well, it appears they have not learned anything. they hired 116k new employees. they defered compensation package, in reality they are still getting the money and then because it was defered, more than likely it will be in a lower tax bracket which means the government will get even less money…. oh my! another loss of revenue…
maybe they should just give them AIG stock as payment, maybe AIG should stop undercutting the market so that they can earn something. Sickening is what is it.
Obviously you people do not understand how deferred comp works. They do that instead of contributing to 401
They did not just hire 116,000 employees, those are the current employees
Shame on these fat cats who continue to bleed this country dry…if there’s a will there’s a way and unless some enforceable restrictions and oversights are placed on greed mongers such as AIG, the Amercian public will continue to digress further into economic turmoil.
This is really getting totally out of hand.
AIG currently employs 116k people TOTAL, they did not hire 116k additional. AIG and all companies that use deferred comp are required to file the information with the government. This is a benefit just like a health care spending account which allows pre-tax money to be deferred to be taken later. The money is NOT eligible to be used by AIG to pay down the $152b loan, so I am not sure what the issue is.
“Deferred compensation plans allow employees to postpone taking some of their pay. This lets them defer taxes, sometimes until retirement, when their tax brackets might be lower. AIG said it recently employed about 116,000 people.”
As a result of exhorbitant previously earned results of business practices, AIG should be prevented from paying Deferred payments to executives who mishandled their own company. P/P management should be rewarded accordingly. If the money is paid it should be with the stipulation that anyone receiving it surrender rights to work or be affiliated with the insurance industry.
If you had done research prior to posting, you would have noted that ALL news reports on AIG noted that they have 116k employees total, the article was written poorly. AIG did not double it’s workforce. AIG made a bad investment, as do a lot of companies. That does not mean that all of the execs are wrongdoers. Let’s not forget that Hank Greenberg was in charge when AIG started writing the CDO’s. They are working to fix it, so I say let them do it. There are not enough insurance companies to take on the amount of risk that AIG writes. The insurance market would most likely collapse.
I find it enlightening that someone has actually engaged some sort of thought process before posting here.
Congrats to you. You actually know what you are talking about.
I am still amazed that Greenberg hasn’t been “invited” by some gov’t offical to answer questions as to how his leadership at AIG actually lead to the mess they are in and how his questionable dealings with other companies such as Berkshire Hathaway and reinsuracne put this company into finacial ruins.
Thanks Guy in the know and Mongoose. All these idiots spouting off about things they no nothing about. There’s really only a few people that brought this all on — Cassano and his cronies. This mess was created after Greenberg’s departure. Cassano wrote more of these swaps in the 9 months after Greenberg left that were written in the 7 years before. All they cared about was the megabucks going in their pockets. Believe me it’s the little people who are paying for this mess. And this business regarding the “Bailout” — it needs to be shown for what it really is — a LOAN not a handout. We’re paying handsomely for the privilege of this Bailout. All people hear are the misinformed comments by the media, never any of their retractions or corrections. Look before you leak and think before you speak.
The article said they didn’t want to provide an incentive for employees to quit the company. If the deferred comp. plan is not a “qualified” plan and AIG goes bankrupt, then the employees with the deferred compensation would get in line with other creditors. If the plan is qualified I don’t think there would be a big rush to abolish it because the funds would be secured.
David, I agree on most of your points. In general, the main concern is that the execs could leave, granted, it would not be the worst thing for some of them to be gone, but they need experienced execs in place to instill confidence in the rest of the workforce (116k people). The problem that the deferred comp creates is that if the exec leaves now, they could access their deferred compenstation now which they have seen as a benefit toward leaving the company. AIG needs to have the right people in place in order to come out of this crisis.
sounds you are an inside guy, defending the situation. hard to say thay anyone involved with such a collosal fiacso is should have been entitled to any pay, let along deferred – oops ! we were wrong – you all screwed up and the till is dry for those rewards we promised you.
GL, thanks for the comment, however, AIG employee I am not. The point I was trying to make is that people tend to post here before having all of the information. If people actually did any investigating (Wall Street Journal, Yahoo Finance, etc) they would be more educated on the situation and could make intelligent comments instead of off-the-cuff remarks – everyone is entitled to their opinion, but at least look into the facts before commenting on a piece of a larger story. I presented the facts – you can interpret however you want.
Back to your original comment, GL – about AIG undercutting the market and not posting a profit – a savvy investor would have noted that in AIG’s 2007 Annual report, they posted a Combined Ratio of 90.33% – as you know, the insurance industry is considered profitable when the combined ratio is around 100% or less because income from investments should still help the company post profits (this is harder now with the weakening ecomnomy – it would be harder for a company to post profits since most investment portfolios have seen a decrease in value). Let’s also remember that what got AIG into trouble was the CDO’s (collateralized debt obligations) and CDS’s (credit default swaps), which are financial products, not an insurance product even though they are typically compared to insurance because they have similarites.
either way, the regular folks are and will be clued to AIG as the title and not it’s financial side. many folks are moving their insurance because they don’t want it to transfer to the other side of the business. you and i know that it will not be. but the regular person, will only focus on those 3 letters – AIG.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck…you know the rest. If a “financial” product (wink, wink) is designed to indemnify the holder of that policy, er, I mean instrument, then it sure walks and sounds like an insurance contract, eh? Just because it was cleverly camouflaged to avoid the peering eyes the NY Dept of Insurance doesn’t change the feathers beneath the clothes.
Sure, sure I know, I shouldn’t say nothin’ if I ain’t got nothin’ nice to say. And, oh yeah, I should always check with Yahoo and the papers on the street to consult the spin, dang, I mean facts, before uttering.
well, it appears they have not learned anything. they hired 116k new employees. they defered compensation package, in reality they are still getting the money and then because it was defered, more than likely it will be in a lower tax bracket which means the government will get even less money…. oh my! another loss of revenue…
Dang….Can someone PLEASE take their magic taxpayer wallet off of them.
