Top Executives at AIG Financial, Other Bailed Out Firms to See Pay Cuts

By and | October 22, 2009

  • October 22, 2009 at 9:32 am
    Sam says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Matt, The United States is not for you. It has never been a land of entitlement. It is the land of oportunity. Move to France if you want that!

    Ever since civilization took hold on our planet. Every prosperous nation in history is composed of the haves and have nots. Only when you eliminate the wealthy, you are left with only the poor. Becoming successful requires hard work and risk taking of which the poor is always unwilling to do, They always move quickly to blaming the wealthy for their lack of success and look to government to provide what they are lacking from hard work, creative thinking and risk taking. You can not legislate wealth.

    By the way, Setting salaries at privatly held companies will be determined by the supreame court to be unconstitutional. The Government can not set pay for private held companies. No matter what you think of the bonuses that they recieved.

  • October 22, 2009 at 10:40 am
    matt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Goldman, the real beneficiary of so much of the bailouts — and who can imagine why, given all the ex-Goldman folks in DC who were in charge of these bail outs — is set to pay $20,000,000,000 in bonuses this year.

    So Americans bail out AIG, who turns around and satisfies their massive financial obligations to Goldman. Then American fury is directed at AIG, while Goldman distributes these massive sums.

    While everyday Americans go bankrupt, lose their homes, lose their jobs, all the while with NO job recovery on the horizon, Wall Street Fat Cats continue to reap in multi Billion dollar (with a “B”) bonuses.

    What a sham. This growing class warfare will lead to greater instability within our nation than any terrorist organization could.

    This wealth will never “trickle down” — we do not better ourselves or our nation by growing the divide between rich and poor.

  • October 22, 2009 at 12:45 pm
    Bill says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Another attempt to bring class warfare into the picture and distract us from the real problem. The economy!

    How about- Reducing taxes and create a tax incentive for small business to hire new employees. How about a tax break for new start up businesses? There are so many things that we could be doing that Obama dislikes. Its called free market capitalism.

  • October 22, 2009 at 12:49 pm
    Reality Bites says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Matt – GS isn’t being spanked because they paid back their loan.

    As long as the borrower does that, I couldn’t really care how much in bonuses they pay out.

    I just don’t see payback happening for AIG or GM, so throttling unbridled compensation is probably a just cause.

  • October 22, 2009 at 1:00 am
    VLS says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I agree with Reality. I only have one other thing to add. If Goldman Sachs pays out these huge bonuses…..and things fall apart again for them. The taxpayers better not have to bail them out again. The TARP money should be a one time thing, period.

  • October 22, 2009 at 1:00 am
    Patti says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You are exactly right….our current administration seems to be totally against capitalism–they make it seem like it’s a crime for us to want to make a decent living on our own without government intervention…we all know what that’s called….

  • October 22, 2009 at 1:03 am
    Patti says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The ‘tarp thing’ should never have happened in the first place!!! No one is helping me pay my mortgage or other bills but ME!!

  • October 22, 2009 at 1:43 am
    BAXTER BOY says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    HERE’S MY CONCERN OR QUESTON—GOVERNMENT COMES IN BAILS OUT CERTAIN COMPANIES, FORCES SENIOR MANAGEMENTTO STEP DOWN, NEW PEOPLE AREE PUT IN PLACE TO SALVAGE THE COMPANY, SEVERAL WEEKS -MONTHS LATTE THEY ARE TOLD , BY THE WAY WERE ARE GOING TO CUT YOUR PAY 90% AND BONUS COMP BY 50%

    THESE PEOPLE WILL LEAVE AND GO ON TO GREENER PASTURES WHERE THE GOV HAS NO SAY SO. LIKE G/S (VOLKER?) THEY ARE TURNING HUGH PROFITS (NOW THAT THE GOV SELECTIVELY PUT THE NAIL INTO lEHMAN ETC

    THIS WHOLE THING STINKS

  • October 22, 2009 at 1:48 am
    Needing Motivation says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Perhaps George W. bush, in his new role as motivational speaker (what a demeaning of the office, but that is what he did while he was in the office every day!) can motivate us all to be good little drones and let the largely Republican elite continue to walk all over us as a true class separation widens due to their machinations.

