So because the 80 billion or whatever was already "paid" to AIG we shouldn't worry about the 165 million? Sorry. It doesn't fly. This is the same argument for letting each individual wetback to stay. One at a time they are just 5 feet of cheap labor, but as a group, they are a burden of the school/hospital/welfare system. The retention motivation should be 1) Stay and clean up the mess you made, or spend the REST OF YOUR STINKING LIFE IN JAIL, breaking rocks, and servicing Bubbah. 2) SEE #1
Fine then they can use YOUR money not mine you dumb sack of shit. WE pretty much own that company aren't you forgetting?
Pa(b)st, here is the answer you have been looking for: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071104173753AA2iFyu
pabst you forgot to mention moses rubenstein,thad's agent,and all your political buddies who skimmed 20% off the top of the taxpayers loot,your one sad punk
While I don't think government should be able to break contracts in general, i do agree with you on AIG. In effect, AIG is in bankruptcy, while not legally, they are not able to cover their capital needs, and if not for government funds, they would be. In bankruptcy, the contracts can be adjusted, or even voided all together. I think this is the route that should be taken. Declared in liquidation status, and all contracts modified accordingly. As for the employees....I think if they start to defect, they should be made to stay and fix the problem they created. President Obama should reinstate the draft, and draft everyone of them into the military and in lieu of going to Iraq or Afghanistan, they can choose to do their time at AIG, at paygrades commensurate with what E-1's make in the service, and fix tha damn thing they created. Further, I think all the counterparties should not profit either, GS and the other firms new what they were getting into, or should have known the risks that AIG was taking, and they did know it, GS bet against them, any profits made by any of the other counterparties should be payable to the taxpayers in the form of a 20 or 30 year term loan.
They are mostly sales bonuses with legally binding contracts. They have the contracts, they made the sales, and some bastards that can't find their ass with both hands after election day want to stride in wide between the legs and take their money!! This is America, nobody has to put up with bullshit like that...
All of this could have been accomplished by letting them go under. Really, whats the difference? If the couterparties are not to be made whole (your argument re: GS) then why go through this charade of "bailing out" AIG?
Accountability, as regards private business, should occur at the board of directors / shareholders, not some bureaucrat slouching towards the next paid holiday.
What a unique brand of patriotism thats managed to evolve; one that emphasizes self and has no loyalty to anything except tenets that insulate self interest at the expense of the majority. That resembles piracy more than freedom; freedom to what ...fuck your neighbor. The forefathers would have AIG bonus recepients pilloried in the square along with the lawyers who drafted their contracts. This isn't even about individualism, its about lawyers who've substituted contracts in place of an ethically based society. At the rate America is graduating lawyers and MBAS, needing to earn their livings by turning inwards for it, the future holds more of the same ...middle class taxpayers out of the loop ...class warfare, hell yes.