Obama's statements on this are making him look like an impotent fool. How can anyone with half a brain not understand this idiot is in way over his head?
Did you know Sen. Dodd put in a provision allowing executive comp that was in contract before Feb09? And that these bonuses were planned LAST YEAR, and were well known?
The only outrage here should be at the idiots in Washington braying over this.
⚧ C.T.L.W. You figure it out
My Endo doc went over my blood work. "I see your estrogen level is now at 315, do you feel like you have too much Estrogen now?"
I told her "... N... N.. No..." and started crying.
The mainstream media isn't really talking about the contractual part of the pay-outs. The focus is on the bailout money that's being used to pay the bonuses. And while I understand the anger that stems from the use of those bailout funds, I also understand that AIG was obligated to pay out "insurance costs for damages" issued accordingly. Now, here's where I have a problem with what AIG is doing...
They report* that the insurance branch of their company is financially sound and that they can pay off insurance claims accordingly, yet they don't make payments until after they receive government bailout funding. Hence, the perception that they're using bailout money to pay those insurance claims. BIG mistake by AIG regardless of their contractual obligations. If they really wanted the American people to believe their conducting "contractual" business above board, they should:
1) let the public (government) review their books.
2) state publicly what's really going on.
3) let it be know why they waited until after receiving bailout funds in order to make contractual insurance payments.
4) make it clear whether it's their money or taxpayer money that's being used.
If AIG can clarify matters on all four counts, I think the public/U.S. government would calm down on this matter. Otherwise, they look no better than the last big corporation (I can't remember their name) who used bailout funds to pay millions in bonuses. Fortunately, the public spoke up and that company backed down.
If the bailout is to keep these companies running and the retention bonuses are to keep the employees on staff what sense does it make to cancel the bonuses???
"lesser of evil" my ass. At leats you've essentially admitted you prefer socialism.
Seems we've presented an even amount of evidence. Guess what, its YOUR JOB to back up your statement YOU MAKE with FACTS if you wish anyone to care anything at all about what you state is true.
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
A retention bonus is money paid to keep someone who is about to be laid off/fired from quitting until the appointed date.
The people who will receive retention bonuses have been given notice that their jobs about to end.