Atlas, or At Least a Rightly Pissed-Off A.I.G. Employee, Shrugs

From the resignation letter of AIG employee Jake DeSantis, who received a $742,000 retention bonus (which he is giving to charity) from the company:

As most of us have done nothing wrong, guilt is not a motivation to surrender our earnings. We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house.

Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.'s assurances that the contracts would be honored. They are now angry about having been misled by A.I.G.'s promises and are not inclined to return the money as a favor to you.

More here.

Hat tip: Kim Corwin

Comments

[Mo]

Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored. They are now angry about having been misled by A.I.G.’s promises and are not inclined to return the money as a favor to you.

Fuck you. Taxpayers were misled by AIG as well and we didn’t want to give them more money as a favor to you.

M3 driving welfare queens shouldn’t be in the same sentence as “Atlas Shrugged”.

[Lamar]

As a person who makes a substantial portion of yearly income from a “bonus”, I’ve been trying to get the point across that “bonus” is a misnomer. You work for a salary that is less than your value to the company. When the quarter or year ends, your worth is evaluated, and you are paid the difference between your salary and your worth.

[Mo]

Note: I don’t support the tax clawback at all, but these AIG execs don’t have any sort of standing for righteous indignation.

[TofuSushi]

Jail them after burning them!

[robc]

MO,

Why not? Personally, I dont think it is “righteous indignation” to expect a contract to be met.

[Lamar]

“Taxpayers were misled by AIG as well and we didn’t want to give them more money as a favor to you.”

Please state how Jack DeSantis misled tax payers. If all AIG employees are fungible and representative of AIG as a whole, then why not confiscate the salary of the secretary at the local office? She duped tax payers! She’s a welfare queen!

[robc]

Lamar,

These bonuses arent even like yours. These are “please stay on for a year before you get fired – we will make it worth your while to not go get another hi paying job right away” bonuses.

Do we want to know how much of a mess AIG would be in without these employees the last year?

[Taktix?]

What a perfect way to fix AIG: push out any talent that might have helped save this Dodo.

DeSantis might have missed the memo that we don’t live in a free society anymore.

Too big to fail, indeed…

[Nick]

At least he gave it to charity. Better than throwing it back into the Treasury for it to be wasted by Geitner and Obama. It was never gonna come back to us taxpayers.

[Reinmoose]

If all AIG employees are fungible and representative of AIG as a whole, then why not confiscate the salary of the secretary at the local office? She duped tax payers! She’s a welfare queen!

Good point. Why don’t we just advocate that nobody working for AIG should get paid at all? After all, none of them would be getting paid right now if it weren’t for the bailout.

I think the best way to look at the bonuses is as whether they would have gotten their bonuses if the government hadn’t intervened. If they wouldn’t have, then the action of taking over AIG should have been designed under the condition that all pay is suspended, reevaluated, and readjusted. The people who worked there before would get first pick to keep their old jobs at this new rate.

[Pro Libertate]

Retention bonuses are part and parcel with companies that are in trouble. If you don’t offer and pay them, people leave. And hiring people when you can’t guarantee any future of any kind is difficult.

I was and remain opposed to the bailout, period. However, if the government didn’t want bailout recipients to pay retention bonuses, then the law shouldn’t have included a provision specifically allowing them to be paid. It’s all well and good to be angry at the mismanagement at AIG, but the reaction of our government is arbitrary, unfair, and arguably unconstitutional. This isn’t some minor change–it’s a complete 180? turn from a bill passed by this Congress. Hate corporations, especially financial services corporations, all you want, but doesn’t this sort of tyrannical behavior bother you? The ends don’t justify the means, especially in a country based on the rule of law and limited government.

I have a question: What about regular incentive bonuses? What about stock options? What about salaries? These retention bonuses are only a small, temporary phenomenon. I’m beginning to suspect that this hoopla was intentional, to some degree, for setting up a call to limit executive compensation in financial services by law. All compensation. Which, of course, will mean a flight to less regulated industries. Buh-bye.

[TofuSushi]

We need a new law taxing AIG people 90% wherever they go to work.

It is the only way to be sure.

[arbitrageur]

lamar is right – the base salary for wall streeters is de minimus.

second, all of these guys are now going to go to hedge funds who will be delighted to learn all of AIG’s positions. So when the government sits down at the poker table to unwind AIG, everyone will know the cards the government has. Paying the bonuses would have been cheaper than the fleecing the government is about to get. The AIG unwind is going to be the biggest layup since the old drexel guys faded Resolution Trust in the early 90s.

[Mo]

The contracts were signed in before the bailouts. These bonuses were paid out after the company had taken well over $150 billion dollars. Had this been a Chapter 11, like it should have been, these guys would be fighting for scraps with the rest of their creditors. Congress fucked up by not making bailout funds conditional on reducing/removing bonuses, like the UAW’s contractual reductions. Seriously, you’re surprise people are pissed about this?

My preferred outcome would have been let them fail.

[kinnath]

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

So Mo, you ready to take a buck for the next year’s work then get a “bonus” check at the completion of your contract. Of course, you’d just be a self-righteous prick if you actually expect to get that bonus per your contract.

[NaiveCynic]

Cry me a river.

[Lamar]

“We need a new law taxing AIG people 90% wherever they go to work. It is the only way to be sure.”

We’ll call it the Domestic Contingency Operation.

[Inkstained Wretch]

I am not unsympathetic to DeSantis’ plight, but it does serve as a good warning to others: this is what happens to businesses that get bailed out by the government. Every decision, plan and contract can potentially be second-guessed by the feds.

If nothing else AIG and its “bonus scandal” (for lack of a better term) serve as a good warning to other companies that accepting a bailout isn’t a just a “get out of bankruptcy free” card. It can have bad, bad consequences for the people involved.

If that means more companies go bankrupt rather than seeking a bailout, well, then some good has come out of this after all.

[robc]

Mo,

My preferred outcome would have been let them fail.

On this we agree.

[anon]

He may have worked hard, but there are people who work hard and do well in all companies that go bankrupt. This doesn’t mean that the public ought to pay them in congratulations. He should have left the company if it was going under, rather than assuming that he’d get his “salary” from taxpayers. It’s not our business.

[TofuSushi]

If we give the bonuses to the UAW strike fund then that would be true equality.

[robc]

anon,

He doesnt get his salary from taxpayers, he gets it from AIG. Now, where AIG gets the money from is an entirely different story.

Once again, as someone said above, if your logic applies to this guy, why not his secretary too?

