advertisement

The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!

Search Boortz.com
Enter search terms:
Browse Boortz.com
Today's Nuze

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

Nobody's listening.

FALLOUT FROM YESTERDAY'S HEARING

By
Neal Boortz
@ March 19, 2009 8:25 AM Permalink | Comments (57) | TrackBacks (0)

One of the most prominent phrases we heard in this AIG hearing yesterday was "give back." That phrase is such a mindless liberal talking point. You might have heard my discussion with a caller yesterday. I just hate this "give back" nonsense. I'm heavily involved in charitable giving. My wife has a 501C(3) charitable foundation. But I am NOT giving back. I'm giving. The money I give I earned. It was not given me. Therefore ... I am not giving it back. I'm convinced this whole "giving back" nonsense was created to cause people to subconsciously believe that whatever wealth a person might have was given them, not earned.

Did you happen to listen to those parts of the hearings yesterday where Slobbering Barney was demanding the names of the AIG employees who got the bonuses? These people committed no crimes .. yet here is the Imperial Federal Government demanding their names and sputtering about subpoenas. This is not only disgusting, it's chilling. You do something perfectly legal, and suddenly you have this politically powerful troll demanding your name.

Barney said that if AIG honcho Ed Liddy didn't turn over the names, he would ask his committee to vote to subpoena the names. Even though AIG employees are receiving death threats from the dumbmasses who couldn't tell their head from a hole in the ground .. Barney wants to make sure that we get those names!

But other members of Congress didn't seem to think this was a bad idea. Senator John Tester said, "Is there a downside? If they don't give the money back, they ought to have their names released." Senator Ben Cardin suggested that if the bonuses were not returned, the names should be given to the Justice Department and Eric Holder would decide if they should be released. Cardin said, "These bonuses have to be given back ... It's just unconscionable, and we can't allow that to happen. If necessary, we should take legislative action."

And let's not let this comment from Barack Obama go by the wayside. He said on the South Lawn yesterday, "People are rightly outraged about these particular bonuses ... But just as outrageous is the culture that these bonuses are a symptom of that have existed for far too long." Just what culture is PrezBO talking about? The culture of capitalism?

There was so much more.

Perhaps the hokiest statement came from Rep. Paul Hodes, a Democrat from New Hampshire. He said that AIG stands for "Arrogance. Incompetence. Greed." How cute.

But moving right along ... AIG CEO Edward Liddy did ask that some of these bonus recipients give at least half of the money back. Those receiving retention payments of $100,000 or more were asked to return at least half of those payments.

Categories:

Tags:

Main Index | Archives | RSS feed

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: FALLOUT FROM YESTERDAY'S HEARING.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/25084

Jamie Dupree's Blog

If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.

Take Back Our Government!

Herman Cain is putting together a movement to take back our government. Do something now! Join the Hermanator's Intelligent Thinkers Movement, HITM! , and take part in the political revolution of 2009! "When they feel the heat, they will see the light!"

Belinda Skelton, Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!

Avg. rating: N/A

What others are saying

  • AIG Acronym
    Arrogance Incompetence Greed huh? I was thinking Arrogant, Incompetent Government