Either they just don’t get it, or don’t care – probably the latter
M
maybe they should just give them AIG stock as payment, maybe AIG should stop undercutting the market so that they can earn something. Sickening is what is it.
Obviously you people do not understand how deferred comp works. They do that instead of contributing to 401
They did not just hire 116,000 employees, those are the current employees
Shame on these fat cats who continue to bleed this country dry…if there’s a will there’s a way and unless some enforceable restrictions and oversights are placed on greed mongers such as AIG, the Amercian public will continue to digress further into economic turmoil.
This is really getting totally out of hand.
AIG currently employs 116k people TOTAL, they did not hire 116k additional. AIG and all companies that use deferred comp are required to file the information with the government. This is a benefit just like a health care spending account which allows pre-tax money to be deferred to be taken later. The money is NOT eligible to be used by AIG to pay down the $152b loan, so I am not sure what the issue is.
“Deferred compensation plans allow employees to postpone taking some of their pay. This lets them defer taxes, sometimes until retirement, when their tax brackets might be lower. AIG said it recently employed about 116,000 people.”
…
sounds like it was hired to me!…
As a result of exhorbitant previously earned results of business practices, AIG should be prevented from paying Deferred payments to executives who mishandled their own company. P/P management should be rewarded accordingly. If the money is paid it should be with the stipulation that anyone receiving it surrender rights to work or be affiliated with the insurance industry.
If you had done research prior to posting, you would have noted that ALL news reports on AIG noted that they have 116k employees total, the article was written poorly. AIG did not double it’s workforce. AIG made a bad investment, as do a lot of companies. That does not mean that all of the execs are wrongdoers. Let’s not forget that Hank Greenberg was in charge when AIG started writing the CDO’s. They are working to fix it, so I say let them do it. There are not enough insurance companies to take on the amount of risk that AIG writes. The insurance market would most likely collapse.
I find it enlightening that someone has actually engaged some sort of thought process before posting here.
Congrats to you. You actually know what you are talking about.
I am still amazed that Greenberg hasn’t been “invited” by some gov’t offical to answer questions as to how his leadership at AIG actually lead to the mess they are in and how his questionable dealings with other companies such as Berkshire Hathaway and reinsuracne put this company into finacial ruins.
Perhaps his turn in the hot seat is coming.
Thanks Guy in the know and Mongoose. All these idiots spouting off about things they no nothing about. There’s really only a few people that brought this all on — Cassano and his cronies. This mess was created after Greenberg’s departure. Cassano wrote more of these swaps in the 9 months after Greenberg left that were written in the 7 years before. All they cared about was the megabucks going in their pockets. Believe me it’s the little people who are paying for this mess. And this business regarding the “Bailout” — it needs to be shown for what it really is — a LOAN not a handout. We’re paying handsomely for the privilege of this Bailout. All people hear are the misinformed comments by the media, never any of their retractions or corrections. Look before you leak and think before you speak.
The article said they didn’t want to provide an incentive for employees to quit the company. If the deferred comp. plan is not a “qualified” plan and AIG goes bankrupt, then the employees with the deferred compensation would get in line with other creditors. If the plan is qualified I don’t think there would be a big rush to abolish it because the funds would be secured.
David, I agree on most of your points. In general, the main concern is that the execs could leave, granted, it would not be the worst thing for some of them to be gone, but they need experienced execs in place to instill confidence in the rest of the workforce (116k people). The problem that the deferred comp creates is that if the exec leaves now, they could access their deferred compenstation now which they have seen as a benefit toward leaving the company. AIG needs to have the right people in place in order to come out of this crisis.
sounds you are an inside guy, defending the situation. hard to say thay anyone involved with such a collosal fiacso is should have been entitled to any pay, let along deferred – oops ! we were wrong – you all screwed up and the till is dry for those rewards we promised you.
GL, thanks for the comment, however, AIG employee I am not. The point I was trying to make is that people tend to post here before having all of the information. If people actually did any investigating (Wall Street Journal, Yahoo Finance, etc) they would be more educated on the situation and could make intelligent comments instead of off-the-cuff remarks – everyone is entitled to their opinion, but at least look into the facts before commenting on a piece of a larger story. I presented the facts – you can interpret however you want.
Back to your original comment, GL – about AIG undercutting the market and not posting a profit – a savvy investor would have noted that in AIG’s 2007 Annual report, they posted a Combined Ratio of 90.33% – as you know, the insurance industry is considered profitable when the combined ratio is around 100% or less because income from investments should still help the company post profits (this is harder now with the weakening ecomnomy – it would be harder for a company to post profits since most investment portfolios have seen a decrease in value). Let’s also remember that what got AIG into trouble was the CDO’s (collateralized debt obligations) and CDS’s (credit default swaps), which are financial products, not an insurance product even though they are typically compared to insurance because they have similarites.
either way, the regular folks are and will be clued to AIG as the title and not it’s financial side. many folks are moving their insurance because they don’t want it to transfer to the other side of the business. you and i know that it will not be. but the regular person, will only focus on those 3 letters – AIG.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck…you know the rest. If a “financial” product (wink, wink) is designed to indemnify the holder of that policy, er, I mean instrument, then it sure walks and sounds like an insurance contract, eh? Just because it was cleverly camouflaged to avoid the peering eyes the NY Dept of Insurance doesn’t change the feathers beneath the clothes.
Sure, sure I know, I shouldn’t say nothin’ if I ain’t got nothin’ nice to say. And, oh yeah, I should always check with Yahoo and the papers on the street to consult the spin, dang, I mean facts, before uttering.
Just so much flatulence.