[Pro Libertate]

Let it fail.

[strat]

This is almost as inspirational as TJ Rodgers’ letter to the nuns who castigated him for not recruiting his executive staff to optimize for gender and ethnic diversity rather than performance.”

Breathing so much of the Capital Beltway exhaust around here, I find this to be a breath of fresh air. I’m no Objectivist, but I can see how the Ellsworth Toohey’s of the world wear good people down.

[Mo]

Please state how Jack DeSantis misled tax payers. If all AIG employees are fungible and representative of AIG as a whole, then why not confiscate the salary of the secretary at the local office? She duped tax payers! She’s a welfare queen!

Dude, he ran AIG FP, the portion that bankrupted the company. He was hardly uninvolved in the process. It’s not like he ran insurance, which generated profits.

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in – or responsible for – the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.

He ran the group and pins the blame on other people, that reported to him. Boo-freaking-hoo.

[Pro Libertate]

Mo,

My problem is that the government has no business demonizing these particular fools or violating principles of law and fairness in acting the way it is. I think most of these executives do have culpability in this mess, and I’m not pleased that they’re getting rewarded for it. But, more important–and more dangerous–is how badly the government is behaving.

This reminds me of a law school adage: Bad facts make bad law. Nobody likes these guys, so do whatever it takes to bring them down–precedent and law be damned!

[robc]

Mo,

the head of business development for commodities. Over this period the equity and commodity units were consistently profitable – in most years generating net profits of well over $100 million.

Reading is fundamental. He ran the commodity and equitity division of AIG-FP. A division that was profitable and didnt deal with CDSs. He wasnt the head of all AIG-FP.

[Lamar]

“Dude, he ran AIG FP, the portion that bankrupted the company.”

He ran the “commodity and equity” division of AIG-FP, not the entire company. He ran a profitable division. AIG-FP was dragged down by other divisions. And while I don’t know the specifics, DeSantis claims that the people responsible have mostly left the company.

So, no, he really didn’t “run the group” as you say.

[P Brooks]

The Congress wouldn’t fuck these guys over if they didn’t deserve it.

SWould they?

[Mo]

Oops, my bad. Misread that portion of it.

[Lamar]

robc: Sorry about that.

More AIG anger: Local news (Ch. 9) recently ran a story saying that recent water rate increases were going to AIG because AIG owns a stake in Hydrostar (an infrastructure fund that owns Utilities, Inc). Pissed off utility customers were saying that their rate hike is a personal bailout to AIG. The rate hike? Oh, that went to pay for a couple million dollars worth of improvements to their water system. But let’s focus! We hate AIG!!!

[P Brooks]

SWould

The people who wrote our Constitution (remember that moldy old “piece of paper”?) had intimate familiarity with “the Rule of Whim” and did their best to ensure this country would not be subject to it.

It took a couple hundred years, but we’re there.

ps- Shut the fuck up, Mo.

[Grumpy Smurf]

I hate AIG.

[P Brooks]

Sorry, Mo- that was uncalled for.

Personally, I think the guy is an idiot, for believing what the Treasury representatives told him.

He should have immediately quit, and offered to take the job on as an independent contractor, with compensation based on value recovered for the firm.

But- as they say- it’s not so easy to see the big picture, when you’re mired in the swamp, fighting the alligators.

[Mo]

Pro Lib,

I totally agree with you you re: Congress trying to claw this shit back and trying to divert the outrage away from them and their mistakes to someone else. The witch hunt is atrocious and Congress’ new laws set a frightening precedent. However, what is also absent is an awareness of why people are upset with them and why there is public outrage.

[ed]

At least he gave it to charity.

Why? Out of guilt? One would think that he would keep his “bonus” on principle.
Unless charitable giving is a higher value to him than keeping the fruits of his labor.
Anyway, it’s hardly a case of Atlas shrugging.

[Pro Libertate]

Yes, they’re full of crap, too. But their crapitude is nothing compared to the government’s.

At this rate, I’m waiting for a bill to crucify all AIG executives along Pennsylvania Avenue.

[Lamar]

“Why? Out of guilt? One would think that he would keep his “bonus” on principle.”

Because it removes the “greedy SOB” argument. Without a personal pecuniary interest, the principle (i.e., not giving hard earned money back for no reason) stands out.

[energized democrat]

the fact that he gave his bonus to charity shows that he didn’t really need the money anyway. nobody here points this out of course because you all would rather we think boo hoo poor executive not making much.

[P Brooks]

I hope he gives it all to The Institute for Justice and LEAP.

[ChicagoTom]

the fact that he gave his bonus to charity shows that he didn’t really need the money anyway. nobody here points this out of course because you all would rather we think boo hoo poor executive not making much.

Exactly.

Instead of giving it back to charity he should give it back to the taxpayers who provided it since he apparently doesn’t need it.

I’m supposed to have sympatyhy from this guy? I don’t. The reality is that without the bailout AIG would have gone into chapter 11, and he wouldn’t have gotten very much of a bonus. So I have no issue whatsoever with the government forcing the company to do things that a bankruptcy court would force them to do if they would have let them fail.

[prolefeed]

That is why I have decided to donate 100 percent of the effective after-tax proceeds of my retention payment directly to organizations that are helping people who are suffering from the global downturn.

In other words, since Congress intends to take 90% of his bonus salary, and other taxes will take the other 10%, he expects to donate nothng at all to charity.

And, for all those fuckwits who think he doesn’t deserve any bonus — he got a base pay of $1, with all his real pay in the form of a bonus — and he worked for the profit-making part of AIG. So, Obama and all those bloviating members of Congress who voted for the punitive 90% tax rate on these bonuses are in effect saying that the people who DIDN’T drive AIG into the ground are being outrageously unreasonable in wanting to get paid more than $1 per year — and will, be shocked, SHOCKED, when AIG goes under because these employees decide that working for free is a raw deal.

[Lamar]

“the fact that he gave his bonus to charity shows that he didn’t really need the money anyway.”

Nobody in this country gets paid based on “need”. Nobody “needs” $700,000. People EARN money.

Give the money to ACORN and you’ll really see some confused liberals!!

[Al Hambra]

I hate AIG.

Oh, you hate everything.

[Lamar]

And what about the bankruptcy law? Chicago Tom says DeSantis would have gotten $0 without the bailout. I think this is an incorrect perception given the 2005 bankruptcy revisions. A bankruptcy court would allow the payments, much like in Circuit City’s case.