    People who are mad at AIG are mad at the wrong people

    How do we wake America up????
    By Chris @ 03/20/09 04:19:08 PMreport abuse
  • "legal"
    i love it when someone hides behind the word "legal". just because something is legal does not mean that it's right. i'm a smoker -- i should know.
    By mickeysix @ 03/20/09 07:36:38 AMreport abuse
  • the main issue
    If AIG hadn't taken any federal money, then they may do as they wish in terms of bonuses.
    By joe v @ 03/20/09 01:28:11 AMreport abuse
  • AIG bonuses
    Is there anyone who truly wants to go down the path where Congress starts to pick and choose who pays a penalty tax? No matter how you feel about the AIG bonuses, a 90% tax will set a precedent that we will regret forever. As if the tax code isn't complex enough - it already tries to manipulate our behavior to do what the politicians want us to do. Imagine a world where some jobs or salaries are taxed higher than others - the politicians pick the desirable jobs with low tax rates. This is very scary.
    By Kathy @ 03/19/09 09:36:17 PMreport abuse
  • LETS TALK
    have not read them all but what about the $326000 ive lost in the last 10 months that being funneled over the big pond to help pepople that has not worked as hard as me in the last 35 years????? screw them all dems and rep--COME AND GET THE REST IN PERSON please
    By jeff powell @ 03/19/09 08:13:51 PMreport abuse
  • The Truth Hurts
    This is my say on AIG, when you allow legislation to be drafted in the proverbial “smoke filled backroom” of politics by a select few and then ram it through the House and Senate, there is no one to blame except those who crafted the policy and commanded it’s forced adoption – Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Reid. I also blame President Obama for doing his best to twist this through and not taking the time to review the changes. This scenario was not to be unexpected and those wringing their hands in false despair are as guilty as anyone working for AIG for crafting this mockery.
    By Jake @ 03/19/09 05:47:47 PMreport abuse
  • bonuses
    If AIG had gone into bankruptcy bonuses wouldn't be an issue.
    Don't let Neal get you worked up. he has to play devil's advocate to generate a buzz. Even if it means he has to engage in shallow thinking to achieve this. He is not a deep thinker on his best days any way. Par for the course when you consider how he got his start in radio.
    By Kent @ 03/19/09 05:39:02 PMreport abuse
  • I don't get it
    I thought this was a different use, being to return the bonuses that they received to the group that gave them. That seems like a proper use of "give back"

    It is a witch hunt yes, but the use of give back seems like a textbook proper example
    By Andrew @ 03/19/09 04:19:50 PMreport abuse
  • Taxes on bonuses
    For what it's worth... isn't the federal tax rate on bonus money 41.56%? If so, after state and federal tax, the executives are only getting around half of their bonus. Technically, they could state that half of the bonus has already been confiscated.
    By Hank Rearden @ 03/19/09 03:52:18 PMreport abuse
  • Give 'em the bird!
    Just once...one time...I'd like to see a CEO, any CEO, stare back at the idiot who just tried to throw him under the bus and make 'brownie points' at his expense and flip that Congressman(or Congresswoman)off! Then say "Excuse me, are you really that stupid?" What's the worst thing that could happen? Since when were private citizens answerable to Congress anyway? I would love to see one tell Congress to take a flying leap at a rolling donut. Then, of course, call their lawyer to bail them out. But think of the satisfaction people would get from seeing a politician get the same treatment they give us. What a bombastic, pompous, bunch of stuffed shirts that room was yesterday. Don't get me wrong, questions should be asked. But drop the phony outrage and the grandstanding. If I ever find myself in that position, as long as I know I have the power of truth on my side, I am gonna let 'er rip! I can't wait to see someone stand up to those Jacka$$es. It's long overdue, but worth waiting for.
    By Chuck @ 03/19/09 03:25:32 PMreport abuse
  • Let me know...
    ...when these clowns 'give back' the political contributions they received from these institutions.

    Who's going to get blamed when all this anger at AIG they are ginning up gets someone killed? Certainly not the dp or msm, I bet they try to blame it on conservatives and/or the GOP. Why not? It hasn't failed yet.
    By CowboyUp @ 03/19/09 03:23:34 PMreport abuse
  • Wal-Mart
    I hope they do have an opportunity to pull Wal-Mart in. You can bet those guys won't sit there politely, almost apologetically answering questions!!! Just once, I want someone with a set to stand up and say "Who are you to question me with what you have done?" and walk out.
    By Joyce M/Blythe, GA @ 03/19/09 02:51:45 PMreport abuse
  • Who
    The he** are you?

    Copyleft: Congratulations: the nation and the community played a part in helping you build your wealth. Taxes are a big part of how repay us for the opportunities we've provided you, so enough whining about them being "punishment for achievers" and similar nonsense.

    What's this crap about "us"??? I'm quite sure YOU didn't do ANYTHING to help anyone. Yeah, rocks in the head alright. In yours.
    By Joyce M/Blythe, GA @ 03/19/09 02:35:19 PMreport abuse
  • McCarthy
    One of the boogeymen the left likes to trot out is Joe McCarthy and his supposed "name names" in the hearings. Now we have Slobbering Barney wanting to name names? Think the Left will have a problem with this abuse of congressional power?

