

I personally could care less if they bail out AIG. I think all the whizbangers need a reality check on what it really takes to earn a buck. Their heads have gotten so big it's truly pathetic.

Good luck with druming up support for million dollar bonues. Your going to have to do better then insults and innuendo to convince anybody other then fellow bonus hogs.

hahah you can kick and scream like a child all you want, that doesn't change the way corporate law works. I'm going to spell this out for you one more time - legally, AIG had to pay the bonuses. Here, I'll repeat it - legally, AIG had to pay the bonuses.

It doesn't matter if the taxpayer wants to cry about it - simple civil law states that they must pay the bonuses. Period. Again, if you don't like it, don't bail them out.

edit: you got pissy about my "insult" but still won't face that topic. Why should their names be made public? How is that possibly legal or ethical? Are you ignoring that topic because you know you're wrong and just want to avoid showing it?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

I reject the obviously faulty notion that one needs to have a "bonus" to do what one is paid to do. That is what your salary is for. Continuing to work for a successful company that can pay that salary and provide you with a stable job is your incentive to do a good job.

As such, asking a bankrupt company to pay million dollar bonuses is totally and completely ludicrous.

I get a regular bonus as a part of my job. A bonus is just another form of compensation. REGARDLESS - its illegal and ethically wrong to even consider releasing the names of those people. They're just doing their jobs.

Your last paragraph is a moot point. Bankrupt companies legally must pay employee contracts first, don't you understand that? There is ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL RECOURSE TO NOT PAY THE BONUS. Once the contract was signed, it was done. You can dislike the contract, but that does not change the fact that once signed, it must be followed.

Your the same type that would argue for white colar= >value than blue. Your full of shit. Blue colar gets it done . White colar dreams about it , than proceed to screw everthing up fact . Look around . Schools, Medical , Science Arts. all degrading.

I have always been blue collar. I have always given my all . No matter the pay structure.

Being blue collar. I learned something. Productivity was stolen away from the blue colars by the white collars. The proof is in history.

I worked in Production piece work . Very normal before the 70's. I want to tell ya something . I have worked with the same guys on jobs that doing piece work and straight wages. Its a differant world. The same guy all of the sudden becomes super worker. I have seen it to much to know its not a fact. Piece work does nothing for me . I work the same all the time. But I get paid more for piece work as I am usually most productive employee no matter what system is used.

Now Some weak backed ass wipe setting behind desk said. Hay were what productivity is about. So they cut piece work . Tried to get guys to do same work without instintives based on past time study. It failed . Productivity on the human side fail. But on the technical side it expanded.

The white collar guys knowing the failed on the piece work thing and they new it . But their smarter right? NOT! So they covered it up with tech to start with . But once all were equal tech . wise it come down to pay. White collar here created a lazy work force by removing piece work . They discovered a child or slave was just as productive as our workers without any bennies. So they started farming work overseas. Which got us to were we are today . Complete and otter failer of the acadimic community to accomplish anything without stealing the others blind.

Its funny us baby boomers were a strange lot. As many here know. There your moms /Dads. Don't misplace that laid back attitude for being cowardly or ineptness on our part. I have never seen my generation this upset and angry. Guys that haven't target practiced for 20 years are at the range now. The firing ranges are good investment now also if your looking to make $$$$.

I might even fire a weapon again . I haven't touched a gun since I was 19. But man I got some nice weapons. I always liked guns , but shit happens. If I see a big planet coming at us . Befor 2012 . I will use a weapon. Cause that big ass planet ain't God coming to save anyone.

If 2012 comes and goes. I will use weapons after. If I live that long . Fat chance that.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Deeko
It doesn't work that way. The government gave them bailout money to fulfill their fiscal obligations. The first fiscal obligation for any company is to pay its employees. If you don't want taxpayer money going to pay AIG employees, don't bail out AIG. Its that simple.

You legally cannot do your 10 cents on the dollar nonsense. The employee could sue for the other 90%, and would win. As long as the company exists, the company must pay its employees as their contracts are written. Period. I don't know why you think there is a way around that.

Again, this is digressing from the topic, which is the release of those names. That is illegal and wrong on all levels, and if you disagree, you are wrong, and frankly a poor excuse for a human being.

You're the miserable excuse for a human being if you can't see (or don't care) that the taxpayer doesn't WANT TO PAY BONUSES. That is not what the bailout is for, it's so people can continue to have jobs. They need to learn to live on less, a LOT less. Just like the rest of us.

I personally could care less if they bail out AIG. I think all the whizbangers need a reality check on what it really takes to earn a buck. Their heads have gotten so big it's truly pathetic.

Good luck with druming up support for million dollar bonues. Your going to have to do better then insults and innuendo to convince anybody other then fellow bonus hogs.

hahah you can kick and scream like a child all you want, that doesn't change the way corporate law works. I'm going to spell this out for you one more time - legally, AIG had to pay the bonuses. Here, I'll repeat it - legally, AIG had to pay the bonuses.

It doesn't matter if the taxpayer wants to cry about it - simple civil law states that they must pay the bonuses. Period. Again, if you don't like it, don't bail them out.

edit: you got pissy about my "insult" but still won't face that topic. Why should their names be made public? How is that possibly legal or ethical? Are you ignoring that topic because you know you're wrong and just want to avoid showing it?

I already stated I think they should publish the names of anybody who's getting taxpayers subsidzed bonuses.

So I guess the best thing I can do is call my congressmen and tell them to support that 90% tax on bonuses they're working on. That weill leave them with the 10% bonus I talked about earlier, which is still more then they deserve.