Obama's First Un-inherited Test (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

SpinnerofTales -> Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 5:03:23 PM)

Up until now, most of the problems that Obama has been dealing with are leftovers. The economic crisis, the bailouts, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan all started long before he took office. Now, though, he has a crisis that will really test his presidency. I speak, of course of the AIG bonus situation.

While the argument can be made that this is a tempest in a teapot ($165,000,000 being only a little more than 1% of the bailout given to AIG), the message sent and the reaction to it are very clear. AIG is saying in no uncertain terms that, despite it's mismangement and role in driving our economy into the dumper, they have no intention of giving up their personal pile. Their excuse that these bonuses were contractually agreed upon does little to placate the people who are undergoing considerable pain due to this economic downturn. This is especially true for those who have been told they must renegotiate their contracts because of this downturn.

So, in short, this a a crisis. It's one that happened on Obama's watch and he has to take care of it from scratch. Even if what he does is more symbolic than substanative, he has to send what is seen as a clear message to AIG and by extension the American people that he is not going to tolerate this. It's time for hardball and we now get an opportunity to see if our president can play it.

So...what do you all think the president should do about this? What would you consider a sucessful resolution to this bonus mess and what do you think will happen if he doesn't bring about some kind of solution satisfactory to the American people?




lronitulstahp -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 5:08:19 PM)

Just a question....how exactly does the President have power to control such things?  i realize the SEC is a federal agency, but isn't there some sort of chain of command or aren't there Congressional hearings that need to take place prior to President Obama stepping in?



MmeGigs -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 5:40:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales
So...what do you all think the president should do about this? What would you consider a sucessful resolution to this bonus mess and what do you think will happen if he doesn't bring about some kind of solution satisfactory to the American people?


Seems to me that they're doing something about it.  They're asking to see the contracts so that they can determine whether they were at all shady.  They're asking to see who's going to benefit.  I'd like to see them get the 400 people who are getting bonuses in a room and talk to them about what's going on.  With a TV camera.  And some taxpayers and folks who invested in AIG and lost.  I'll bet that if these folks have to have their faces out there justifying why they deserve this bonus in front of the folks who are paying for it, they might be willing to reconsider their contract.



maybemaybenot -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 6:05:24 PM)

Obama gave/approved a huge bailout for AIG with absolutely zero stipulations, such as were attached to the auto industry.
AIG is a private company who can do as they chose with any monies they get. Unless of course, the bailout money had stipulations.
So.

Obama get a big red  " F " on his first uninherited test. < IMO, of course >

And it is my understanding that what we a referring to as " bonus's", are in actuality commisions to employees who were owed a commision. The government, not even Obama, can dictate to a private company what they can or can't do with their own money/earning.

If I were the employee who was working on commission, I would want my money.  I worked, I did my job, I had no change in terms or conditions of employment, and I want my freaking money.

So, yeah, it sucks  but let's say you were a member of middle or upper middle management and were entitled to your comission. Would you say, oh sorry, the corporation took Federal cash, therefore I will forfeit my paycheck ?

It's a huge mess, and if their had been stipulations, as there were to the auto industry, this wouldn't be happening. Obama let it slip thru the corporate cracks.

                                                   mbmbn

                        mbmbn



domiguy -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 6:23:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales


So...what do you all think the president should do about this? What would you consider a sucessful resolution to this bonus mess and what do you think will happen if he doesn't bring about some kind of solution satisfactory to the American people?


My understanding that the bonus fiasco ocurred long before Obama's term started.   If there are contracts stating that bonuses are to be paid and the company is still in business then it looks like those bonuses will be paid.  The only way out appears to be if you can embarass the receivers of those bonuses in such a manner that they forfeit the right to collect.

If AIG would have gone into bankruptcy they could have reemerged without being weighed down by many past contractual obligations...The same goes for the auto industry,. If they go bankrupt, many of their union costs would be set aside and they could start up again leaner and meaner.



TheUtopian -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 6:49:24 PM)

The hell with the bonuses - I find it extremely disheartening that Obama continues to fuel a dying parasite with more life-blood of the American people.

If the folks here truly understood both the nominal and notional monetary exposure AIG has in terms being used as a funnel for counter party payouts, they would know there is absolutely zero chance AIG can survive long term.


The crime is not the bonuses - but instead the unwillingness to let the Frankenstein monster die.





- R






TNstepsout -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 7:51:45 PM)

AIG was bailed out before he took office. This is still an inherited mess. No single company should have the ability to undermine the economic health of a nation should it fail. AIG and companies like it need to be monitored more closely and maybe broken up.  If the payments have to be made due to contractual obligations I think they should be paid in stock. Then if AIG fails they lose too. Maybe more incentive that way.



ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 8:04:25 PM)

Like I said in the other thread - I propose a new federal tax. Any bonus paid to an executive of a company receiving federal bailout money will be taxed at a rate of 99.9 %. One way or another, we're getting our money back.



TheUtopian -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 8:23:02 PM)

quote:

No single company should have the ability to undermine the economic health of a nation should it fail.