    I guess God wants us to be less well off than them. Just ask your favorite prosperity preacher.

    What a cruel joke and hoax!

  • October 22, 2009 at 1:57 am
    scottsdale slim says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You can beat Obama with a stick all you want, but any administration would have tried to do similar things to keep this from worsening.
    Washington should have listened to Brooksley Born when they had the chance. Even Greenspan has recanted on his free market beliefs.
    Because people can not be trusted to do right by others, we are required to have regulations and rules. That goes from the lowest petty criminal all the way up to Wall Street tycoons.
    The problems we have today are the result of greed, not governance.
    I am tired of the Obama and Bush bashing on this site. 95% of the wrongs discussed here are the outcomes of the greed of a person or group. I am not supporting socialism, but I am not supporting free market capitalism either.
    HOPE is a beautiful thing, but it is more concept than reality. I hope for the best but try to take actions to avoid the worst.

  • October 22, 2009 at 2:17 am
    Tx Cat Lady says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Well said, Scottsdale Slim. I could not agree more.

  • October 22, 2009 at 2:25 am
    matt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Yes, Goldman repaid THEIR portion of TARP.

    However, a strong case can be made that the AIG bailout principally benefitted Goldman Sachs.

    Second, Goldman is suspected to have had a hand or two in bringing down Lehman and Bear to their exclusive benefit. Matt Taibbi has a good article in Rolling Stone focusing on naked short selling, pointed and controversial as the story may be.

    One finds it difficult believe that Goldman was merely a passive beneficiary who played its cards right in tough times, given their extensive ties to the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations and the Fed.

    They took our money, directly and indirectly, they completely eliminated three of their largest rivals, and they now hold the reigns of our government tighter than ever before. Any investigations into their potential wrongdoing seem to lack any sense of purpose or urgency – the reasons for this are left to speculation.

    It is hard to perceive this as anything other than an outrageous fleecing of the world economy through control of government officials and market manipulation.

  • October 22, 2009 at 2:31 am
    matt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Bill,

    When a single digit % of the population increases its piece of the pie by unprecedented amounts while the supermajority of the populace flounders and struggles to even keep wages flat, THAT is “class warfare.”

    Is there a single example in history where concentrating all the wealth with an elite percentage of the populace worked to that nation’s advantage? I cannot think of a single instance.

  • October 22, 2009 at 4:06 am
    Revolutionary says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    View 1 – sorry, these guys are over compensated. Few bring capital to the game yet take rewards like they have risked their personal wealth to the max. Rewards go to the owners and risk takers. The “royalty” sucking money for their minimal contributions is what starts popular unrest.

    View 2 – will the labor leaders with out of work members getting “Obama Money” have to give up some of their salaries?

  • October 23, 2009 at 9:00 am
    Bev says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Freddie Mac is giving its chief financial officer compensation worth as much as $5.5 million, including a $2 million signing bonus. The government-controlled mortgage finance company doesn’t have to follow the executive compensation rules because it is being paid outside the TARP.

    Barnie Frank’s Boyfriend works for Fannie.

  • October 23, 2009 at 9:44 am
    someone important says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    outrage over eye-popping paychecks…………. when the people have more greed than heart.. this has been going on for a long long time for years and years – who payes for greed we all do.

  • October 23, 2009 at 11:15 am
    batman says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    comments like yours make no sense to me and Robin. After all, what is WRONG with paying taxes? If you are a wage-earner, you have no choice but to pay, not rich enough to be able to afford a tax attorney, let alone need one. It is only the well-to-do who complain about taxes; the rest of us just pay anyway and shoulder more than our share of the tax burden while you guys buy another SUV or build a vacation home on the coast and complain about having to pay high insurance rates and wanting the rest of us to pay into a cat fund, to “share” the unfair price of coverage. And then you want to point a finger at the current administration and say they want to do things which are abhorrent to “American” principles or they want to waste government resources on things which are against the public good? Such as cleaning up the economy that you think should be left alone? A government that only favors the properous cannot long proper at all. And if anyone wants to distract attention from the economy, it is those very folks who enriched themselves at the public expense and now we are supposed to let them clean up again with bonuses to make sure they stay working for these firms? It is too bad that “Wall Street” was only a movie and reality was not. We’d be better off letting some of these “successes” go to jail instead of cashing in….but that is MHO.

