The AIG bonuses matter because they are part of the political and corporate disconnect

[rpannier]

IMO opinion they matter because they (the bonuses) are a part of what is seriously wrong the corporate-political structure in the US There is a total disconnect from anything outside their little bubble.

Anyone with an IQ higher than a 400 year-old, headless corpse that had just been dug up from an old cemetery would have recognized that the bonuses would have touched off a firestorm. Not because they are the most egregious thing that has happened in the last 25 years, but because they were another piece built on top of this festering tower of ****.

And when people come out and say, "There's nothing that could be done." "These people earned this money." etc then are shocked or angry that people are upset are missing where the public is at the moment and are trying to soften it by saying how insignificant it is in the greater picture -- smelltelli.
It is part of the bigger picture and it shows that politicians, corporate-types and the media are disconnected from where the public is at this moment.
People are not mad...They're pissed. They're pissed that this huge amount of money has been 'loaned' (loan in the way I loaned my brother 2K 10 years ago and have yet to see a dime of it) to these companies and we're seeing nothing positive occurring.

Within weeks of the first loans given out, there were a series of reports that the money loaned was being used for Mergers and Acquisitions.
Funny...I don't remember that being part of the purpose for the loans.

Why were they using the money for that?
Simple,because they could. There was no oversight by the previous administration. And the 'sit-and-spinners' we call a Congress did nothing during that time as well...John Adams was correct in his assessment of useless men.

Then we find out, that some of these companies were using this money for company functions, new luxury items (new planes), in-services, etc on themselves.
These companies gave a series of responses to try and justify trips to Las Vegas, etc.

-Not everyone at the company did poorly and we should reward those who deserved it with these trips.
Guess what...There were some guys on the Detroit Lions who had a kick-ass year and they didn't get to go to the playoffs or the Super Bowl. If the team sucks everyone suffers.
- We needed to upgrade the planes, autos, etc because they were 6-10 years old. Commercial air in coach???
- By going to these places were stimulating the economy.
How about stimulating the economy by taking that money and hiring more people. That will stimulate the economy,though you won't get stimulated by the hot blond on the from the strip or the hulking guy the hotel sent up for your 'massage'.

Then we have the CEO's wailing and moaning about too much oversight and restrictions on how much money they can earn. We are/were told that people would leave the company and go elsewhere if these restrictions on salary occur.
Gee...that would be a shame. Yeah I could see where that could happen.

Interviewer: So...Mr Blows-Sacks-of-Cash.Tell me about your last job.
Mr. Blows-Sacks-of-Cash: I was responsible for overseeing the financial security of a company that was 100,000,000,000 in the black when I took the job in 1998 and when I left last week, they were 100,000,000,000 in the red.

That'll wow 'em at the interview.

Then there is their argument that these people need this money because there is a certain lifestyle that goes with these positions.
I posted a few months ago from someone arguing that these people have two vacations, private security and private school to pay for. That they can't be a real go-getter taking the subway each day.

Yeah...preserving their lifestyle is certainly first and foremost on my mind.
Maybe instead of a go-getter, they could hire a stay-protector?

Too much regulation might bog these businesses down...You mean like the regulations we had in the 40's, 50's and 60's? When the economy boomed and these companies made hand over fist, as did many Americans.
That deregulation from 1978-2007 certainly lifted the burdens off business and allowed them to blossom to where they are today. Gasping for air as they go down for the third time, clinging to the lifeboat full of our money.

The US government owns 80% of AIG, but seems to be unable to do anything or affect any change. Not surprising, as the Democrats in Congress told us they couldn't do anything when they were in the minority and are now equally as impotent as the majority party.
I'm convinced that if the government owned all but one share of AIG, they'd be bullied by the guy that held that one share into doing his bidding.

We keep getting told that we need to fund these businesses because it would be disastrous if they went under.
I agree with this statement, except for one thing -- are they showing any real positive progress?
We're told it will take time. Agreed. But how much time? How about a rough time frame. Anything? Some clue as to what progress is might be nice. We could be shoveling money into this furnace and watching it burn for 20 years for all anyone knows and at the end of the day nothing positive may happen.
It would have been cheaper (and I think it still is) to just buy up the damn thing, sell what is of value to a responsible bidder and suck up what is lost. Cuz guess what??? The toxic assets are most likely going to be toxic 15 years from now.

But if we did that it would be a giant step toward Socialism, or Communism or Neptunism or something elsism.
It's interesting how most people (according to polls) are less afraid of the 'isms' and more afraid of the 'un' -- unemployed. Yet, this doesn't seem to catch the attention of the media, congress or 'Wall Street'
Not surprising as they're all Employed.

To its credit the administration appears to be doing the right thing...try to stop the hemorrhaging first. What they're doing may be right, it may be wrong. But it's not clear what, if anything, will work.
I have faith in Obama, I wish I shared the same faith he has in Geitner. I lump Geitner in with the disconnected Wall Street crowd.
To make their problem more difficult, they have to deal with people that are hampering their efforts because of ideology and fear -- fear it might work.
Funny how they and their enablers created this mess and they will be damned if they'll let someone else clean it up.

The problem is the disconnect and the AIG Bonuses are the newest issue that reminds people of how bad it is.
The bonuses are in may ways the equivalent of Al Capone's Tax Evasion and Watergate. They weren't the worst thing that was being done, but it's what ultimately brought them down.

I could be wrong. I don't think I am.
As I said, I have faith in Obama and I recognize that this is going to take time.
But when you're dealing with people who are disconnected from the real world, it's very difficult. Especially when they wield power themselves.

[Fire1]

1. You say 'disconnect.' I say, 'corrupt.' n/t

[rpannier]

2. And that's part of the disconnect

Many of them don't see what they're doing as corrupt.

They see it in the same way that lunatic Ayn Rand did "It's the best way you play the game to win. If you destroy lives and other people's future in the process 'Oh well' they were losers anyway."