Please....by any and all means - I challenge you or any other poster on these boards to explain in detail how the whole system will collapse if Obama undermines these derivative entrenched, parasitical entities from their ability to pay out counter parties by withholding current and future tax-payer-generated bail-out funds....

Take your time.....do the research, plagiarize, do whatever - but explain to these boards how we will see a total collapse if we don't continue to bail out AIG.

I'll be waiting.....





- R



StrangerThan -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 8:30:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

Up until now, most of the problems that Obama has been dealing with are leftovers. The economic crisis, the bailouts, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan all started long before he took office. Now, though, he has a crisis that will really test his presidency. I speak, of course of the AIG bonus situation.

While the argument can be made that this is a tempest in a teapot ($165,000,000 being only a little more than 1% of the bailout given to AIG), the message sent and the reaction to it are very clear. AIG is saying in no uncertain terms that, despite it's mismangement and role in driving our economy into the dumper, they have no intention of giving up their personal pile. Their excuse that these bonuses were contractually agreed upon does little to placate the people who are undergoing considerable pain due to this economic downturn. This is especially true for those who have been told they must renegotiate their contracts because of this downturn.

So, in short, this a a crisis. It's one that happened on Obama's watch and he has to take care of it from scratch. Even if what he does is more symbolic than substanative, he has to send what is seen as a clear message to AIG and by extension the American people that he is not going to tolerate this. It's time for hardball and we now get an opportunity to see if our president can play it.

So...what do you all think the president should do about this? What would you consider a sucessful resolution to this bonus mess and what do you think will happen if he doesn't bring about some kind of solution satisfactory to the American people?



Honestly, I think it's a distraction. While it does irk the hell out of me, it seems rather idiotic to complain about 165 million when we're soaked to the tune of something like 180 billion by this company.

This is exactly the kind of end-around politicians and partisans want and like. Makes them seem like they're doing their job in protecting your money and your interest. Well, if they were really doing that, we'd not be where we are. Every major crises has a few scapegoats. We're starting to see some. The hope is that's where folks will pinpoint their interest while losing sight of the greater picture. And in this case, the greater picture is 180 billion, not 165 million.

This is perfect in some ways. It let's the righteous indignation flow unchecked, let's those in charge, and even more importantly, those who created the legislation that allowed it, who looked the other way, who lined their own pockets refocus the vision on what is a pittance in comparison to the real financial and economic rape.

Yes, it pisses me off where the money is going. What pisses me off even more though are the architects of this disaster are lining up to point fingers at AIG bonuses. I'm not talking Obama. This is a true leftover for him. The measure of this man will not, for me, be whether or not he somehow manages to stop payment of bonuses, but whether or not he holds the real culprits to the fire.

In all honesty, this is political grandstanding at its finest.



NeedToUseYou -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 9:03:56 PM)

If the contracts are signed and were agreed to, I think it would be very corrupt to take that away. The government should have thought of this before giving them the money. It's also not like every AIG employee is responsible for the mess, a large portion of AIG is profitable, it is a few bad sectors that aren't. However, it doesn't matter just because a business is going bust doesn't make it acceptable for the employer just to decide not to pay you what you and the employer contractually agreed to.

If they didn't want to pay this stuff they should have thought of that before giving them money, and forcing a renegotiation or soemthing. As is they don't have a position to take peoples bonuses except by force.

Anyway, this is why they should have just let the company go bankrupt, whatever.





MarsBonfire -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 9:04:28 PM)

As Frank put it: "We now effectively own 80% of AIG. They may be able to lay claim to their bonus money, but nothing says they have to remain employed." Since we also control the SEC, I think it's well within our rights to ban these creeps from ever working for an investment firm again... ever.

(There are, apparently, bills on the floor now that are singling out bonus money earned via governmental bailouts, which will tax between 60% to 100% of all that money they lay their gubby little paws on...)

Now, onto the bigger issues...



OrionTheWolf -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 9:39:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarsBonfire

As Frank put it: "We now effectively own 80% of AIG. They may be able to lay claim to their bonus money, but nothing says they have to remain employed." Since we also control the SEC, I think it's well within our rights to ban these creeps from ever working for an investment firm again... ever.


What laws would they have broken to have such a drastic measure taken against them? Is this kind of like those mob things with torches and a rope?

quote:


(There are, apparently, bills on the floor now that are singling out bonus money earned via governmental bailouts, which will tax between 60% to 100% of all that money they lay their gubby little paws on...)

Now, onto the bigger issues...


Would you happen to know the HR number so I could read those?



chiaThePet -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 10:05:55 PM)

Hmmm, my Father recently passed away and I was, as his son, remembered quite well in his will.
Some of the bling, whilst all shiny and sparkling, is a tad bit over the top for my reserved taste and style.

As his son, I am of course quite taken that he bestowed upon me the shimmering trinkets of his hearts desire.
I was aware always of their existence before they became mine, as they were displayed openly there before me.

He, with love, willed that I should have the jewels which were openly displayed as a parcel of my inheritance.
He found me worthy, out from among my brethren, to be the recipient of said bounty of which he was so fond.

