Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/10/news/companies/aig_bonuses/index.htm?postversion=2009071009" target="_blank">http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/1...09071009</a> I just can't get behind this. How in the world can a rational person justify a bonus if the only reason the company still exists is because they were bailed out? I don't think anyone should be getting a bonus until the bail out money is repaid. And if AIG or any company is afraid of losing "talent", at this point I'd have to say they should call their bluff and see if they leave. Where would they go? The grass isn't greener anywhere else in that field right now, it's all dead and brown. It's one thing to bail out a company, it's another to rub our noses in it.
Originally Posted By DAR So this means the next time they ask for a bailout, we the American public and taxpayers can give AIG a giant middle finger.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I think we can all agree, the Government bailout of AIG was probably not needed, if they can afford massive bonuses, they can afford to stay afloat without taxpayer assistance...
Originally Posted By fkurucz AH, but they are "special", unlike the little people. They don't have to justify their bonuses via results.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Where would they go? The grass isn't greener anywhere else in that field right now, it's all dead and brown.<< Not true. Unemployment in the financial sector is just over 5%. Banks under the bailout restrictions - especially AIG - have been losing top level management to other companies right and left. Which doesn't mean that the weasels should be getting the bonuses, it's just more proof that America has been pwned, probably permanently. Cramdowns will solve it. Everything else just encourages it.
