These democrats really have a hard time understanding economics and tax policy. If no one can make bonuses, there will be no bonus income to tax at 40-50% (non-punitative tax rate).
If they cap executive income at 500K, there will be no large, multi-million salaries to tax at the 39% federal rate they are pushing for.
So, they are really only limiting the amount that will be collected by federal taxes.
Stupid.

First, I'm not for nationalization. I'm for regulation on companies that take government funding due to bad decision making. Actually, I'm for allowing the weaker ones to fail but that ain't happening.

Most posters here are for letting them fail as well. So to those folks, what in the hell do you think would happen to the talent if we did let them fail? Probably find jobs elsewhere, switch positions with other folks in the industry that didn't screw up the business. And some get early retirement. Keep is consistent people.

The whole argument from the target industry (bias at best) is that lower wages will make the "talent" go somewhere else. Well, GOOD! But those people are full of crap. Why would I say that you ask? Look at the IT industry. IT salaries have droped for most. For many others, people have had to find other types of work due to outsourcing. And some how, the talent is still here in the U.S. keeping an edge on the rest of the world.

JP Morgan's analyst is full of biasness. Whining about not regulating their salaries/bonuses when most of you wanted them to fail in the first place (like me) is inconsistent.

Quit brown nosing the exec's and let's move on. The tax payers own the jobs now, thus, regulation there will be. Get over it!

Neal seems inconsistent about bailout and bonuses. He opposes government money going to bailout the autos or other unionized companies but he does not seem to opposed bailouts and bonuses to white collared industry like AIG.

IMO ALL use of government money to bailout the private sector - white or blue collared is Unconstitutional, Socialistic and plain old wrong. Once you do bailout though the rules change. Salaries, wages can and should be capped and equaled in Socialistic countries and government owned/subsidized industries. AIG along with the auto's should be bankrupt and on the auction block as we speak. Either we go Socialistic or we don't but you can't have it both ways. I cannot condone Capitalistic bonuses for AIG employees paid for using Socialistic (taxpayer) money. Nor can I support wages for union employees paid for using Socilaistic (taxpayer) money either.

"at a severe competitive disadvantage for talent relative to foreign banks which have not received such funds."

But what are they talented at? Losing money. Driving their companies to bankruptcy. Driving the nation to bankruptcy (with lots of help from government). Destroying the world's economy. Stealing taxpayer money.

Talent like this we don't need.

AIG wants to act like it has money to burn? Thinks that not doing so will damage the company and won't let them compete in a global marketplace?

Well then, they shouldn't accept federal funding. Then they can do whatever they want. I really don't care in the slightest how a company spends its money, how much executives get paid, whatever.

But you should _not_ get a hand-out from the government unless you've cut back on all other luxuries first.

The NY TIMES ran an article about a guy that basically did just that! (Not special Olympics, but donated it full stop)

If I were an AIG executive that recieved the bonus, I would keep the bonus, call a press conference, and publically donate the entire amount to the special olympics. I would then challenge Obama, Dodd, Frank and the rest of Congress to donate their AIG campaign contributions to a charity. This would sway public opinion, get Obama's panties in a wad, and it would also avoid the 90% tax because the contribution would be tax deductable.