  • October 23, 2009 at 11:22 am
    Stevie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Bravo, Slim, Bravo! I couldn’t agree more; I am tired of this site being highjacked by whiners who act as if they are hurting because we peeked behind the curtain. Greed and the lust for power have lead to the same end in 2008 as it did in 1929 and both times the GOVERNMENT not BIG BUSINESS stepped in to fix things. what does that say about free markets? the only thing really free is the freedom to steal and get away with it. call it whatever you want but enriching yourself at others expense is not ethical, or moral but who are we kidding if anyone thinks there is any integrity or ethics when it comes to making money, becuase for most, there can never be too much; keep piling it up; after all, we can all eat cake when they run out of bread.

  • October 23, 2009 at 12:54 pm
    someone important says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    the only thing really free is the freedom to steal and get away with it. WELL SAID MY FRIEND……….

  • October 23, 2009 at 12:58 pm
    someone important says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    15,600 registered lobbyists
    Comment:
    by Richard M. Ebeling
    Wednesday, 06 August 2008
    With the government budgeted to spend nearly $3 trillion in its current 2008 fiscal year, it should not be surprising that special interest groups of all types flock to Washington, D.C., to lobby for pieces of the budget pie at taxpayers’ expense.

    In 2007, over 15,600 registered lobbyists spent more than $2.8 billion to influence federal legislation and tax policy. During the last ten years the number of D.C. lobbyists has increased by one-third, while their spending has almost doubled.

    Lobbyists span the political spectrum and represent virtually every sector of the economy and social group. Special interest groups lobby for offensive and defensive reasons. Some pressure groups aggressively lobby to acquire benefits, favors, and government handouts to the detriment of their competitors’ and the taxpayers. Others lobby reactively to prevent the implementation of government regulations and redistributions that might harm them.

    But either way, billions are are being spent each year to persuade politicians to use their governmental power in one way or another that otherwise could have been spent more productively in private sector activities.

    According to the Center for Responsive Politics, in 2007, organized labor spent over $44.3 million on lobbying members of Congress. Public sector unions shelled out almost $18.5 million last year to influence federal legislation; transportation unions spent nearly $10.6 million, industrial unions spent $6.1 million, and other unions spent in total another $6 million.

    On the other hand, business associations of all types spent more than $87.2 million last year on lobbying activities (the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, alone, expended over $52.7 million of this total).

    As can be seen in the Table A, below, by industry, pharmaceutical and health product companies spent the most on lobbying in 2007, almost $227 million , followed by insurance ($135.9 million), computers/internet ($110.7 million), electric utilities ($110.6 million), hospital/nursing homes ($91.5 million), and education ($88 million).

    In Table B, below, the specific largest individual associations and companies are listed that expended the largest sums on hiring Washington lobbyists in 2007.

    Freddie Mac spent $8.5 million and Fannie Mae $5.6 million “persuading” the congressmen who have now assured them a government-guaranteed bailout.

    Finally, Table C, below, summarizes the leading policy issues in terms of the number of clients (businesses, unions, associations, non-profits) that hired lobbyists to influence federal legislation in their respective desired directions.

    Not surprisingly, the general heading of federal budget and appropriation issues had the largest number of interested parties hiring lobbying firms. After all, this covers a huge number of policy areas for which government can expend monies, impose regulations, or distribute any number of other favors and privileges that can affect the economic well-being of virtually any citizen in the United States.

    The specific spending areas that drew the biggest number of clients in 2007, outside of general budget and appropriation decisions, were, respectively, defense, health care issues, taxes, transportation, and energy.

    Billions of dollars a year in lobbying activities will continue to be spent in Washington as long as the government has favors and privileges to bestow, and other people’s money to redistribute for the benefit of some at the general taxpayers’ and citizens’ expense



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*