Why am I not surprised?

These guys are CRIMINALS.

Obama should have poured money into America to create more jobs, etc.. and help the little guy instead of handing over huge sums to a bunch of crooks.

Makes you want to cry.

Yeah, me too.  Wonder where I go to petition the government for like a few hundred thousand?  Really, that's all I need to stay competitive.  

There has to be a point where ethics can be put in on these individuals. My question is, what can be done about this? Any ideas?

Best, Amy

I'm gonna say it anyway.  First of all, that $100 million is being distributed amongst about 400 employees, for an average of $250K per employee.  Still a lot of money, as most would agree, but published reports make it sound as if that money is being paid to a handful of AIG executives.  It isn't.  Secondly, consider this: AIG was contractually obligated to make those payouts long before they took any bailout money.  Furthermore, that $100 million was a reduction of the next $198 million payout that was originally agreed to.  Not only that, but AIG hasn't used all of the TARP proceeds it received, and is selling off assets to repay the feds.  From today's New York Times:

The contracts, which were established in December 2007, were intended to keep people from leaving the company and called for the bonuses to be paid in regular installments to more than 400 employees in the unit. The final payment, which was for about $198 million, was due in mid-March, but was accelerated to Wednesday as part of the agreement to reduce its size...

...[b]ut some people have not agreed to the cutbacks and are insisting on the entire amounts. People with knowledge of the negotiations said that a vast majority of those still employed at A.I.G. had accepted the cuts, but only about a third of the former employees had done so.

The holdouts seem determined to make A.I.G. pay the full contractual amounts, knowing they can make a reasonably good case under law, because A.I.G.’s own lawyers have previously issued an opinion that the contracts are binding. If they succeed, A.I.G. would have to pay them more money at some point in the future, and might even have to pay penalties for breaking its employment contracts.

How would you feel if you had negotiated in good faith with an employer for what you thought was a fair compensation package, only to have the amount reduced because of Big Government's response to populist anger?  I know I'd be highly...p-turbed.

This is precisely why the federal government should never be permitted to have an ownership stake in a private company.

Regards,
Scott Perry (no relation)

Scott, 

I can't agree with you more as to your statement that the Federal Government has no right becoming involved in these private negotiations.  And, with that being said, they had no right to promise funds to these entities in the first place.  They needed to let the chips fall where they may.  If the companies had been allowed to fail the contracts would have fallen into the bankruptcy proceedings and the court would have an opportunity to cancel or re-negotiate these contracts thus potentially saving us all the huge sums of money used to bailout these large companies.

The same can be said of the current events relating to Toyota.  I hear that congress is planning on having hearings on the gas pedal issue.  Will someone please explain to me why congress has to get involved in what is clearly a problem for Toyota and has absolutely nothing to do with Congress and their role as our legislators.  Maybe I'm missing something or am uninformed, and believe me, that is very possible.  But, I digress... sorry :)

As with any large(or small)  business that fails the employees are the ones that get hurt the most for sure.  However, it is not the job of the governmment nor is it the responsibility of you, me, our children and grandchildren to reward the failures of the management of these companies by offering bailouts in the gazillions of dollars just to keep watching the same folks who caused this debacle benefitting from their actions. I have stated here previously and I will state again;  I got ZERO DOLLARS from the bailout funds.  What was your piece of the pie? I bet ZERO DOLLARS. Yes, contracts should have some bearing but common sense should prevail.  Let management take a hit on their salaries and bonuses and distribute whatever excess to those to whom they owe a contractual obligation.  We the people owe nothing to these folks and should not be made to bear the burden of complying with a contract in which we had no part of the negotiation.  Had we been parties to the negotiation we would certainly bear some burden but that is just not the case here.

Respectfully,

Charlene Perry

Regarding Scott's comment:

 Secondly, consider this: AIG was contractually obligated to make those payouts long before they took any bailout money.

I don't care when the obligation arose, or whether it was by contract.  The fact is that the company didn't have the money to pay bonuses and using tax dollars to pay them should be offensive to every American who works hard and pays taxes.

The bailout should have been structured differently, and not rushed into as it was. Just like GM, any bailout should have come after the company was restructured in bankruptcy and these "bonus contracts" should have been canceled.  Of course I wouldn't like that if I were one of the employees who "negotiated in good faith" for the bonus.  But, that shouldn't change the fact that they entered into an agreement with a company that was financially unable to live up to its obligations.

Why should I, or any of you, be forced to pay someone else's bonus because their employer went broke?  Let them sue AIG for breach of contract and get whatever they could as a creditor in bankruptcy.  Those are the rules the rest of us have to play by... but the bailout changed all of that.

We have morons in Congress that didn't take time to think about their stupidity. I don't think the rest of us should be less angry about having our tax dollars go to pay bonuses for anyone. We should all be irate!

Is the fact that the government is involved in the first place.  The point I'm making, Charlene and Rob, is twofold:  first, there are two sides to every story; and second, I believe that your anger in this instance is misplaced.  If you want to be outraged, be outraged by the fact that your government is doing everything in its power to wreck this economy.  As the two of you correctly pointed out, the way to resolve this is through the bankruptcy court system.  And to answer your question, Charlene, no I didn't get an offer of any bailout money, wouldn't have taken it even if I did.

But, that's just me.

Regards,
Scott Perry

I don't think my anger is misplaced... I'm rightfully angry with the government for poorly orchestrating the bailout and allowing our tax money to be used to pay bonuses.  And, I would agree with you that the government is largely to blame for the economy.  However, I don't think they are "doing everything in its power to wreck" it.  I think the bailout and stimulous were needed and we would probably be wrose off to day had they not done anything. 

They definitely could have done better... but, we don't elect intelligent people to office anymore, so we really shouldn't be surprised.  Now, we just have to hope that it works.

hello steve :) could you tell me how to go about petitioning the government to get some of that bonus money ???

Thanks Steve, I love your answer