Home › Blogs › davidfarrar's blog ›

Why are we punishing AIG's employees?

Submitted by davidfarrar on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 13:13
in

I just posted the following question to Pres. Obama -- I assume -- on a new blog site, Ask the President, sponsored by The Nation, The Washington Post and Personal Democracy Forum:

Why are we going after AIG "retention" employees for simply doing their jobs? I feel strongly about AIG, Inc., giving our taxpayers money away, but to use Congress's taxing powers to go after a few private employees for simply doing their jobs, is overkill. If Congress wants to get the taxpayers' money back, go after AIG, Inc., not its employees.

 Check it out.

Think of this effort as you will, at least its a good example of both the infancy of deliberative groupware in action and its potential.

ex animo

davidfarrar

5
Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

Comments

We taxpayers own AIG

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 14:07.

or at least 80% of it.

Evidently the last thing Obama and Barney Frank want is a bunch of highly compensated and motivated emplyees running the company.

If I were the AIG CEO, I would have told Baney to take this job and shove it yesterday. Let Barney go find some other qualified candidate to take the job for $1 a year.

Oh and yes Barney, lets publish the names of the bonus recipients too! Nothing like a lynch mob on the front lawn to boost moral and recruitment!

Re: Why are we punishing AIG's employees?

Submitted by gs on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 14:34.

The idea seems to be to warn the rest of the world not to sign treaties with us, buy our debt, or invest in our economy.

No kidding.

Submitted by lagomorph on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 16:09.

If I sat back over a few brews with a group of radical nihilist let's-overthrow-the-government friends to develop a complex strategy to cause this much damage to our country through asymmetric economic warfare, the end result could never be this elegant or successful.  Either the people "in charge" are Kasparov-level professionals, or they're absolute hapless idiots.

As much as I enjoy conspiracy theories and tinfoil hattery for its endless speculative entertainment value, my rational mind tells me that the level of competency required to obtain such an effective outcome as this is sorely lacking in the government and any of its overlord(s).  I'm more convinced that the economy broke, and the more the government and the Fed try to fix it, the more they muck it up into a kind of Perfect Storm of failure.  I call this "The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight" theory. 

As comical as that sounds, however, I'm extremely concerned that the net result is that we're liable to edge closer and closer to tyranny as the government finds itself more and more frustrated by being less and less able to control the outcome (and the ever-escalating populism).

you're assuming that they care about the populism.

Submitted by RisingTide on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 16:28.

why not just "make me do it" as fdr put it...?

All this effort

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 16:27.

to get back 50 cents per taxpayer.

I agree, they can't shoot straight, but they can do a hell of a lot of collateral damage along the way.

I know the Kos thypes think Obama is five moves ahead in a three dimensional chess game, but the fact is he can't find his ass with both hands.

We are in trouble and this should frighten everyone:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=7120979

I think eventually anyone making over $250,000 is screwed. Seems to be a majic number that congress does not like.

yawn. i really wish congress would put in more higher taxbracket

Submitted by RisingTide on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 16:33.

Obama is an asshole, and nobody knows how in hell we're goin got get ou tof this depression.

enjoy!

And it was all a lack of good legislation to begin with

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 16:31.

But, Barney Frank loves to scapegoat.

Ever think this was deflection?

Submitted by spartacus on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 18:44.

"Hey, look up in the sky!" he exclaims, as he grabs the money off the counter and runs out the door. 

Deflection is the oldest trick in the book. And while I am pissed off like the rest of the nation about bonus payouts to employees who feel entitled to be paid to stay working (like they have options if they quit? get a grip) - to me this all stinks like that can of tuna that didn't make it to the trash.

Here's why - we have bigger issues that this bailout money to be chasing down, and Obama is using this to cushion himself as the People's President claiming outrage and the "buck stops with me" one liners.

I'm glad Obama is outraged and I love hearing him speak, but I can't help thinking all this posturing is simply a way to deflect us right now from the issues we should be paying attention to.

And if it was, the collateral damage was immense

Submitted by Ironman on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 19:26.

Right now the Democrats are left with the Treasury Secretary and the Senate Banking Committee chairman both looking like clueless liars.  You can throw people overboard for only so long and this team is getting into foul trouble way, way early in the game.

I don't think they expected the press was going to look back at the folks selling the outrage and realize they were being played. Maybe some reporters finally got tired of being played for marks.

I still want to know how Goldman Sachs could now claim they were solvent all along when they used AIG as a pass-through to get over $30B in TARP money.  Where did Hank Paulsen work again?

 

Foul Trouble

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 22:26.

Indeed. Who will foul out first? Geitner?

The Senate protects their own, so Barney Boy and Chris are probably safe. And they have as much to do with the worldwide financial meltdown as anyone.