[vanya]

Fuck him. His job only exists in the first place because of market inefficiencies caused by lack of transparent information and government distortions. He doesn’t build anything, he doesn’t create anything, he doesn’t make peoples lives better, he doesn’t add any real value to society – he is a parasite arbitraging off market inefficiencies with a vested interest in letting the government foster those inefficiencies so that he and people like him can game the system. Hardly an Objectivist hero. And if he really believes he did nothing wrong, why is he giving the money to charity? Have some backbone and be defiant if you truly believe you earned and deserve that money. I’d respect that, a lot of people would. When you give the money to charity and then whine about it you’re signaling that you know at heart you’re a fraud. What a puke this guy is. It’s people like DeSantis who are root of this rot.

[Spoonman]

Know who else gets taxpayer-funded bonuses? The executives at Lockheed Martin.

[Unka Sam]

the fact that he gave his bonus to charity shows that he didn’t really need the money anyway.

You’re completely missing the point. People don’t bust their ass to go to M.I.T., rise through the ranks by being a successful commodities broker only to take home a pay that is simply what they need to exist. This is still America, and Capitalism is still the de facto standard around here. There’s nothing shameful about being good at what you do and earning a substantial amount of money.

[P Brooks]

The reality is that without the bailout AIG would have gone into chapter 11, and he wouldn’t have gotten very much of a bonus.

No bankruptcy judge (unlike the TARPmeisters) would have asked him to work for nothing.

[TofuSushi]

Know who else gets taxpayer-funded bonuses? The executives at Lockheed Martin.

Yea! Corporate Welfare at its finest!

[bloodstar]

Oh well, the Bailout Tax isn’t going to pass anyway, so all this sound and fury over those evil communists taxing our hard earned bonuses… all the hand wringing, all for nothing.

Next thing you know Obama’s going to let Card Check die too. Those damned anti cardchecking anti bailout taxing communist liberals!

[kinnath]

AIG should have died under the scaple of bankruptcy court judge.

Executive compensation would have been set by fiat by the judge (just like a judge can set aside a union contract).

However, the feds decided that bankruptcy was bad — so the feds dumped billions of dollars into AIG to prop them up until the could be dismantled from within.

The executive staff were given contracts to perform the job of dismantling the company for a salary of $1> with a lump sum payment of deferred compensation (the so-called “bonuses”) upon completion of their employment contracts.

These contracts were known to the politicians that wrote the law that dumped the billions of dollars into AIG. Those same politicians left these employment contracts untouched by the legislation.

AIG pays out the lump-sum deferred compensations in March per the established contracts — the word “bonus” hits the media.

The politicians that wrote the legislation that put our tax dollars into the hands of the management of AIG shit their pants.

The politicians then start to write new legislation to claw back the deferred compenstation that the executive staff “earned” per their employment contracts.

There are many, many people in this passion play that deserve to be crucified. However, the executive staff that took $1 salaries to dismantle the company they worked for with the understanding they would be compensated at the completion of their contracts are not those people.

[Don Mynack]

“Do we want to know how much of a mess AIG would be in without these employees the last year?”

Can AIG be in more of a mess than it is now? Is that possible?

[Lamar]

“He doesn’t build anything, he doesn’t create anything, he doesn’t make peoples lives better, he doesn’t add any real value to society.”

Let me guess: Hooker with a heart of gold charms Wall Street magnate, convinces him to build boats.

[energized democrat]

good for him giving it to charity. it just goes to show that there are some people out there who don’t just think about money and themselves. clearly he’s not a libertarian because he would have just kept the taxpayers money and told everyone to suck it. the black mark on his record so to speak is that hes not staying with the company to fix this mess and accepting a reasonable rate of pay to do so.

[Lamar]

That? That’s the money you could be saving by f*cking over AIG execs.

[Lost_In_Translation]

I share very little sympathy for Mr. DeSantis and at the same time believe that “Bonusgate” was red meat thrown to the populists. Under the bailout as written, AIG was perfectly justified to pay whatever bonuses they wanted to retain the talent necessary to man the shovels trying to uncover the valuable assets under the dung heap. The government said “Do what’s necessary to NOT FAIL”.

Now, I wouldn’t have voted for the bailout nor am I the least bit pleased that the fuckwits that represent me did, but what’s done is done and AIG wasn’t trying to bend congresses agreements. They said that if they were restricted on what they could pay, they’d lose some of the top talent (to where, fuck know, but whatever) and congress agreed at the time. Now, when the media got wind of what AIG was going to do with the money, Congress comes back with THAT’S NOT WHAT WE THOUGHT YOU MEANT!!!

However, Mr. DeSantis may still have trouble finding new employment at his previous salary, but he was as justified in claiming it as anyone else there. The government robbed taxpayers, not AIG.

[ChicagoTom]

. There’s nothing shameful about being good at what you do and earning a substantial amount of money.

What about when you aren’t actually good at what you do. Should you still earn a substantial amount of money?? Cuz last I checked being in charge of a company that is essentially bankrupt (it wouldn’t survive without taking tax dollars) means you aren’t good at your job.

Chicago Tom says DeSantis would have gotten $0 without the bailout. I think this is an incorrect perception given the 2005 bankruptcy revisions.

He might have gotten something but no way it would have been 3/4 of a million dollars. It would have been substantially less

Again I just can’t feel bad about this. If they would have gone to bankruptcy (which is what should have happened) they would have gotten a fraction of the bonuses.

[kinnath]

I share very little sympathy for Mr. DeSantis . . .

Defending the rights of the unsympathetic is the real test of one’s beliefs.

[Michael Pack]

If you really want to here whining try this.Put all auto workers on salary and eliminate over time.I’m sure these bonus receivers worked more,maybe far more ,then 40 hours a week.

[Reinmoose]

ChiTom – so what do you think the government should do about it now? Do you think that the 90% tax is the way to go? Because it’s one thing to think that the government shouldn’t have given them much because AIG was going to go into bankruptcy (something I argued above), but what does one do now that they’ve entered this agreement with AIG rather intentionally?

I’m not being accusatory, I just am curious.

[Pro Libertate]

The main issue aside–should the government be behaving in such an improper and duplicitous manner–the bonuses are retention bonuses. They don’t reward behavior, they just keep people on for whatever reason. Maybe they shouldn’t be paid in this case, but I trust the company (and I trust it very little) to make that decision more than I trust the government.

All that said, I’m very much in the why-the-hell-did-we-bail-them-out camp.

