tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post1000686545966452163..comments2023-07-03T05:16:55.433-05:00Comments on Hanging with Joe: Who is to blame for AIG bonuses?Lakeview Coffee Joehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11478205537070255505noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-84567188019279131842009-03-20T12:41:00.000-05:002009-03-20T12:41:00.000-05:00Buffett actually said that there were a lot of fac...Buffett actually said that there were a lot of factors including the degree of uncertainty. Either way, there was no money for AIG. The only organization that could help was US. That's a bail out man, whether there's collateral or not.<BR/>I think we're all losing track a little. This is .01% of the total money going to AIG. It might just be the cost of doing business. <BR/>There's a lot of other things to be pissed about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-90912046843156461562009-03-20T11:00:00.000-05:002009-03-20T11:00:00.000-05:00Fear of lawsuits is a poor reason for paying out b...Fear of lawsuits is a poor reason for paying out bonuses to incompetents whose performance essentially caused the company to become insolvent. Talking to some corporate lawyers, I suspect there are plenty of ground for the company to sue some of those employees for negligence. In a jury trial who would you want to be defending - the taxpayers in the form of the US Government or those receiving the bonuses for losing billions and billions of dollars?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-29026802735961451602009-03-20T10:02:00.000-05:002009-03-20T10:02:00.000-05:00True Billy, Buffett didn't have enough money to do...True Billy, Buffett didn't have enough money to do it, but he would have because it was a sound deal. That was my point. The comment is still there....must have been a computer glitch.<BR/><BR/>And I still disagree djf: apples and oranges. The AIG contracts were for work PERFORMED as in past tense. The UAW is for future work to be performed. You can renegotiate any contract as long as someone hasn't delivered on there sideof it. Once a party has completely their end of the bargain, then there's no onus on the them to renegotiate and certainly no moral obligation. I don't blame them at all. If Billy is right, then it seems to me that the blame falls on Congress for not forcing the issue. If Congress left the bonus terms in there, then shouldn't be publicly outraged that they got paid. They should be publicly outraged in their own incompetence.Lakeview Coffee Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11478205537070255505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-85962941202052041612009-03-20T08:52:00.000-05:002009-03-20T08:52:00.000-05:00Sorry Joe,Either I'm hallucinating again, or you t...Sorry Joe,<BR/>Either I'm hallucinating again, or you took out your comment about buffett.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-2100050736969107182009-03-20T06:40:00.000-05:002009-03-20T06:40:00.000-05:00Just a couple fact-checks Joe:Last Friday Buffett ...Just a couple fact-checks Joe:<BR/>Last Friday Buffett told Bloomberg News that he chose not to loan money to AIG. He only "wanted to" in the sense that I want to date Catherine Zeta-Jones.<BR/>Also, not all of congress were shocked that the bonuses existed; they were shocked that they were paid out. Specifically, Rep. Paul Kanjorski stated that three months ago he told Liddy to find a way to get out of the contracts, and he offered the resources of the U.S. Congress to help him do it. It's not that Liddy couldn't do anything about it; Liddy made no effort. Instead he worked with the Fed to move forward on the bonuses.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-15752766312637590632009-03-20T00:54:00.000-05:002009-03-20T00:54:00.000-05:00The real mistake was in giving them the bailout wi...The real mistake was in giving them the bailout without requiring that these contracts be renegotiated.<BR/><BR/>As for the UAW, your reasoning isn't quite sound, Joe. The union alrerady has contracts in place with the auto companies; they are volunteering to rework the contract in order to make things easier on the auto companies (and keep their jobs). It's something the AIG folks could do as well.<BR/><BR/>In that way, I agree with el supremo.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-2714191795941311262009-03-19T20:09:00.000-05:002009-03-19T20:09:00.000-05:00You mean other than the inevitable lawsuits agains...You mean other than the inevitable lawsuits against both AIG and the government? <BR/><BR/>You're right, AIG was kept around because of the loan (a loan Buffet wanted to make by the way), but if it was Pepsi, the government would have let them go under. We NEEDED AIG solvent, so it's not the same as any old company in bankruptcy. If they went under, it would cost us and the rest of the world, trillions of dollars more.....not to mention the additional loss of jobs from other companies going under. Given that AIG was going to continue to exist, they HAD to honor their employee contracts.Lakeview Coffee Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11478205537070255505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-52641420224799033842009-03-19T12:22:00.000-05:002009-03-19T12:22:00.000-05:00While agree with and acknowledge your facts, I don...While agree with and acknowledge your facts, I don't agree with your conclusions. When a company is going insolvent, all bets are off. If AIG just tanked, there would be no bonuses paid. The US loan kept AIG solvent no ifs ands or buts. When companies are insolvent and trying to work their way out of insolvency, all stakeholders have to sacrifice. This is what we do everyday when we work on a crisis management client. I see no reason for not putting the hammer to the executives of a division that blew it irregardless of contracts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-78356408000753161142009-03-19T09:36:00.000-05:002009-03-19T09:36:00.000-05:00The difference would be that these bonuses are for...The difference would be that these bonuses are for work already performed (albeit obviously not well!). The auto workers are renegotiating their wages for the future.Lakeview Coffee Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11478205537070255505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-40005124873555842492009-03-19T09:31:00.000-05:002009-03-19T09:31:00.000-05:00True, Joe, but how is it different than the UAW wo...True, Joe, but how is it different than the UAW workers, who are also under contract yet are being asked to renegotiate with the auto companies?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2176418776631006361.post-57463788502004013322009-03-19T08:06:00.000-05:002009-03-19T08:06:00.000-05:00Thanks for the full scoop Joe! i haven't been as i...Thanks for the full scoop Joe! i haven't been as in on the story as I would normally be so this is good to know.stefhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04743716011273416940noreply@blogger.com