Monday, March 16, 2009


AIG took a boatload of money from the Federal government to bail them out of a self-created (with the help of George Soros, no doubt) financial morass! Now they're paying bonuses to various executives, claiming they are contractually obligated to do so. Really? How does that work AIG? Doesn't the company have to make a profit? Isn't a bonus a reward for GOOD performance? This is such horse manure that I'm surprised there aren't steaming piles all over Capitol Hill and Manhattan!

Of course, President Obama, continuing in the dangerous vein of interfering in the business of privately held companies on the basis (fairly well justified, to be sure) that the U.S. taxpayer has invested mightily in the private business and is entitled to tell them when they're behaving irresponsibly. You think?

But the comment du jour has to be this one from Rep. Barney Frank, financial wizard extraordinaire (without whose contribution we wouldn't be in this financial kerfuffle at all):

Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, earlier Monday charged that the move to pay bonuses amounted to "rewarding incompetence."

That's exactly what we do every time we issue YOU a paycheck Rep. Frank!


CDR J said...

I believe that the bonuses were a) approved by the government beforehand, and b)retention bonuses, not performance bonuses. In other words, the money was to be paid in order to keep people on the job when they normally would have been freshening up their resumes.

Gayle Miller said...

Considering what their "performance" has contributed negatively to the bottom line, they'd be better off letting them head on down the road!