[Lost_In_Translation]

kinnath,

Rule of law and contracts is worth defending above any individual. Unless someone wants to argue that Congress failed to meet the mental capacity requirement required to make a contract valid (which I would love to here from a very serious legal standpoint), Congress knew what AIG was doing, they signed away my money to do it (through physical threat of confinement if I didn’t agree) and now come back with “Oh, we didn’t really meant what we wrote, we meant something else”. If they’re not willing to defend what they wrote and embrace law and order, WHY THE FUCK DO WE HAVE THEM!?! Its a sea of morons following the tides of populist opinion. Fuck’em, fuck every single one of them (sorry Ron, Jeff, your fight against absurdity is Don Quixotesque at best)

[energized democrat]

michael pack
what is it about libertarians that they always think that people who dont make very much money are obviously being paid too much but people who make 750000 from a company that should be bankrupt are being rightly compensated? it would be totally different if we were outraged about them paying the secretaries because the secretaries need the money they got paid while this guy clearly didnt.

[kinnath]

Lost, I think we are in agreement on the failure of the congress to pay attention to what it passed and its total cave-in to media pressure after the fact.

I am less unsympathetic to DeSantis than most of the people posting here today. He negotiated a contract with his employer, did his job, then expected to get paid. $700k net is far from outrageous for VP-level compensation.

[Unka Sam]

What about when you aren’t actually good at what you do. Should you still earn a substantial amount of money?? Cuz last I checked being in charge of a company that is essentially bankrupt (it wouldn’t survive without taking tax dollars) means you aren’t good at your job.

Read the fucking article, Christ. He wasn’t in charge of the company. His division was consistently profitable.

[Lost_In_Translation]

Reinmoose,

If it was me at the beginning of this debacle, I’d have nationalized the biggest failures, hired an army of accountants (at high pay) to spend weeks sorting through account records, retaining those employees necessary for discovery, brought in a company breaker to start parceling up the company into many bits, built the world’s largest financial report, sold the company in bits (along with those sections of employees) and then slowly dissolved the corporation to a shell, the sold the remaining physical assets, delisted and moved on. Of course I’d have ignored all the bleating sheeple in the media and population to do what had to be done and my dictatorship would have been harsh, but fair.

I probably shouldn’t be elected…

[kinnath]

Over this period the equity and commodity units were consistently profitable – in most years generating net profits of well over $100 million.

The last thing you want when your company is going tits-up is for the profitable parts of the company to collapse because the hired help bailed out.

[Lost_In_Translation]

I am less unsympathetic to DeSantis than most of the people posting here today. He negotiated a contract with his employer, did his job, then expected to get paid. $700k net is far from outrageous for VP-level compensation.

I really don’t know whether to be sympathetic of unsympathic with those still in this debacle, but as I am totally against what government has done, most of the players involved would have to earn my sympathy rather than get it based on where I think they may have been wronged. I’ll march out against congress flip flopping, but not for a personal anecdote.

[daveednyc]

This has “I’m picking up my toys and leaving” all over it. The man is a fool — he launches a tirade about how his bonus is perfectly justified, then declares he will give it away. What does he hope to gain by this publicity stunt? Assuage his stupid sense of guilt?

[JiggleTits]

“We need a new law taxing AIG people 90% wherever they go to work.

It is the only way to be sure.”

Really. Please. Just shut the fuck up. You’re like an Amish buggy on the German autobahn.

[R C Dean]

what is it about libertarians that they always think that people who dont make very much money are obviously being paid too much

What is it about useful idiots that makes them dream up imaginary libertarian strawmen?

[Lost_In_Translation]

The last thing you want when your company is going tits-up is for the profitable parts of the company to collapse because the hired help bailed out.

I think we all understand that AIG didn’t want to lose alot of people in certain areas, but very few of us are enamored for paying for AIG’s mistakes.

Army of accountants

[J sub D]

I’ve tried explaining this to people who are outraged about AIG bonuses.

Congress bought those fucking contracts when they bought the fucking company! Let the buyer beware, rule of law, sanctity of contracts and all of that.

[Lost_In_Translation]

What is it about useful idiots that makes them dream up imaginary libertarian strawmen?

Liberal tendency to lean towards the creative side of the mind whereas libertarians can be so stodgily stuck in the pure logic (goddamn unfeeling bastards that we are)

[Lost_In_Translation]

I was being unfair there. Conservatives can be creative too, they just prefer their strawmen crucified rather than burned sometimes.

[Baracl Obama]

“I hope he gives it all to The Institute for Justice and LEAP.”

It won’t matter. Because today, I am submitting to the congress, my plan to give ACORN complete controll and oversight of all charities in the U.S.

[kinnath]

I really don’t know whether to be sympathetic of unsympathic with those still in this debacle, but as I am totally against what government has done, most of the players involved would have to earn my sympathy rather than get it based on where I think they may have been wronged.

You have a VP-level guy running a portfolio that generates $100M a year net profit. The self-serving plan of action for this guy is to head for the doors as soon as it becomes clear that the company is going down. He should be able to take his resume and get some equivalent VP-level position in a profitable company.

Instead, he stays, takes a buck a year salary, then starts selling his business to other companies. In return for staying until the assets are sold and his job is essentially gone, he is promised a lump-sum payment at the end of the contract. When it comes time for his just compensation, 300+ elected yahoos decide he should be humiliated in public and be stripped of his compensation.

I find his situation to be sympathetic. But I have been called an elitist prick in H&R threads in the past.

[ChicagoTom]

ChiTom – so what do you think the government should do about it now? Do you think that the 90% tax is the way to go? Because it’s one thing to think that the government shouldn’t have given them much because AIG was going to go into bankruptcy (something I argued above), but what does one do now that they’ve entered this agreement with AIG rather intentionally?

Personally, it’s a tough call.

The 90% tax doesn’t sit well with me, mainly because everyone KNEW these bonuses were coming (maybe not everyone in Congress, but Geithner, Bernanke, Summers — and surely they would/should have told Obama). And a lot of the reaction, from the administration especially, is posturing and faux outrage that is nothing but a response to (justified) populist anger.

On the other hand, I believe that whoever pays the piper calls the tune, and the idea that taxpayers have to just STFU and accept that it’s too late now is bullshit. If the government has the right to retroactively immunize law breakers, and they can give tax breaks and subsidies to certain companies and industries, then I don’t see why the government shouldn’t be able to go and tax “bonuses” that are being paid from public coffers.