    Speaking of McCarthy, I read Anne Coulter's excellent book, "Treason". She covers the McCarthy hearings in there. Supposedly McCarthy actually DIDN'T want to release the names of people that might be Soviet agents but was being forced by others to do so. Also, McCarthy was mostly interested in weeding out Soviet agents (not just communist sympathizers... actual agents) working in the State Department. He wasn't interested in leftists in Hollywood. If everything Coulter documents in her book is true, the Left has done a wonderful job of rewriting history and slandering McCarthy these last 60'ish years.
    By TimT @ 03/19/09 02:29:46 PMreport abuse
  • naming names
    So, the feds want the names of execs who receive(d) bonuses? Are they going to publish these names? Are they going to use the force of government to intimidate them or are they going to just publish the names and let a mob descend upon their homes?

    I wonder how the congressmen and senators would feel if their names and addresses were published? Would they feel comfortable knowing that information was made public? What would they have to fear since they are doing such a slam-dunk job of running the country?

    Consistency. If you want to publish the names of AIg to get a headline, how about publishing your own address in DC and in your district first?

    Any congressman or senator who is calling for names and is unwilling to publish his own information is a coward and a hypocrite.
    By brevard bum @ 03/19/09 02:27:56 PMreport abuse
  • Congress = Clowns
    So let me get this straight:

    1. CONGRESS wrote and passed the bill that said bonus's could be paid out.

    2. Amemendment language in the bill was changed by request of the administration/Treasury Dept concerning the bonus payout.

    3. AIG had been discussing the bonus payout with the Federal Regulators for months.

    4. CONGRESS says we didn't know anything about the bonus payout - perhaps you should read and understand what you are VOTING FOR!

    5. AIG is honoring the contracts - probably has something to do with "rule of Law".

    AIG is suppose to take all the blame for following what the bill stated they could do, what they were legally bound to do by the contracts - and they are the bad guys.

    So what does Congress do:

    1. Grill the CEO who was put in charge of AIG by this administration. Who had nothing to do with getting AIG in the mess there in and nothing to do with the bonus contracts.

    2. To save face with the American people they want to enact a "punishment" tax. So that the money can go to the rightful owners - the taxpayers (So when is my check going to be in the mail). Oops they mean it goes back to the government (aka: rightful owners).

    3. Shows their lack of compassion for private citizens who are receiving DEATH threats, by wanting the names of people who got the bonus - to do what with - that's right give the names to the LAME STREAM MEDIA.

    The biggest culprit in this whole deal is how big a FAILURE this congress and administration is! That is where the ANGER should be directed!
    By Rick @ 03/19/09 02:02:25 PMreport abuse
  • AIG - Rob's Comments
    Rob, you are looking at this incorrectly. It does not matter where the money came from the fact is the execs had contracts they fulfilled and they were paid. The fact that the Government gave AIG money to meet its obligations is irrelevant. The bonus obligation is not different than paying the rent or the electrical bill. There are only two valid points in this mess; first AIG should just have been allowed to go under, and second, if Congress did not want to pay bonuses they should have done due diligence prior to providing the funds.

    This is more or less a show trial to appease and distract the mob.

    GJ
    By GJ @ 03/19/09 01:54:27 PMreport abuse
  • This is very scary
    This is REALY scary. Let forget about the fact that these bonuses went to AIG, that took A BAIL out. Just totally forget that for a second - Now look at what our GOV is trying to do in the name of Justice.

    Force people to name, names so that they can grandstand. Abuse their power to go back and take money away from these people. The GOV is out of Control and are abusing the power that they were given. They need to go to jail or be dismissed. Because who's next? Once they have a taste that they can do anything they want there will be nothing to stop them. But I am afraid that we are already there.

    Copyleft - just a side note - you are a complete moron. I can not believe that you are so blinded that you can not see what is happening. I hope you and others like you wake up soon.

    Neil -- You are not always right either and you should be more open to some other peoples point of view.

