Santelli: AIG $165 million is like worrying about 16.5 cents

[RamboLiberal]

On Tuesday morning, it was Rick Santelli's turn to downplay the outrage. The CNBC host of 'rewarding-the-housing-market-losers' fame, urged the masses to show some perspective. After all, this was mere "millions" of dollars engendering the bonus-driven anger, as opposed to the "billions" that AIG has received in bailout bucks. From CNBC's Squawk Box:

SANTELLI: Now, think about it this way. Maybe I'm missing something. But the outrage seems to be about M's, millions of dollars, right? $165 million, OK?

But I would think that it should be looked at as a pretty big positive, because when you go from the M, maybe you should try to go to the B's, which is the billions of dollars, and maybe that's going to even enlighten it for the T, trillions of dollars. You know, $165 million is like worrying about 16.5 cents, while $165 maybe necessitates a little more outrage. What do you guys think?

BECKY QUICK: Hey, Rick, I think the real idea here is just the idea of rewarding bad behavior, which is something you've spoken out against in the past.

SANTELLI: No, I guess what I'm saying is it's an order of magnitude. Don't you think this dynamic that the average guy reading his newspaper is really starting to be in tune with this?

And I think bonuses really strike a cord as to the dynamic you're talking about. But there's many degrees of intensity if one really wants to shine the light on the money that's being scrutinized. You know, there's Ms, Bs and Ts. I just want to know what people think.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/17/santelli-sen-kyl-push-bac_n_175691.html

No outrage Mr. Populist????????? Going to be fun watching Jon Stewart, KO, Rachel, rip you a new one. Hope Gibbs goes after this as well.

[leftstreet]

1. He's right

This reminds me of Reagan's Welfare Queens. Whip people up into a frenzy over something minor, while shoveling billions to the Ruling Class.

The M$M love it. Politicians love it. It's full of win!

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/business/15AIG.html?hp

Word of the bonuses last week stirred such deep consternation inside the Obama administration that Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner told the firm they were unacceptable and demanded they be renegotiated, a senior administration official said. But the bonuses will go forward because lawyers said the firm was contractually obligated to pay them.

The payments to A.I.G.’s financial products unit are in addition to $121 million in previously scheduled bonuses for the company’s senior executives and 6,400 employees across the sprawling corporation. Mr. Geithner last week pressured A.I.G. to cut the $9.6 million going to the top 50 executives in half and tie the rest to performance.

How far will that bonus money go again?

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

6. Of course he's right.

That doesn't change who he is or what he stands for, though.

I just don't like him.

[Clear Blue Sky]

7. Agree. Outrage of 165M but not over 165B?

[FrenchieCat]

23. Then we should have been outraged long before this.....

Like when the 2 trillion went missing from the Defense Department.

Santelli's fake outrage failed.
So they are trying a new tack.
Getting you outraged about what happened back in October,
when the Bail out vote occurred.

The Outraged Faux Populist Republicans who didn't vote for the Bail out,
are waiting for the pitchfork mob as we speak.

This is all a set up to garnet support for an artificial populist movement.

Anytime the Corporate media pushes us to be angered, one has a duty to ask
what their motives are.

We are being manipulated, and I'm not falling for this fake ass shit.

[Incitatus]

29. Outrage that the ones who caused this are profiting from it.

Of course, there is outage over the billions.

[phantom power]

12. I'll tell you why I think it matters...

It matters because the message is "Fuck you, Taxpayers, we're not going to fix a damned thing, no matter how much money you gave us. In fact, we're going to keep lining our personal pockets and thumb our nose at you while we do it."

It's a clear signal that the white-collar sociopath motherfuckers who gave us this mess are still the ones in charge, and nothing is going to change while that's true.

[Marr]

31. It's even worst than that-- they toss in a little, "the economy will collapse without us" at the end

as well. Self-important, corrupt pigs who are so convinced of their superiority that they can flip us the finger while we're paying for their con games and basically say, "what are you gonna do about it, losers?".

[WilliamPitt]

13. Yup

[Junkdrawer]

21. Related aside....Seen this Will?

A much better, detailed article about the same subject as my "London Gambling House" post....

http://www.villagevoice.com/content/printVersion/850296

[WilliamPitt]

25. Awesome

Thank you.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Santelli is protecting the mega-wealthy by misdirecting the argument.

Nobody is happy about bailing out AIG with billions of dollars but it's done with the understanding that it serves the nation or public good by preventing catastrophic collapse of the financial market and in turn the general economy.

On the other hand the bonuses for gross dereliction of duty serve no public good, to the contrary they reward the people most responsible, sometimes the principle does matter.

Santelli doesn't care about the public good, just his narrow view of looking out for the mega-wealth y's interests.

He used a broad brush on the mortgage bailout without taking in to consideration.

1. The effects of a slowing economy, an exploding national debt mismanaged by Cheney/Bush combined with a dysfunctional health care system and good paying people getting laid off in a tight job market, contributing to the foreclosure crisis, to him and the corporate media it was all the fault of irresponsible borrowers.

2. The malignant, adverse effect of those foreclosures on the homes and credit of people not in danger of being foreclosed on.

So the average American and the threat to the general economy didn't mean shit to Santelli, but if the mega-wealthy start catching flak for being paid incompetence bonuses even if only in the hundreds of millions, Santelli suddenly gains perspective!

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

2. Santelli? You're still relevant?

GO AWAY.

You're a shill for the corporate elites, and the only person you're fooling is yourself.

If you have children, I hope they're ashamed of you.

[ddeclue]

3. Hey Santelli take the hint : STFU!

Now that Jon has taken down Cramer - who was mainly a target of opportunity for standing up and defending the CNBC infomercial - he needs to get down to the mission objective: YOU - Getting your ass fired!

