If AIG has so many lucrative businesses, then why didn't they/ why don't they try to sell some of these enterprises?

Is AIG hiring?

I could use a bonus check since all of my current money is going to pay for the TARP.

Feels like a rob Peter to pay Paul kind of thing.

i am adept at sarcasm. but i have to judge where the sarcasm comes from. from neal, and the way it was written, i was thinking it was serious.

of course, i know you're a banker.

They shouldn't be getting ANY bonuses. The federal government should have let them fail. It's never the government's place to interfere in private enterprise.

This amount reflects, "reflects all types of variable compensation across all of our businesses," which means that it likely includes commissions to sales reps and MBO type bonuses for employees. These are rank and file people that EARNED the money they are receiving. We should hope that more sales reps are earning big commissions because growing sales is the answer to ending the bailout nonsense.

I don't think the American public was ever that angry about the bonuses in and of themselves. It was Barney Frank and the MSM who said that there was "populist anger" over the AIG bonuses. The real "populist anger" is over the 100+ billion dollar bailout of AIG with literally no oversight of how our public funds are spent.
That being said, I don't think there's anything wrong with being angry about the bonuses. You can't have banks and insurance giants operating like private companies when they're funded like federal agencies. If this money that AIG was a lifeline that was the minimum necessary to save the entire financial system, how is it that they have 400 million to spare for bonuses? This "bonus anger" pro and con debate is nothing more than a smokescreen on so many levels.

Michael,

The receiver has the authority in bankruptcy to allow or disallow any payments made from the company. It really depends upon the explaination of the proposed payment.

If these bonuses were contractual in nature, the BK court would probably allow the payments. I think everyone has a misconception of how bankruptcy Ch.11 works. Any and all payments, assets, etc., can be ordered disgorged(gotten back) from the recipient of the payment if later it is shown to have been made erroneously or fraudulently.

I am, and would be more concerned that the USGubmint is is even making taxpayer money available to private corporations in the first place. There is no provision in the Constitution to cover what they are doing and it should have never happened in the first place. The only thing that was happening was the folks at Goldman, JPM, Citi were at severe risk of going under and throwing the US financial system into utter chaos. The bailouts did nothing for the little guy, but it did save Goldman, JPM,...after all, we don't want the US monetary policy to go down with the makers. These guys have been setting policy since the establishment of the FED(federal reserve, which is a PRIVATE company of bankers, for the only reason for existance is to serve the bankers). They were made whole(covered their losses) at the expense of the taxpayers. These guys don't have any political allegiance, they whore themselves to which ever political party will allow them to do what they want with little interference.

Military aircraft release flares when an AA missile is fired at them to divert the munition from its target. The bonus broo-ha-ha is the same thing.
Find the recipients of the BILLIONS of US Treasury bailout money, the counterparties to the swaps which were paid in full by US Treasury money and you will have the real story. Do you think that AIG brass are idiots? Bailout was likely the plan all along. Perhaps those who wrote the bad bets (credit default swaps) for AIG are somewhere on the winning end of these bets? Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

i'm confused here. i thought wealth envy was a bad thing. you said, "Well, maybe the time has come again" that people would "raised their pitchforks" again.
so its alright now to have wealth envy, because you said so?