I of course had no choice in the fact that he was my father, that I was born of his loins and raised of his hand.
I at no time campaigned to be his son, at no time set forth my name as one whom wished to inherit his bling.

I did not hail from sea to shining sea, offering of eloquent words, that I might inherit all which my Father held before me.
Holding up his majesty of bling, twisted of my taste, deformed of my style, with promise that I might make such shine anew.

Yet inherit such I did, as his son, at his choice and free will, with no provocation, aside of my ability to be loved as a good son.
It is within this inheritance that I am completely humbled and accepting of his gift to me, free of judgment or reservation of such.

Had I stood boldly and proclaimed my desire to wear his bling about me, knowing full well the style and design as presented,
simply to turn and claim that I wore such only because it was bestowed upon me by inheritance, faultless of it's original creation.

He would rise mightily from the earth, snatch each bauble from my being, and fling such to the clamoring crowds with abandon.
His words would echo as thunder at my presumed misfortune of desire, "Don't be such a Casper Fuckin Milquetoast boy".

chia* (the pet)



TheHeretic -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 10:48:41 PM)

      A crisis???  The first real test of his Presidency???  What the hell are you talking about, Spinner?  This isn't even a pop quiz.  Maybe, MAYBE, it's the teacher having him come up and solve a problem on the blackboard.  This is exactly the day-to-day job he wanted so badly.  Let's hope this isn't an indication of how he is going to do that job, because his response seems a bit troubling

     I caught a bit of the news on the radio this afternoon while stuck in traffic (some idiot rolled his pimped Explorer on the freeway, and had to be airlifted.  My taxes will probably be paying for his helicopter ride, too.).  It seems President Obama has ordered his Treasury Secretary, the one who can't get his own taxes paid, to explore all options on preventing this.  I see; A: a dumbass press release type statement, or B: a display that Obama lacks the proper focus and organizational skills to understand actual priorities.  Doesn't the Treasury Secretary have slightly more important things to be doing right now?

     If this is an indication of how he will govern, the analogy is to a chicken with it's head cut off.  Oh wait.  Talking about chicken is a slur against black people...  It's probably racist to make that comparison.



awmslave -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/16/2009 11:17:13 PM)

quote:

It's time for hardball and we now get an opportunity to see if our president can play it.

If I was Obama I would immediately freeze the assets of AIG top managers and order full federal investigation. It will not be difficult to prove that for at least decade these people commited fraud, tax evasion and other financial crimes. After conviction the others forget bonuses (legalized theft in other words) for a while. Russian government has perfected similar system to discipline "oligarchy".



4u2spoil -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/17/2009 2:55:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

So, in short, this a a crisis. It's one that happened on Obama's watch and he has to take care of it from scratch.



Actually, the unrestricted use of federal funds was set up under Paulson and Bush's guys. If you remember, their bailout came before the general TARP ($700 billion) bill was passed. And the original $700 billion request was something like 3 pages with no specifics on how it would be used. It got expanded, but Obama was not the signatory or cheerleader on the original rescue of AIG, which is where these bonus contracts originated.

It's pretty difficult for Obama to legally do anything about it now. The sad part is that a lot of these bonuses are actually going to foreign investors who truly couldn't care about the US taxpayer, but it's a legal contract that has to be upheld nonetheless. What he could do is take $165 million from any future funding to pay for the bonuses, and restrict use of future funding so that it can't be used to pay bonuses, but this is a big stinking turd that's already dropped. Too late to put it back.



housesub4you -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/17/2009 4:37:45 AM)

I think the term "bonus" is not the corect term for these funds.  It seems they are funds promised for staying on the job, more like retention pay then a bonus.  A bonus is something you get because of preformance (a good performance) these funds are offers to stay employed with said firm

So I think what will happen when the Feds get the contracts (watch for a long legal battle before they turn them over) is that they will be reclassified as retention pay and therefore they will be able to stop payment if not paid out or sue the individuals for the return of the funds. 

However all this will have to go through the courts and we all know how long that will take and it will like other such matters fall from the front pages and be forgetton.  In the end they will get to keep their money and we will have wasted even more on legal battles keeping every lawyer in DC spending even more taxpayer money with no results.

Seems we should just pay them in AIG stock, then let it go down and fail



MmeGigs -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/17/2009 4:39:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou
If the contracts are signed and were agreed to, I think it would be very corrupt to take that away.


No, it wouldn't.  Contracts aren't carved in marble.  They can be renegotiated.  The automakers and the UAW renegotiated their contracts in light of their new reality.  Why shouldn't these folks?

quote:

It's also not like every AIG employee is responsible for the mess, a large portion of AIG is profitable, it is a few bad sectors that aren't.


The bulk of the payments are going to folks in the Financial Products group, the unit of the company that sold the credit default swaps that caused AIG's mess. 



mikeyOfGeorgia -> RE: Obama's First Un-inherited Test (3/17/2009 4:49:28 AM)

ever notice that, after 9-11, America went looking for Osama Bin Laden...and now we have two new leaders in America...Obama and Biden? curious, huh?



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875