You are a soul-less sleaze and give weasels a bad name. (He's a sleazel??)

Doug D.

[butterfly77]

4. Notice how anytime...

giving money to regular people their always seems to be a up roar from the right and their stupid fringe groups. As soon as it comes to the rich its fine by wallstreet,the media, the congress and the senate. If a regular person needs unemployment benefits,medical care,welfare,education,etc...their is always a problem and the so called regular person has to follow the rules.

[DJ13]

5. His type never has any outrage at the excesses of the upper class

His outrage is reserved for the times when the government tries to help the middle and lower classes.

[marketcrazy1]

8. I see where he is going with this

165 million is a lot of money and there is outrage and maybe that outrage will cause us to look at the BILLIONS with a B or the TRILLIONS with a T that are being shuffled around to investors so that THEY are made whole at OUR expense!! lets get to the "B`s" and "T`s". a few hundred million is bad enough what about the hundreds of BILLIONS going to investors and foreign banks to cover their losses! they are being paid off with OUR money!! where is the outrage over THAT!!??

[havocmom]

9. If it's such trivial $, the bozos who got bonuses for wrecking AGI shouldn't mind giving it back

!

[gratuitous]

16. Yeah, since this is such a paltry amount, Mr. Santelli

Why don't you go back down to the trading floor in Chicago, and ask your "silent majority" pals to pungle up for their fellow do-nothing millionaires? I'm sure you know the way there. It's right at the corner of Eviscerate Boulevard and Decapitate Way. Good luck!

[TheCoxwain]

10. That guy is -as Jon Stewart put it - BALLSY.

nt

[backscatter712]

11. Sick Rantelli is at it again... n/t

[GinaMaria]

35. Love the nick name!!!

great job

[backscatter712]

36. That's what KO calls him.

I've also called him Slick Rantelli...

[mikeytherat]

14. Well then, Dick Santorum, I guess a homeowner potentially getting a multi-THOUSAND dollar bailout

is something that should not be mentioned at all. And having a thrombo over this is really, really overkill, yes?

"Do you want your neighbor bailed out so he can have an extra bathroom???"

"Hell, no!"

"Should we look the other way at $160 million in bonuses???"

"Hell, yes!"

mikey_the_rat

[HughBeaumont]

15. Santelli is part of the "SCREW THOSE LOSERS" crowd.

If there was one thing Cramer did well on with the TDS interview, it's that he condemned Santelli's statements about troubled mortgage holders. Victim blaming is poor taste no matter who does it.

[Supersedeas]

27. what are the foreclosed losers complaining about...it's only 165 Million

[GinaMaria]

17. What no teabags?

Average Americans getting help with mortgages makes Santelli go into a rage but AIG making the American taxpayer responsible for it's contractual obligations to questionable performers Santelli minimizes it by comparing it to 16.5 cents. His head is up corporate ass.

[Spirochete]

18. Well, in that case...

Brother can you spare a dime?

[Deja Q]

19. Because this bailing out is not an ENTITLEMENT, that's why.

Or is it?

[marketcrazy1]

22. santelli is right

165 million is a lot of money BUT is is chicken feed compared to the hundreds of BILLIONS of OUR money being GIVEN AWAY to investors who fucked up. although it is right to be outraged over the way AIG is spending OUR money we need to start looking at the BIG picture, the billions and trillions being shifted to the wealthy at OUR expense. I really dont get this outrage at santelli, sure he fucked up. his comments about home owner bailouts touched a nerve but the fact is he has been dead set AGAINST these bank bailouts and TARP from the beginning! and he has been one of the ONLY commentators on CNBS willing to tell the TRUTH about this meltdown. he caught TONS of shit from the other bobble heads throughout last year because he told the TRUTH and know one wanted to hear it. so, yes he fucked up but that does not make everything he says untrue.

[slipslidingaway]

32. Agree, I'm not happy about the bonus money, but it is small

in comparison to the other money being given away.

[Ganja Ninja]

20. Well it's not like they're wasting it on "volcano monitoring".

:shrug:

[backscatter712]

24. Becky Quick is right.

The point isn't that it's 1% or 0.1$ or whatever of the total bailout money.

The point is that these giant bonuses while AIG struggles to stay in business and has to go on bended knee to the taxpayer to get billions of bailout money is REWARDING BAD BEHAVIOR.

If the company you're running isn't making money, you shouldn't be making bonuses. You should get a basic salary (for a high-level executive, that would be somewhere in the six-figure range, not seven-figures, and ABSOLUTELY NOT eight figures) and THAT'S IT! If you can't pay the mortgage on your personal Palace of Versailles, it's time to sell it and come back down out of the stratosphere.

Is that so hard of a concept?

[City Lights]

28. Bite me, Little Ricky.

Your neighbor's bathroom cost a lot less than $165 million, yet you had an unscripted tantrum over it on the floor of the CBOT. You're as phony as a three-dollar bill.

You're not fooling anyone with your bullshit. :eyes:

Oh, and you're a cowardly weasel to boot.

[Marr]

30. It's the principle of the thing, so I'm not surprised that a man like Santelli can't grasp it.

[me b zola]

33. Rick "Let Them Eat Cake" Santilli

can go f*ck himself.

[GinaMaria]

34. Maybe he started a website about it last August

Has anyone looked? :evilgrin:

[slipslidingaway]

37. Here's the video....

starts around the 5 minute mark, unfortunately Liesman changed the topic, we need more focus on the B's and T's.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1063382216&play=1


By Eliot Spitzer

"It's not the bonuses. It's that AIG's counterparties are getting paid back in full."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5273635&mesg_id=5273635
http://www.slate.com/id/2213942