    Who's going to be next?
    By Brad @ 03/19/09 01:36:16 PMreport abuse
  • aig bonuses
    who would even dream of hiring one of these guys that is giving it back!!!
    if you earn it , keep it, it's your money not the imperial federal govt's..have some b@lls and tell congress to stick it!!!
    By nail @ 03/19/09 01:27:11 PMreport abuse
  • This is a simple matter of wealth envy. The "He has more than I do so take it from him..." mentatlity in our country has become rampant. The non-workers are no longer content just to have thier hands out, now they have their hands out with a big stick in the other hand and are emboldened by our pandering governement demanding that they receive "Their fair share". Although, as we all know, their fair share would be to "Give" what they already have, which is nothing.
    By Simple.... @ 03/19/09 01:16:57 PMreport abuse
  • Why no outrage?
    Funny, all this outrage directed towards AIG ( and presumably Freddie/Fannie, yet to be seen ), and yet no one in the Gvt. has a WORD to say about the Millions of Taxpayer dollars given in BONUSES to our very own Federal Government department heads for a "good job".

    Good job my fanny, but the fact remains, why no outrage?

    Neal, any comments?
    By Pat Daly @ 03/19/09 01:00:27 PMreport abuse
  • AIG
    To have anyone in congress feign outrage over what they consider wasteful spending is the biggest absurdity of all. Where was the outrage over waste when they signed a trillion dollar spending package without reading it? Or a budget plan with 9000 earmarks? And people actually cheer when O says he'll cut the deficit in half. Proves how stupid his voters are.
    By Dawggirl @ 03/19/09 12:44:50 PMreport abuse
  • Taxes on Bonuses
    Will the government pay back the taxes AIG paid on these bonuses?
    By Eric Knapp @ 03/19/09 12:39:14 PMreport abuse
  • give back
    I'm sorry but Neal you're wrong on this one. Those bonuses were not funded by the profits these companies made but by the taxes of Americans. That is why they should give them back. I was happy for the big profits of oil companies and defense contractors, they provided a good or service that the market rewarded them for. That was their money to spend as they saw fit. AIG didn't earn this money in a free market. They got this money by begging and scaring the American people about what would happen if they went down. They didn't earn the money, they should have failed, and my taxes shouldn't be paying for bonuses, it should be buying guns and planes for the military. Neal... You picked the wrong example to defend. As soon as the Congress goes after Wal-Mart profits I'll be by your side defending them, but not these bastards!
    By Rob @ 03/19/09 12:13:05 PMreport abuse
  • Mr @ rants
    funny, I did not see "Society's" name when I read the signatures on the Constitution, just a bunch of INDIVIDUALS
    By booger @ 03/19/09 11:49:31 AMreport abuse
  • Give back your raise....
    The only entity in this whole mess that can give back is government because they are the only ones that took something.

    Where is their outrage for their part in this whole mess? They're the primary stewards of our economy and because of their actions as much as any others is why we are in this mess, Democrats AND Republicans.

    Don't you think we should ask them to give back their recent 10% raise and all the campaign contributions (as Michele Malkin has suggested) they received from AIG? Practice what you preach.
    By Patriot til Death @ 03/19/09 11:47:39 AMreport abuse
  • Wealthy Congressmen
    This whole debacle about exec pay and bonuses has me wondering how it is that so many congressmen and senators become quite wealthy during their tenure with the government. If we pay congressmen a salary of around $165,000 per year, and they all have the expense of maintaining a home in DC and a home in their home district, how is it that they become so wealthy? I think there should be an FBI investigation of the financial status of every single person in Congress.

    If they think the compensation policies of publicly held companies (answerable to their shareholders) should be fair game for the press and the general public, then I think they should ALL be investigated as to the sources and uses of their own money. Since, after all, WE'RE paying it!