Its time to fit the Obama administration for goat horns. This whole mess belongs on his doorstep.

goldmann has balls.

Submitted by RisingTide on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 08:18.

they ran the second AIG bailout, and they're running this outrage scandal.

You seem to be assuming that they had some sort of choice in the matter. Goldmann and the rest of the counterparties have a lot of blackmail saved up...

this isn't the sort of thing that campaign contributions buy.

not Obama.

Submitted by RisingTide on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 08:14.

Goldmann Sachs, who engineered the AIG secondary bailout. And they're getting away scot free.

Can we say counterparty risk?

Can we say free money for no risk premium?

Lonestar

Submitted by acinphx on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 22:55.

You probably don't frequent HuffPo but after reading this article and one of lagomorph's post's today, I am extremely motivated to learn more about the Fed.  Here's the link:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ann-pettifor/bernanke-dodges-the-bulle_b_176753.html

If you have a few minutes to read it, I'd be interested to know what you think of it -- is she off base or would you agree with her?  I didn't know that the Fed has a seat on the board of AIG until reading it.  (Yeah, I know, I have much to learn!)

What do you think of the Fed's role in the bonus debacle?  Does it have a role or does she just have an ax to grind with Ben Bernanke?

person writing is illiterate.

Submitted by RisingTide on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 08:23.

doesn't know jack about the federal reserve, bernanke, or much of anything else. It's Goldmann behind this outrage, and it was them that made sure that the bonuses would be allowed int he bill.

the uproar should be about bailing out goldmann, but... you know how easily bribable reporters are!

Probably looking for someone outside the administration . . .

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 23:53.

Here is a list of the Board of Directors for AIG:

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/board.asp?symbol=AIG

I don't see  anyone representing "The Fed" as a board member.

So I'm thinking the article is not so much an ax to grind with Bernanke, as looking for an entity outside of the Obama administration to blame. The Fed is not a part of the administration, and Obama didn't appoint Bernanke, so if the Fed can be made the scapegoat, Team Obama is off the hook. The Treasury is a different story. The NY Times is no friend to conservatives, but this article is probably closer to reality:

www.nytimes.com/2009/03/20/business/20bonus.html

The US government has only been an "owner" of AIG in the past several months, and they seem to be working closely with the Treasury Department, not he Fed. It would be suprising if someone from the Fed  or Treasury isn't on the board now, given that they own 80% of the company, but that only would have occured in September.

Just my opinion.

writer is just incompetent.

Submitted by RisingTide on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 08:27.

Geithner had a very special job as NY Fed guy -- he was liaison to Wall Street.

Bernanke got his job because Bush and company figured that the foremost expert in the great depression would be a good idea to have on tap when the shit hit the fan.

best appointment bush has made, if you ask me.

Thanks to both of you for

Submitted by acinphx on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 11:12.

Thanks to both of you for your perspectives and for the link, Lonestar.  Rising Tide, why are you convinced it's Goldman behind the bonuses?

they're behind the furor. the bonuses were cut in stone

Submitted by RisingTide on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 11:16.

ages ago. the question is not "why is there an uproar" but why is there an uproar NOW.

There was a time when such an uproar would have allowed us to make good changes in the laws.

My good conservative friends were not with us when we needed them.

Thanks for the info.  I also

Submitted by acinphx on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 13:41.

Thanks for the info.  I also read the Newsweek article linked on the MSN homepage.  Sickening. 

it could be a number of different counterparties...

Submitted by RisingTide on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 11:21.

But goldmann sachs has been consistently getting the better end of the stick. And they've got tons of blackmail... (blackmail makes the world go round!)

At least one of the major financial firms has threatened Malia and Sasha, if they are nationalized. (this is not hyperbole. I know people who are currently afraid for their lives, because they've turned down jobs... -- not this particular job, mind.). Also, these are not the type of people to kid around. They make a threat, they can back it up.

I'm still in favor of Nationalization. Obama knew what he was getting into, and if we have to sacrifice two children for the safety of our country... well, it's a truly hard decision, but there is only one good choice.

Well, one thing is for sure...

Submitted by davidfarrar on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 09:06.

...using the taxing powers of Congress to go after the least powerful group in this whole sorted scenario, simply because they are the least powerful, is nothing but a cowardly witch hunt. The taxing power We, the People, gave Congress was meant to raise funds with which to run the government, not to punish individual citizens in an effort to cover up the government's own incompetence. It is nothing but an abuse of power in my book, and yet another example of the fascist state we now are all living under.

Welcome.

ex animo

davidfarrar

Re: Well, one thing is for sure...

Submitted by gs on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 09:59.

...using the taxing powers of Congress to go after the least powerful group in this whole sorted scenario, simply because they are the least powerful, is nothing but a cowardly witch hunt.