I think the ideal solution would be to force AIG force AIG to renegotiate the terms of the contract. Contracts are voided and renegotiated all the time in the business world, and I just don’t buy the whole “the contracts are sacred” argument. That’s why contract law is such a lucrative business for the lawyers — because they aren’t sacred and parties redo them all the time.

Barring that, I think I would rather see a smaller claw back — something that would approximate what a bankruptcy judge would do (maybe 60% or so). Because at the end of the day, these people shouldn’t be better off than they would have been if AIG would have gone into bankruptcy.

It may not seem fair, but it’s also not fair to me as a taxpayer to have to bail out failing businesses who took on way too much risk and didn’t care about the consequences and has allegedly acted fraudulently.

If I as a taxpayer am gonna get fucked (by having to bailout all these fucking poeple), it’s only fair that these people get fucked a little too.

The administration and Congress have not been acting in the best interest of the taxpayer, and if it takes populist outrage to get them to finally protect taxpayers so be it.

[energized democrat]

sanctity of contracts and all of that.

thats rich coming from a libertarian seeing how you all think that employers should not be allowed to form contracts with unions and the ones that do you dont think they should have to keep them like with the uaw.

lost in translation –
im glad you can admit that you dont have a shred of morals because you cant see the moral hazards of not allowing people access to affordable health care and housing.

[stuartl]

Retention bonuses are part and parcel with companies that are in trouble. If you don’t offer and pay them, people leave. And hiring people when you can’t guarantee any future of any kind is difficult.

Bingo. You have to pay to keep talent when you are in trouble. Unions also take advantage of this, by threatening strikes when the company is near the edge and will go under if a strike occurs.

“he is a parasite arbitraging off market inefficiencies” – which is good for the economy because it helps to remove inefficiency.

Energized Dem, most libertarians would have preferred to let AIG go under. The govt chose not to, and promised to pay the talent to stay. Now the government is embarrassed and needed to deflect attention from their own stupidity.

One interesting thing about donating to charity — since he only made $1 last year, he can deduct the entire donation. Had he made the evil $250K, he would not have received the full deduction.

[Lost_In_Translation]

lost in translation –
im glad you can admit that you dont have a shred of morals because you cant see the moral hazards of not allowing people access to affordable health care and housing.

speaking as a renter who maintains a healthy active lifestyle, fuck you. The only reason I agree to mitigate other people’s bad decisions is so they leave me alone.

[Lost_In_Translation]

Instead, he stays, takes a buck a year salary, then starts selling his business to other companies. In return for staying until the assets are sold and his job is essentially gone, he is promised a lump-sum payment at the end of the contract. When it comes time for his just compensation, 300+ elected yahoos decide he should be humiliated in public and be stripped of his compensation.

I find his situation to be sympathetic. But I have been called an elitist prick in H&R threads in the past.

Considering 300 elected yahoos decided to strip me of a healthy percentage of my salary for promises I KNOW are not going to be fufilled in the future, I fail to sympathise other than shake my head and repeat “he should have seen it coming and bailed”.

[vanya]

which is good for the economy because it helps to remove inefficiency.

Only in economics textbooks. In real life people like DeSantis lobby the government to keep those inefficiencies in existence so they can profit from them. AIG itself could never have existed in a truly free market, it is basically a creation of Federally regulated markets, so cry me a river when the Feds turn on them.

[R C Dean]

On the other hand, I believe that whoever pays the piper calls the tune, and the idea that taxpayers have to just STFU and accept that it’s too late now is bullshit.

Err, Tom, the taxpayers can say whatever they want, but its the State running the show, and the State is (or should be) subject to some restraints.

J sub D accurately describes what happens when you buy a company – you take the good with the bad.

kinnath pretty accurately described what went on with this guy. He made a deal, held up his end, and got fucked in the ass by Congress.

I don’t see why the government shouldn’t be able to go and tax “bonuses” that are being paid from public coffers.

The bonuses aren’t being paid from public coffers. They are being paid by AIG. AIG is stuffed full of taxpayer money now, but its their money (Congress gave it to them), and should be subject only to whatever preconditions Congress put on it at the time.

What’s the principled case for retroactively taxing away the compensation of a guy who ran a profitable division at AIG, and not taxing away the compensation of his secretary?

[Pro Libertate]

Principles? We don’t need no stinkin’ principles!

[P Brooks]

What about when you aren’t actually good at what you do. Should you still earn a substantial amount of money??

So, you’ve finally seen the light, and are prepared to repudiate Unionism, ChiTom?

Welcome, my friend.

[Jennifer]

The capriciousness of the government deeply concerns me here. I have zero sympathy for the AIG guys, but think what a bad precedent this sets: Congress and the Prez use tax money to pay for the bailout and the bonuses. Then Congress and the Prez express outrage at the bonuses which they allowed in the first place. Then they pass punitive ex post facto tax laws to take back the bonus they had no business paying for to begin with.

Let the salaries of the President and every Congresscrud who voted for this also be taxed at 90 percent, and I’ll feel better.

[stuartl]

AIG itself could never have existed in a truly free market, it is basically a creation of Federally regulated markets, so cry me a river when the Feds turn on them.

Are you really saying insurance would not exist without the feds? Next you will tell me people don’t play the lottery. People will pay a fee to protect against large losses or to achieve large gains.

[stuartl]

Financial markets are all about risk. Read that economics textbook again.

[Zeb]

Just a little perspective. The bonuses are screwing us over at a rate of about $0.60 per capita. The bailout potential liability is up to, what, $10000 per person now? Aren’t there more important things to worry about?

[J sub D]

sanctity of contracts and all of that.

thats rich coming from a libertarian seeing how you all think that employers should not be allowed to form contracts with unions and the ones that do you dont think they should have to keep them like with the uaw.

energized democrat –
Reason.com has a pretty decent site search function. Take some of your democratic energy and try to find a post where I’ve said that union contracts should be invalidated short of bankruptcy.

In the future I’d appreciate you not attributing positions to me that I’ve never espoused.

[domoarrigato]

The contracts were signed in before the bailouts. These bonuses were paid out after the company had taken well over $150 billion dollars. Had this been a Chapter 11, like it should have been, these guys would be fighting for scraps with the rest of their creditors. Congress fucked up by not making bailout funds conditional on reducing/removing bonuses, like the UAW’s contractual reductions. Seriously, you’re surprise people are pissed about this?