    And Neal, I agree with you about being disgusted by the whole "give back" movement. The implication is that your money has been GIVEN to you, and not EARNED. And that for some reason that money should be willingly SHARED with "the community." Give me a break! Also, when I hear comments about someone making an "obscene" amount of money, I find myself wondering what constitutes "obscene" and who should be setting that parameter. I am assuming, of course, that "obscene" is any amount of money that is more than the speaker (or comment writer) makes.
    By DG in GA @ 03/19/09 11:23:06 AMreport abuse
  • retention bonus
    This is just a perfect example how government DOES NOT GET IT. Liddy explained numerous times that the decision to pay out the "bonuses" were based on a RISK ASSESSMENT. Liddy's JUDGEMENT that paying-out the bonuses to continue AIG's growth is better than NOT paying and have AIG collapse. THAT SHOULD BE RESPECTED. Congress appointted Liddy to use his judgement and run AIG. Now, they are second-guessing. The outrage that somehow PAYING SOMEONE for work is ridiculous. Yeah, 6 million is a lot of money. But, who is joe-public to say what that person is really worth...joe-public wasn't appointed to run AIG...nor could they even begin to know where to begin. 1/10 of 1% of the 170 billion for retention bonuses is not overwhelming by any measure. LET LIDDY DO HIS JOB.
    By sam @ 03/19/09 11:14:11 AMreport abuse
  • AIG Scam
    Chris Dodd actively participated in the doling out of the bonuses. Gov't bailout was the goal all along, to pay off the bets and the bookies, that is to say, cds contracts and their purveyors. The grand standing is a token show to distract the public and set the stage to implement new taxes on evil rich, that is to say, anyone with a bonus. The Madoff scandal was penny ante poker compared to this fleecing. If they can get this far, its too late to stop it.
    By Steve A. @ 03/19/09 11:06:03 AMreport abuse
  • I did earn it!
    "... The notion that any wealth you've managed to accumulate was earned, 100%, through your own efforts, with no one and nothing else contributing in any way."

    Well, I needed internet, so...I paid for internet! I needed electricity, so...I paid for electricity. You get the picture.

    I needed property rights and military, but not social welfare, so...let's pay reasonable quantity of taxes to support courts upholding contract law, law enforcement maintaining our borders, and the military defending us from foreign invaders. Funny, I don't see public education in there, nor do I see social security for illegal aliens in there. It would appear we are spending too much!

    Did I earn this money? You bet! And for the people I worked with to complete a product, they were also paid! Last year, I was a little more productive than my teammate, so my company gave me a little bit more of a raise. This year, my teammate was motivated to work harder, and earned a little more raise than me. We call it merit pay! End result? Both of us are better, the company made more money, and we BOTH earned it!

    I also feel that some groups are helping those that didn't do as well as me, so I have given some of my hard-earned money to them. However, if they start going nuts and spending it on the wrong people, I will stop giving. That makes them compete for my money. When was the last time the Feds competed for my money?
    By Greg @ 03/19/09 10:55:56 AMreport abuse
  • Releasing the names
    There's only three words that could offer protection to the 73 individuals who must have their names released while at the same time receiving death threats: Concealed Weapons Permit.
    By Copy this @ 03/19/09 10:46:04 AMreport abuse
  • Culture of Greed
    If Mr. Obama wants to step downt that slippery slope so bit but it has to be inclusive. All NBA players should give back, all hip-hop and rap artists should give back, all NFL players should give back, all movie stars should give back, etc.

    For some of these people who have more money than brains, it would be the first time they were ever "patriotic".
    By Kevin H @ 03/19/09 10:44:17 AMreport abuse
  • Hearings
    I just wish one of these CEOs (whether it's the annual circus when they bring the oil execs out to berate them over gas prices or the bankers now) would pull a Jack Nicholson rant from "A Few Good Men", and put these inept, worthless, absoltely economic ignoramuses in place.

    If I were Liddy, I would say this to the slobbering pole-taster Barney "Fill my Mouth With a" Frank:

    "Senator, I will disclose the names of my employees who received bonuses as soon as you disclose the names of all the boys your live-in pillow-biting escort brought you?"
    By The Truth @ 03/19/09 10:41:19 AMreport abuse
  • Keep telling yourself that you earned the money and that you are not giving it back. You are perhaps more deluded than I originally thought. You do realize that you are only able to make money, because society, not the individual, has created the social situations necessary to make money. You have simply learned how to play the game better than everyone else. That does not mean that you deserve obscene amounts of money.