You're right to say 'Congress' because half of the House GOP voted for the "tax".

Have the Republicans learned their lesson after losing Congress and the White House?  Oh yeah, absolutely.  Would the Republicans give us fiscally responsible limited government if we returned them to power?   Suuure they would...

And, as usual, they're outmaneuvered by the Democrats.  Half of House Republicans join the Democrats' witch hunt--and they overlook that for the first time in decades, the Democrats have succeeded in getting a 90% income tax on the books.  Camel's nose, meet tent.

Corrupt gutless morons.

Divided government is the only reason I see to vote Republican.

No Republican (or Democrat) should have voted yes on this

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 11:01.

Besides setting a dangerous precident, it just shows the shallowness of these representatives.

To vote yes on this bill is simply showboating for the folks back home, and the "unintended consequenses" will soon become clear.

we'll get this sort of case soon

Submitted by Ironman on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 11:54.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_&_Tube_Co._v._Sawyer

if the legislature rams it through...

Submitted by RisingTide on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 12:27.

it's much less likely to see the Judiciary declaring it unconstitutional, methinks.

Exactly

Submitted by Lonestar Bill on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 12:23.

Unintended consequence #1-Government spends millions more tax dollars in litigation over this emotional showboating on the part of congress.

Could be deemed a "takings case"

Submitted by Ironman on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 12:30.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_et_al_v._City_of_New_London

Do you really think it will

Submitted by acinphx on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 12:56.

Do you really think it will make it through the Senate in anything close to the House version?  That would surprise me. I think the Dems have gotten what they wanted out of it already -- salve for the public outrage and half of the House GOP voting for a 90% tax rate.  By the tiime it hits the Senate cooler heads will prevail, there will be backtracking on the constitutional concerns and for the reason you raise, the additional cost of litigation.

Not bad for a day's work. Game.Set.Match. for Nancy Pelosi. 

The GOP also really needs to step up its media game.  (What a newsflash, huh?)  Watching Cantor stumble his way through the Morning Joe interview, promoting a bill that would direct Geithner to figure out how to fix the bonus problem, while Boehner calls for his head.  Which is it?  Is Geithner competent or not?  On one hand the GOP says he can be relied on to properly fix the bonus problem and at the same time says he's incompetent.  And, of course, no GOP alternative solution in sight.

Not so sure

Submitted by Ironman on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 14:23.

Pelosi and co. now have Moveon.org , the Working Families Party et al loaded for bear. If they allow this to fall off or get Dodd-ed in conference committee, the lynch mob they fired up will be turning on them.

Meanwhile, they've done more to discredit corporate welfare than anything the GOP has done in a decade.

This is gonna be a long game, folks  

You're right, it will be a

Submitted by acinphx on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 15:47.

You're right, it will be a long game and this was a single round.  But I still think Nancy Pelosi won it.

Isn't discrediting corporate welfare a good thing?  Who is the they in "they've" done more to discredit it than the GOP for the past decade?  The AIG execs or the Dems?  If you meant the GOP, in what way, because I'm not seeing it?

As more is revealed it becomes abundantly clear that regulation and enforcement reform is needed.  The market was obviously unable to regulate itself, as Greenspan acknowledged.  Going forward, what would you expect to see or be looking for from the GOP/conservatives in that regard?

I was reading Jubak's article on MSN (http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/JubaksJournal/fluke-credit-crisis-was-a-heist.aspx).  His description of the "The next round of looting" is not encouraging in terms of reform, especially given both parties' facilitation of the present looting.

We launched Ask The President for questions like that

Submitted by AriMelber on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 13:19.

David - interesting question, and we launched ask the President (yesterday) to spark these kind of public debates over the questions, values and priorities facing our government. This is Ari Melber from The Nation, which is backing the project with PDF and The Washington Times (not the Post, as written above).

We also have a broad range of new media involved -- I emailed Patrick before the launch to invite The Next Right, and please know that you have a standing invitation. Hugh Hewitt, Smart Mobs blog, Care2 and many others are backing Ask The President already.

Cheers, Ari

www.communitycounts.com/obama

 

You did a good job...

Submitted by davidfarrar on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 13:57.

...and an interesting website at: "Ask The President".

Just a couple of suggestions -- and maybe it is just me not being familiar with the website -- but there should be a way for the author of the question to delete the question and regain another question.

Secondly, we should be able to enter the questions through a display of categories or topics.

And lastly; I am not sure if the President is every going to answer these questions, so the answers should also be supplied by the general public with a thumbs up or down vote as well.

But I definately believe this is the next step in harnessing the tremendous potential of the wisdom of crowds for the common good of all.

ex animo

davidfarrar