If AIG had been allowed to go bankrupt, Mr. Desantis would have had the opportunity to seem other employment. As it was, he stayed at AIG – in part because of the compensation – and has irretrievably lost the time he spent without compensation of any kind. No one is demanding that UAW pensioners pay back their health insurance premiums for last year…

BTW – what do you think is going on at Lehman Brothers right now? What? You say LEH doesn’t exist any more? HA! there are hundreds of lawyers and traders STILL picking over the bones and unwinding trades. Guess what – they are being compensated! Some of them might even get – shocking – BONUSES! The idea that the guy shouldn’t be compensated at ALL because the company is bankrupt is total bullshit.

ChiTom

What about when you aren’t actually good at what you do. Should you still earn a substantial amount of money??

What evidence is there that he isn’t good at his job? How much taxpayer money did he save or lose through his trades or those of his group? “bbbbut AIG failed” So fucking what – this guy couldn’t stop it, why is he guilty by association. If one group screws up, do you fire the whole division?

what is it about libertarians that they always think that people who dont make very much money are obviously being paid too much but people who make 750000 from a company that should be bankrupt are being rightly compensated?

The fact that people making 750k usually achieve this through arms length negotiation and demonstrable performance and not threats and coercion.

Vanya
Fuck him. His job only exists in the first place because of market inefficiencies caused by lack of transparent information and government distortions. He doesn’t build anything, he doesn’t create anything, he doesn’t make peoples lives better, he doesn’t add any real value to society

Ever stop to think what life would be like without efficient capital markets to allocate resources? He creates something alright. That’s why they call the job a “market-maker”

Energized democrat

the fact that he gave his bonus to charity shows that he didn’t really need the money anyway

Feel free to fuck yourself anytime. Failing that, if you aren’t giving away any resources that you don’t “need” you are a massive hypocrit. I guess as long as we each had a grass hut and some berries to eat, we would all have everything we “need” – feel free to live like that if it is your choice, idiot.

[P Brooks]

you all think that employers should not be allowed to form contracts with unions

Nicely done!

[SugarFree]

P Brooks,

We really need a “Dumbest Strawman Of The Week” Friday feature. Maybe a poll so we can vote.

[Michael Pack]

One other thing.This guy worked of one dollar for the year,what happened to minimum wage laws?I guess if you don’t ‘need’ the money you shouldn’t be paid.

[TofuSushi]

Maybe a poll so we can vote.

As long as there is a vote-check to prevent cheating.

[Hank]

“He doesn’t build anything, he doesn’t create anything, he doesn’t make peoples lives better, he doesn’t add any real value to society.”

Stop dissin’ JarJarSushi.

[Right Wing Realist]

He’s rich, so he deserves to be executed by a public mob.

^this is what leftists and reasonoids actually believe.

[bill]

“We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised.”

I’d like to see that guy go over to GM and tell that to the line workers. The beatdown would be monumental.

[domoarrigato]

TofuSushi | March 25, 2009, 1:25pm | #

Maybe a poll so we can vote.

As long as there is a vote-check to prevent cheating.

Maybe we could just sign cards – none of that shady secret ballot stuff…

[JB]

Moral of the story:

There is only one proper thing to say to government in any and every situation: ‘go fuck yourselves’.

Anyone who gets into bed with the government deserves their dick to fall off.

[TofuSushi]

Maybe we could just sign cards – none of that shady secret ballot stuff…

Perfect!

Where is MNG?

[Reinmoose]

We really need a “Dumbest Strawman Of The Week” Friday feature. Maybe a poll so we can vote.

Wait, dumbest as in worst attempt at a… or dumbest as in most hilariously good attempt at a…

[JB]

I’m waiting for the AIG exec who ‘donates’ his bonus money to taking out hits on members of Congress.

‘You are going to take all of my $700,000? Do you know how many hits that buys?’

[domoarrigato]

JB,

Right on – see what Ray Dalio, the founder of the worlds largest hedge fund, has to say about partnering with the government

[P Brooks]

I suppose I should have said, “Nicely done, Reinmoose!”

I thought that was you.

[SugarFree]

Reinmoose,

Wait, dumbest as in worst attempt at a… or dumbest as in most hilariously good attempt at a…

Those two overlap to me so well, I’m not sure I could tell the difference. Maybe “Laughably Stupid”?

[Isaac Bartram]

‘You are going to take all of my $700,000? Do you know how many hits that buys?’

And remember everybody cuts prices in a recession.

[domoarrigato]

‘You are going to take all of my $700,000? Do you know how many hits that buys?’

unless hits cost less than 700k / 535 =~ $1300 per hit, it ain’t nearly enough.

[energized democrat]

Failing that, if you aren’t giving away any resources that you don’t “need” you are a massive hypocrit. I guess as long as we each had a grass hut and some berries to eat, we would all have everything we “need” – feel free to live like that if it is your choice, idiot.

speaking of strawmen this is a good one. like progressives want us all to go back to wearing grass skirts and eating dried tree bark.

i guess since i care about the poor and everyone having what they need it means that i dont care about prosperity. well guess what the progressives are proving that if things are more equal then everyone is more prosperous like they are in some other countries. obama is taking steps to bring us back to the prosperity we saw in the 90s under clinton and you all want to block that. i cant say i can see good natured motives for doing that.

[JB]

domo, good to see someone voice that, but they really should be laughing at government assurances.

Congress is willing to ignore the spirit and letter of the Constitution. I don’t know what stronger assurances you can make. Maybe have Obama get down on his knees and say ‘I am an idiot’ three times?

[JB]

unless hits cost less than 700k / 535 =~ $1300 per hit, it ain’t nearly enough.

Fear is a big motivator. All you would need is a few and the rest would shut their cowardly mouths.

[kinnath]

Salon has picked up the story. The comments a amusing. They have less nuance that Mo’s first post here.

Just more bloody, red meat for the wolves.

[anon]

Atlas? You’re joking right? This douchebag is only getting paid because you and I pay our taxes.

Reason sucks.

[domoarrigato]

i guess since i care about the poor and everyone having what they need it means that i dont care about prosperity. well guess what the progressives are proving that if things are more equal then everyone is more prosperous like they are in some other countries. obama is taking steps to bring us back to the prosperity we saw in the 90s under clinton and you all want to block that. i cant say i can see good natured motives for doing that.

Like I said, If you care so much about the poor – feel free to give away all the money you don’t “need” Until you’ve done that, don’t come knocking on my door thinking you can demand mine.