    Keep telling yourselves that you are so great that you are able to earn all your big money on your own with no help. It is a lie that only an uneducated fool could believe.
    By Mr. @ 03/19/09 10:36:36 AMreport abuse
  • Any chance?
    Any chance someone can make one of those morph videos that turns Joseph McCarthy into Frank?
    By Mark @ 03/19/09 10:33:33 AMreport abuse
  • congressional hypocrisy
    The death threats AIG employees are getting would be better aimed at the buffoons in our government, including B.O., that seeded, nursed and fertilized this whole economic mess. Too bad the American public seems to stupid or ignorant to appreciate that Barney, Chris, Nancy, Harry, Barry, et.al. are striving to enslave them, not free them.
    By Honest Abe @ 03/19/09 10:30:08 AMreport abuse
  • AIG
    I think everyone working at AIG should take the money and run. Just walk away they have plenty to get by on until another job comes along. There is no way anyone should have to put up with this nonsense.
    By Thomas @ 03/19/09 10:14:27 AMreport abuse
  • One point missed in these comments
    One key point being glossed over in this conversation stems from a point Liddy made yesterday. Simply put, he stated that it was a risk avoidance/mitigation measure (see: defacto insurance policy) to pay the bonuses so that the team still managing a $1.6T (Trillion with a "T") portfolio wouldn't resign, potentially causing a much greater disaster if this is not managed properly (or consistently).

    Liddy is a man who has a proven track record of success and making the tough (and correct) decisions. Congress put him in charge because of these attributes, and are now stating they know more about how to run AIG than he does. Wrong!!!

    Time and again during the hearings a common theme appeared (besides all of the idiotic grandstanding by the panel), and that was Barney Frank and co. telling Liddy what he should have done, and Liddy clearly demonstrating that he weighed out all options, and made what he felt was the right decision for the situation.

    Who would I trust more? Hmmmmm.....

    All this hearing did was further demonstrate that the government should not be running any sort of business whatsoever.

    Liddy should've just quit right then and there.
    By MT @ 03/19/09 10:13:22 AMreport abuse
  • Kangaroo Hearings
    The jist of yesterdays hearing.

    Do what your Government wants, not what your Government does.
    By Chris in Missouri @ 03/19/09 10:06:39 AMreport abuse
  • sickening
    They vote for something they don't even bother to read, and then they're outraged over the outcome.
    By stepcousin @ 03/19/09 10:06:31 AMreport abuse
  • Let the lynchings begin
    Barney Frank wanting names to be named is stunningly chilling.
    This is the end, folks.
    Once Frankenfurter gets to get hold of names, and publish them across the internet and in various print rags...
    Because this man is incapable of reasoned action. (Go figure.)
    This is much like arming a lunatic asylum and releasing them.
    What was America thinking?
    What's been keeping these clowns suppressed over the past years, and what's changed to get them leaping about like idiots? Lack of any supervision?
    By John @ 03/19/09 10:03:35 AMreport abuse
  • Bizarre
    1. Bob is correct - if you control the money - its taxable.
    2. If you return it - well there's no tax deduction for that.
    3. The current hysteria to add a special demon tax 90% - is a huge abuse of power. It would be commical if it weren't sad.
    4. Anyone remember that AIG is STILL a public SEC Reporting company? Hello? Anyone? Does any other SEC company have to go through that? Is BofA next, why not Pepsi? John Deere? InBev? The fact of the matter is simple; owners elect board members who then hire management and management hire employees. Yesterday was like a public board meeting and that never happens. Very risky business.
    5. As for naming names... at the end of the hearing, Mr. Liddy was berated by some moron ... saying "only 25 people responsible for bringing AIG down, name names, who were they, now, what you are CEO and can't remember even one" What an idiot. Mr. Liddy, should have said, Frank (barney frank) ah Franklin (Reins), Carter (james earl).... would have been a moment.

    - Meanwhile - back on the good ship lollipop.

    6. Can anyone compare and contrast the amount of attention and federal hearings and taxpayer cost to analyize the recent two spending bills (totalling 1.3 TRILLION) -v time spent on theis $0.165 Billion? Thats the diversion here that I wrote about the other day.

