General discussion


Bailout fraud starts early

By puppybreath ·
Unbelievable! <sarcasm> It's a good thing the government felt they had to step in and save these guys. </sarcasm>

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

18 total posts (Page 2 of 2)   Prev   01 | 02
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -


by jmgarvin In reply to In this case, was Bush to ...

He helped to deregulate and make this mess, then he helped get the bail out Bush is responsible.

AIG execs are responsible because apparently they are full retard, and we all know, you NEVER go full retard.

Collapse -


by w2ktechman In reply to Yes...

Although deep rooted this could be blamed on Bush, this is not a situation to blame him directly over.
This was a company party for getting a bailout and getting away with everything. This particular event was all AIG execs.

Collapse -

I read the Consumerist link.

by OnTheRopes In reply to Eric Dinallo needs to be ...

Ninety percent of the people think he should've been punched. That was over 24.400 people when I voted. I voted punch. So I'm not a nice guy. <br><br>
I heard testimony that one of the AIG exec.'s received a $34,000,000 golden parachute along with a $1,000,000 monthly consultancy fee. Seems a little steep to me. Every time I've screwed up at my work I got in trouble. No consultancy for me.

Collapse -

Me either, Ropes

by Tig2 In reply to I read the Consumerist li ...

It would seem that if you fck up really bad that you would have consequences to face. That has certainly been my experience and I know I am not alone. But these yodas? Obviously they get to live by very different rules than we mere mortals.

If this is the price tag for Mental Health Parity, it is WAY too high. Parity should have been passed long ago. Bailing out idiots should not have been the entrance fee.

Collapse -

But execs, over the last few years

by w2ktechman In reply to I read the Consumerist li ...

have been getting larger and larger pay, bonuses, and Leaving fees. They get fired and take home $$$$$$$$.
Often they leave getting more than they got as salary for several years -- + parting gifts/bonuses.
It has gotten too bad in my opinion. The law dont touch em, the companies bend over backwards for them and they pull scams like this

Collapse -

Executive Bonuses will be the last expense line cut

by drowningnotwaving In reply to Bailout fraud starts earl ...

It may be immoral bordering on criminal, but it's a logical conclusion in every sense.

Shareholders get a Board notice saying "we have to pay bonuses (or issue a new round of options at 3c instead of $27) otherwise we will lose all our talented executives with their years of experience and inside knowledge. Your board, whilst cognisant of the current issues and shareholder displeasure with their recent performance, unanimously agrees that this is in the best interest of the stability of the company and its shareholders".

Your average shareholder doesn't know any better to argue with the Board.

Even belligerent shareholders think "gee, if we sack this lot, how will we attract new people and give any sense of them making their high salaries?". Answer, you hire new people with the promise of sign-on bonuses, high salaries and options at 3c.

A few key executives fall on their swords (generally with nice little agreements signed between themselves and other directors) but inertia almost always wins.

There was a strong (and obviously winning) argument for the bailout, but failure would have got rid of lots of the troublemakers.

As Delbertpgh (I think) said, Banks do not and never have acted morally. They act only (for the most part) within the laws that bind them.

Collapse -

Banks shouldn't act morally, but they shouldn't be stupid either

by jmgarvin In reply to Executive Bonuses will be ...

They've acted counter to being profitable. They should all rot in jail.

Collapse -

I agree JM

by drowningnotwaving In reply to Banks shouldn't act moral ...

... or at least wallow in their own mortgage **** on the unemployment line.

I just doubt it.

I do agree (and have learnt from) Maxwell's / other's writings about the source of the issue being wayward government policy.

But no-one held a gun to the banks' (or their financiers') heads saying give the money away to bad borrowers.

It's ironic that whilst this was and is all happening, major banks around the planet are spending billions updating systems for Basel II compliance, an objective of which is to limit or repel situations like the one we now find ourselve dealing with.

We sell software to banks and finance companies. Life isn't particularly rosy right now but we just have to hang out. Well I guess I could sell a few of those shares I accumulated ... Doh!

:) Keep on smiling/drinking (circle your choice).

Back to Community Forum
18 total posts (Page 2 of 2)   Prev   01 | 02

General Discussion Forums