The overwhelming evidence is that when people are more equal via government redistribution and destruction of incentives, poor people have no reason to become productive. If having the top 5% of people wholly supporting the bottom 2/3rds is what you mean by properous, I suppose… The really stupid thing about this argument is that “equality” as measured by the gini coefficient has remained pretty much the same over the last 50 years or so in this country. Not one set of policies tried has changed it much – but they sure have wasted and stolen a lot of money.

[Jennifer]

obama is taking steps to bring us back to the prosperity we saw in the 90s under clinton and you all want to block that.

Going deeper into debt to temporarily avoid paying down the debt you already have and can’t afford to pay is NOT the way to prosperity.

[insurgent]

As taxpayers, we are invested in this company to the hilt and really need to make sure it stays afloat and is profitable.
By pissing on these employees that had nothing to do with the original problems, they are now going to go work for our *competitors*. Ergo, AIG will end up being run by a bunch of AMTRAK managers that couldn’t find a profit if it bit them on the face.

Now we all know why mob rule sucks. Good job guys.

[The Angry Optimist]

You people are incredible. Arbitrary, capricious and populist action from the government and a lot of you are going through the mental contortions to justify it.

Fucking. Amazing.

For all of you saying that “this guy wouldn’t have gotten paid anyways without taxpayer money”, that’s bullshit and you know it. The fact is this: the government fraudulently induced people to keep working for $1 with the promise of later compensation. This guy, had the Government been honest with him, could have quit and made more money working at McDonald’s rather than having the wool pulled over his eyes.

So, Government Lies + Government Being Capricious + Populism = Libertarians fellating the government.

[Lamar]

Chicago Tom: Didn’t Circuit City execs recently get to keep over 90% of their compensation in bankruptcy? If you’re year’s wage was in the form of a bonus, and your division was profitable and you worked on cleaning up the mess others created, would you want to keep 90% of your bonus, or would you prefer to keep 10%?

Regardless, the point is that the “they wouldn’t have gotten anything in bankruptcy court” underestimates what they would have gotten by a few hundred thousand dollars.

[Craig]

Do we want to know how much of a mess AIG would be in without these employees the last year?

Yeah, they might have lost $60 billion or something…. Oh, wait….

[The Angry Optimist]

This douchebag is only getting paid because you and I pay our taxes.

He’s not getting paid anything, jackass.

The Government just lied and stole 740,000 worth of labor.

[P Brooks]

I’d like to see that guy go over to GM and tell that to the line workers. The beatdown would be monumental.

Last time I checked, those worthless UAW fucks were getting a regular paycheck, as per their contract.

[kinnath]

I’d like to see that guy go over to GM and tell that to the line workers. The beatdown would be monumental.

In high school, the proletariat worships the jocks and beats up the nerds.

As grown ups, the proletariat sucks the union tit and worships ball-players that “earn” their 8-figure salaries while despising everyone that makes a lot of money with their brains. Cause that’s not real work.

[The Angry Optimist]

kinnath – that is some tasty elitism, my friend. I like it.

If I as a taxpayer am gonna get fucked (by having to bailout all these fucking poeple), it’s only fair that these people get fucked a little too.

Yikes.

[domoarrigato]

I love the people who say that the financial industry doesn’t “produce anything” (it’s only 8% of GDP after all). They think that somehow a guy at a screen who generates 20mm a year in profits is somehow worthless compared to a guy in an assembly line who adds $1000/day in value to the cars he attaches the bumpers to. Because we can grab the car with our hands!

[kinnath]

Remember kiddies, Jake DeSantis is bitching about losing his $750K net bonus. Given Federal and NY state taxes, his gross must have been $1.5M or so.

So let’s gin up some real outrage over MILLION DOLLAR BONUSES.

[JB]

Can we please stop calling these ‘bonuses’?

They are contractually-obligated deferred compensation.

[kinnath]

They are contractually-obligated deferred compensation.

See kinnath’s prior posts.

[ChrisO]

“Sympathy” has nothing to do with anything. The guy had a contract with very specific, enforceable terms and lived up to his end of the bargain. The feds knew about these contracts when they bought up much of AIG. The contract should be enforced as written. Period.

The actions by the House and the state AGs in this matter should be extremely disturbing to everyone with more than a room-temperature IQ.

[domoarrigato]

In centigrade.

[Untermensch]

Qua? vanya:

His job only exists in the first place because of market inefficiencies caused by lack of transparent information and government distortions. He doesn’t build anything, he doesn’t create anything, he doesn’t make peoples lives better, he doesn’t add any real value to society – he is a parasite arbitraging off market inefficiencies with a vested interest in letting the government foster those inefficiencies so that he and people like him can game the system.

Come now Vanya, warum don’t you just get it out of your System und kahl him a Jew?

[Pro Libertate]

I hate Illinois Nazis. But I believe in their constitutional right to receive incentive bonuses.

[T]

Note to self: never let these people anywhere near my pay structure. Because apparently, the agreed upon terms between me and my employer are subject to changes immolation if they don’t like my employer.

[Hazel Meade]

TAO, I don’t see any libertarians fellating the government. Just pointing out why AIG should have been in bankruptcy in the first place.

It’s a rhetorical argument: You’ve got a problem with paying bonuses? Then stop supporting bailouts.

The fact that this bullshit has led the government into one of the most egrigious uses of ex-post-facto punishment for crimes not even commited is case-in-point proof that the government cannot be trusted to run businesses in the private sector.

All of the worst instincts of the populist/progressive Obama movement are on full display.

I for one am enjoying watching them make total cretins of themselves.

[vanya]

Ever stop to think what life would be like without efficient capital markets to allocate resources?

I don’t have to, that’s the life we already have. Get your nose out of the textbook. How anyone can make the claim with a straight face that existing capital markets are efficiently allocating resources is beyond me. Why do you think the economy is so messed up? Resources have been allocated with incredible inefficiency for at least the past 8 years. Now letting AIG, GS, etc. go bankrupt rather than get bailouts would have gone a long way towards restoring market efficiency. But we didn’t do that and here we are.

Domoarigato – guess what – those Wall Street profits proved to be completely illusory. They did not really exist, and that 8% of GDP is also quickly vanishing. Nice job. Capital markets are supposed to be a means to an end, not an end in themselves – they are supposed to be allocating capital more efficiently to the best producers of goods and services. And the people in the financial world who do that work deserve to keep their profits. But that’s not what most traders have been doing – they’ve just been gambling, nothing more, nothing less. And I would be OK with that too, so long as the gamblers pay up when they lose. But no, now the taxpayer is supposed to cover their losses. Fuck that. There’s a world of difference between a commercial lender or a private equity investor and a trader like DeSantis.