    7. Tax cheat Timmy - needs to go (along with Sen. dodd) . He was incompetent in his due diligence of AIG and allowed Gov't money into it without forcing them to renegociate these payments.

    8. These payments should be deferred until Loans are repaid and Preferred Stock is redeemed.

    God help the USA - it really needs it this time.
    By Quiet Riot @ 03/19/09 09:47:15 AMreport abuse
  • Fake Outrage? AIG Bonuses Known Months Ago
    And I wonder why this hasn't gotten time on the news????

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/18/politics/main4873238.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_4873238
    By Aaron @ 03/19/09 09:41:29 AMreport abuse
  • Piling on
    I felt sorry for Mt. Liddy yesterday. Even though I DON'T agree with the bailout of AIG at all, Mr. Liddy was brought in to clean up the mess created by the previous management team. He seems like a reasonable guy that is trying to make the best of an awful situation! Give him credit!
    By Michael @ 03/19/09 09:40:35 AMreport abuse
  • AIG bonus vs. Pork/Earmarks
    So it's ok for the government to pass a bill full of pork/earmarks that benefit very few if any and it's not ok for AIG to pay a bonus? Both the pork/earmarks and the bonus's are being paid by us tax payers.
    By Me @ 03/19/09 09:34:01 AMreport abuse
  • Bonus Payments
    This is a product (or is it a multiplier) of Wealth Envy Education pushed so damn hard by our wonderful government and the "mainstream" press.

    These clowns are so damn stupid that they can't see that potentially they are cutting their on throats. Can you just see the look on Slobering Barneys face when he loses his office and some corporation makes him an Exec and then he finds his pay is capped at $250,000.00 because of Government regulation and this is taxed at a special rate since he is an Evil Rich Exec.

    I can't wait for this all to back fire and for the people to vote to mandate that all of congress be with out ANY FORM OF Compensation, because it is a CIVIC DUTY.

    Keith C. Hensley
    Retired TPD
    By Keith C. Hensley @ 03/19/09 09:32:41 AMreport abuse
  • I tried watching some of the hearings, but can't stand to listen to slobbering fat a** Barney Frank for any extended period. He's as crooked as they come, yet the libtards in his state keep electing him time after time.

    I did however catch the part where Frank was grilling Liddy about releasing the names of people who've received bonuses. Liddy responded if he had too he would, with the assurance that the names would be kept private. Of course fat a** slobbering Barney Frank wouldn't give such an assurance, so Liddy read some of the DEATH threats that are being made not only against the people who received bonuses, but their families/children as well. That is just sick, and there is no way under those conditions, well any condition that those names should be made public. Barney you helped create this mess, you can't out shout everyone now trying to deflect from the fact that you and Dodd (as well as many many others) are partly responsible for this giant cluster ****

    I'm not sure what to think about the bonuses....on the one hand a contract is a contract, just like in sports when you give outlandish contracts and a player gets injured and still collects his huge money, where is the outrage there? Bonuses are mostly used as rewards for performance...On the other hand, AIG has suffered tremendous losses, and has received taxpayer money to "help" them out. Their performance is so pitiful why should they receive any money? If the bonus was actually a salary, part of a promised contract where you earn a $1.00 for the year then at such and such a time we'll give you this, that to me really isn't a bonus but part of the salary. Its a giant mess, and no no one's life should be threatened over it, but it isn't the time IMHO for these companies to be giving such outlandish bonuses, especially when they are losing millions and are accepting handouts to bail them out. A capatilistic society means failure as well as success, and honestly these companies have failed, they should've filed for bankruptcy and re-organized (there goes your contracts), and I don't think bad and irresponsible behaviour on their parts should be rewarded with bonuses. Now if they had earned a 500 billion dollar profit, that's another story, that means success...but taking taxpayer money to bail them out, they've failed.
    By Jennifer @ 03/19/09 09:30:00 AMreport abuse
  • Copy left
    Exactly how have you contributed anything to their wealth or anyone's wealth. These people paid there property taxes, road and gas taxes that pay for their use of these items, probably overpaid so dregs like you could have these freedoms (what's left of them) that the Constitution and Bill of Rights provide.

