The AIG situation
People are commenting on this thing left and right. For those who may not be familiar with the situation, the government recently provided AIG with an additional 30 billion dollars to keep the 120 billion they'd already been awarded company. As part of a contract that was drawn up well in advance of the economic crisis, AIG awarded $165 million in bonuses to the department responsible for fucking their company over to the point where they need 150 billion dollars to stay temporarily afloat.
A surprising number of people have come out in support of these bonuses. They cite reasons like:
A government worker drives a dumptruck full of money into AIG and dumps it onto the floor. He gets out and shakes the hand of the AIG representative responsible for overseeing the transfer of the money. "Thanks," says the AIG representative, "we really appreciate the government's help getting us solvent again. Now, in accordance with AIG policy, let me just take $100 here," he leans down and grabs $100 from the pile, "...and throw it into the incinerator."
"Whoa, wait, what the fuck?" says the government appointed money dumptruck driver, as the AIG employee opens the furnace installed nearby for exactly this purpose and throws the money in. "That money is to help you cover some of the shitty insurance policies you made! You can't just fucking chuck it into the furnace!"
"My hands are tied," says the AIG employee. "It's in our company charter that at least $100 of monies received has to go directly into the ceremonial furnace, lest 20 years of bad luck follow."
The issue isn't that $165 million is a lot of money. The issue is that it shouldn't have been given to these assholes at all. It should be used to cover the shitty insurance policies that they issued.
Under contract? Congress fucking yelled at like five companies that had corporate jets ordered on contract until they agreed to cancel the order, and nobody called that unconstitutional (like they're now calling Congress' massive taxing of the bonuses). And frankly, the workers should probably feel fortunate to have a job at all in the financial industry. If they're going to quit because their $200k bonus was cancelled, AIG should hire someone specifically to kick them in the ass as they go out the door. These bastards don't deserve bonuses. I'm not even convinced they deserve jobs.
Here's the thing, though: The people who are now arguing that this is practically no money compared to the size of the bailout so why not let them keep it are the same ones who before were arguing that $20 million to fight pests in the farm belt (and yes, the infamous volcano monitoring) in Obama's big spending bill was a huge waste of money, even though it was a tiny fraction of the overall amount. This reversal of roles is all too common in modern politics. If you agree with the way the money is being spent, you can point out that it's a small fraction of the total amount, and if you don't agree with it then you get to be pissed that it exists at all. So maybe I'm the asshole, and the AIG guys should get their precious bonuses after all. They certainly think so. But I can't help but wonder if that money might have been better spent delivering bottled hot water to dehydrated babies, or something other than padding the bottom line of these assholes who work at a company which would be dead if not for the people kind enough to hook them to a money I.V.
If they took that money and bought an airplane people would be pissed. If they spent it on foosball tables and beer they'd be pissed. If they bought lottery tickets or solid gold desks or threw it in an incinerator they'd be pissed. Why aren't we allowed to be pissed that they're distributing it to their employees, who will take it home and spend it on hookers? Someone needs to work up the courage to give these people the finger.
A surprising number of people have come out in support of these bonuses. They cite reasons like:
- The bonuses account for 0.01% of the total bailout money
- They're under contract, so their hands are tied
- The workers are going to leave in a huff if they don't get their bonuses
- Their workers deserve compensation, because bonuses are a big part of how these people get paid
A government worker drives a dumptruck full of money into AIG and dumps it onto the floor. He gets out and shakes the hand of the AIG representative responsible for overseeing the transfer of the money. "Thanks," says the AIG representative, "we really appreciate the government's help getting us solvent again. Now, in accordance with AIG policy, let me just take $100 here," he leans down and grabs $100 from the pile, "...and throw it into the incinerator."
"Whoa, wait, what the fuck?" says the government appointed money dumptruck driver, as the AIG employee opens the furnace installed nearby for exactly this purpose and throws the money in. "That money is to help you cover some of the shitty insurance policies you made! You can't just fucking chuck it into the furnace!"
"My hands are tied," says the AIG employee. "It's in our company charter that at least $100 of monies received has to go directly into the ceremonial furnace, lest 20 years of bad luck follow."
The issue isn't that $165 million is a lot of money. The issue is that it shouldn't have been given to these assholes at all. It should be used to cover the shitty insurance policies that they issued.
Under contract? Congress fucking yelled at like five companies that had corporate jets ordered on contract until they agreed to cancel the order, and nobody called that unconstitutional (like they're now calling Congress' massive taxing of the bonuses). And frankly, the workers should probably feel fortunate to have a job at all in the financial industry. If they're going to quit because their $200k bonus was cancelled, AIG should hire someone specifically to kick them in the ass as they go out the door. These bastards don't deserve bonuses. I'm not even convinced they deserve jobs.
Here's the thing, though: The people who are now arguing that this is practically no money compared to the size of the bailout so why not let them keep it are the same ones who before were arguing that $20 million to fight pests in the farm belt (and yes, the infamous volcano monitoring) in Obama's big spending bill was a huge waste of money, even though it was a tiny fraction of the overall amount. This reversal of roles is all too common in modern politics. If you agree with the way the money is being spent, you can point out that it's a small fraction of the total amount, and if you don't agree with it then you get to be pissed that it exists at all. So maybe I'm the asshole, and the AIG guys should get their precious bonuses after all. They certainly think so. But I can't help but wonder if that money might have been better spent delivering bottled hot water to dehydrated babies, or something other than padding the bottom line of these assholes who work at a company which would be dead if not for the people kind enough to hook them to a money I.V.
If they took that money and bought an airplane people would be pissed. If they spent it on foosball tables and beer they'd be pissed. If they bought lottery tickets or solid gold desks or threw it in an incinerator they'd be pissed. Why aren't we allowed to be pissed that they're distributing it to their employees, who will take it home and spend it on hookers? Someone needs to work up the courage to give these people the finger.