[mantooth]

Great. Now I’ll have to stay in my office the rest of the afternoon because I don’t want my co-workers to see that I’ve been crying. Just heartbreaking story.

[Paul]

Mr. Desantis does understand how this high-stakes game works, right? I mean, I get Desantis’ point and fundamentally, he’s right. But these are public-private partnerships. The CEO of AIG (Landau Calrissian) made a deal with the Empire (Darth Obama). It’s just too bad this deal keeps getting worse. But that’s what happens when you make deals with the Empire.

[Hazel Meade]

The CEO of AIG (Landau Calrissian) made a deal with the Empire (Darth Obama). It’s just too bad this deal keeps getting worse. But that’s what happens when you make deals with the Empire.

So does that make DeSantis Han Solo, and maybe C3PO represents US taxpayers?

[Alex]

Screw him and his self-righteous crap. HOW CAN HE DARE TAKE SUCH A TONE! He is, as was appropriately mentioned, a parasite. He does not need the piddly million dollar bonus after the tens to hundreds of millions he has made already. I think it is fair to ask our culture to adjust and reassess the amount we fund / finance our lawyers and our business class. Why do I say this? Well, let me be self-righteous. I work as a physician and service the poor and the indigent. I make in 5 years what he is “giving away” to charity. And of that, I am forced to give about 60% of this to malpractice insurance and other fees of the medical profession. I work a hell of a lot more hours than Mr. Desantis, I guarantee. And when I am self-righteous about helping people, I can say so sincerely.

It is time we look to the bloodsuckers of our society. It’s time the business class, the political class and the lawyers STOP sucking our blood and propagandizing. It really is time to riot in the streets for a fair and responsible system.

Stop your whining. Consider yourself lucky that no one is going to sue you or your company for malpractice for destroying countless lives.

[Paul]

So does that make DeSantis Han Solo, and maybe C3PO represents US taxpayers?

No, he’s just another official at Cloud City. The TaxPayers are Rebellion.

[P Brooks]

Dear Alex (or should I call you “Che”?)-

Shut the fuck up, you self-righteous, blathering commie.

[vanya]

I’ll simplify this so even Gillespie can understand.

1. Large financial houses place bets for years, inflating asset values, and generating false profits.

2. Employees of these houses pay themselves large salaries and bonuses year after year derived from what we now know were non-existent profits.

3. Government bails out these companies with taxpayer money when their profits turn out to have actually been losses after all.

4. Employees of said Companies whose salaries and bonuses are pretty much entirely funded from taxpayer money, at least retroactively (because AFAIK none of them have offered to pay back the compensation they received over the past 10 years when these Companies turn out to have not been profitable at all) whine bitterly when the government tries to take some of this government funded compensation back. And this guy is supposed to be a libertarian hero?

Saying “I was against the bailout but these guys should get their bonuses” is probably the most ridiculous position you can take. No. The bailout was a huge mistake, and continuing to pour cash into these zombies to fund high levels of compensation is just compounding that mistake.

[bill]

Hey I have no love for the UAW, but the fact is they renegotiated contracts and made concessions when GM got bailed out. That was my point. On the other hand AIG had a senator slip language into the stimulus bill protecting their bonuses. Some of which were probably more than a UAW worker makes in 20 years.

[@]

No vanya, the most ridiculous position that one can take is to vote for legislation that you haven’t read, appear mortified when it has bad things in it, then stretch constitutional boundaries to use the tax code to strip income away from people that you voted to give it to to start with.

[Paul]

1. Large financial houses place bets for years, inflating asset values, and generating false profits.

2. Employees of these houses pay themselves large salaries and bonuses year after year derived from what we now know were non-existent profits.

3. Government bails out these companies with taxpayer money when their profits turn out to have actually been losses after all.

Problem solved.

[vanya]

No vanya, the most ridiculous position that one can take is to vote for legislation that you haven’t read, appear mortified when it has bad things in it, then stretch constitutional boundaries to use the tax code to strip income away from people that you voted to give it to to start with.

Well, sure. But I don’t think anyone on this thread advocates voting for “legislation you haven’t read”, even the most far left posters. It’s also possible to have no respect for either AIG or Congress, I know some find that difficult to believe.

[DannyK]

Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored.

I think I figured out the problem right here. He knew there was a con going on, but he thought he was in on it!

[Hazel Meade]

Well, the really big problem is that issuing legislation after the fact to strip away payments that were explicitly permitted in a previous piece of legislation (remember Chris Dodd explictly permitted retention bonuses at the request of the Treasury department) is a gross abuse of power. Treading pretty darn close to ex-post-facto punishments, the prohibition on which is just about as fundamental a principle as habeas corpus.

[Jeff Balla]

Article 1, Section 9:
“No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.”

Rock on, Jake.

[Bob Smith]

Giving his bonus to charity may have been one of the stupidest financial moves of his life. If Obama’s proposed limit on deductibility of charitable donations becomes law, he’ll end up paying 90% in taxes but only be able to deduct it at a 28% rate. That error would cost him a cool $460k.

[Seamus]

For all of you saying that “this guy wouldn’t have gotten paid anyways without taxpayer money”, that’s bullshit and you know it. The fact is this: the government fraudulently induced people to keep working for $1 with the promise of later compensation. This guy, had the Government been honest with him, could have quit and made more money working at McDonald’s rather than having the wool pulled over his eyes.

The feds and CEO Liddy ought to just tell DeSantis what Otter told Flounder: “You can’t spend your whole life worrying about your mistakes! You fucked up – you trusted us!”

[Seamus]

Congress bought those fucking contracts when they bought the fucking company! Let the buyer beware, rule of law, sanctity of contracts and all of that.

But only the little people conduct due diligence before buying a company.

[plutosdad]

I know a few people at AIG here in chicago, they are all just as pissed off. From what I heard from them (also what I’ve read elsewhere) it was only one small part of the company that invested in these, the rest – abuot 90% – of the company is fine, and has done sound business. But AIG as a whole is being made into a scapegoat. They actually divided themself up a few weeks ago into more like a holding company to try to remove any more influence of that part of the company.

Though I guess it’s even worse for Wells Fargo – here’s a company that didn’t want TARP money but Bernake browbeat them into taking it, and then they cancelled a vacation that was to reward their top sales people.

Every socialist I know used to think atlas shrugged was a joke and could never happen. And now here we are.