    Since the Civil War, we the people, have set by and watched our Government grow, let our freedom and power wain, while the power of the Federal Government grow, now with Prezbo, at an alarming rate.
    By booger @ 03/19/09 09:15:21 AMreport abuse
  • AIG campaign donations
    Is Obama going to give back the $100K+ in campaign donations AIG paid out last year?

    Copyleft: You really can't be that stupid, can you? This is all just performance art, right?

    Oh, and please let me know how I can get my Internet, water and power bills subsidized by the taxpayers. Silly me, I've been paying for them myself all along.
    By Josh M @ 03/19/09 09:10:47 AMreport abuse
  • Heil Hittler
    It's sounding more and more like the Fourth Reich. This is nothing more than tyranny!

    The Imperial Federal Government is targeting a few hundred individuals. They want to retroactively change the tax laws as they apply. And only to these few people. They want to tax 100% of the bonuses. They are attacking one company, AIG (for now). Those evil capitalists! Who's next? Walmart? Exxon Mobile? Anheuser - Bush? Marlboro?

    "Vee must have deir names!"

    Next it will be "Show me your papers!"
    By Ben Dover @ 03/19/09 09:10:23 AMreport abuse
  • Absolutely sick
    The hearing yesterday was one of the sickest dog and pony shows I've ever seen. Congress and the Treasury should have been the ones being grilled, not Ed Liddy. Congressman Lynch was way out of line with his remarks to Mr. Liddy. Lynch's constituents should be embarrassed to have such a pompus, arrogant, jerk representing them in Washington.
    By JB @ 03/19/09 09:08:39 AMreport abuse
  • Giving back
    As I recollect correctly even Jesus never said "give back". He just said..."give". I think the whole "give back" issue strips the giver of his just dues. It minimizes their generosity to nothing more than a task that was expected (almost like paying a debt) instead of free will.
    By CGarcia @ 03/19/09 09:06:31 AMreport abuse
  • Who says this is taxpayer money?
    Why is there an idea that these 'bonuses' are actually from taxpayer money. I read about AIG last year and they had asset holdings in the range of a $1B to a $1.5B when the government took 80% of the stock. There is no way that this is all taxpayer money, and the Media has spun it to look like AIG had nothing but taxpayer money.
    By Greg s @ 03/19/09 09:00:50 AMreport abuse
  • Gift Tax on return salary
    Any person who returns their bonus is making a gift to AIG. Therefore, anything above $12000 is going to be subject to a gift tax.
    By JackDonlan @ 03/19/09 08:47:54 AMreport abuse
  • Scary Stuff
    Okay, this is freaking me out a bit. I feel like I'm wathcing "V for Vendetta" or something! Release their names??? Do you people realize what's going on here?
    By JP @ 03/19/09 08:45:06 AMreport abuse
  • Giving Back Bonuses
    Isn't the income tax rule that you have taxable income if you receive it OR ARE ENTITLED to receive it? If so, if these executives return all or part of their bonuses, they may still be liable for paying income tax on the entire amount, if the IRS chooses to use this rule as it stands.
    By Bob @ 03/19/09 08:39:32 AMreport abuse
  • Ahh, the central libertardian fantasy
    ... The notion that any wealth you've managed to accumulate was earned, 100%, through your own efforts, with no one and nothing else contributing in any way.

    Pure nonsense, obviously... but you'd be surprised how many Ayn Rand fanatics who never outgrew their teenage years mentally still make that claim.

    Tell me, O objectivist geniuses: Did your income involve interacting with any other parties whatsoever? Did it take place in a society of laws and property rights? Did it make use of any communications or travel mechanisms (such as roads, or the Internet)? Did you have lights and water working at your place of business (utilities paid for collectively, through taxes)? Did it involve currency, guaranteed by the government? Was it a peaceful transaction, thanks to police and military?

    Congratulations: the nation and the community played a part in helping you build your wealth. Taxes are a big part of how repay us for the opportunities we've provided you, so enough whining about them being "punishment for achievers" and similar nonsense.

    No man is an island, but plenty of people apparently have rocks in their heads.
    By Copyleft @ 03/19/09 08:35:06 AMreport abuse
send to a friend  view as printer-friendly  RSS feeds
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement