[inthebox]

Obama's pick that keeps on giving [ taxpayor money ]

OpEdNews » Lying Or Incompetent - Either Way, Geithner Needs to Be Fired

The AIG bonus contracts being cited by the administration were signed in 2008, and as the 80 percent owner of AIG, the federal government (ie. the Treasury Department and the Obama administration) have had access to the company's books and contracts for many months. Indeed, even if you believe that only the Federal Reserve bank was told about the AIG bonus contracts, recall that Geithner was a top official at the Federal Reserve bank when the AIG bailout was crafted and when AIG was telling the Federal Reserve about its finances and obligations - and the Wall Street Journal reported that Geithner was intimately involved in the AIG bailout (meaning he had access to their books/contracts months ago).

That means either Geithner is lying to the public by pretending he never knew about the AIG bonuses when, in fact he did.* Or, he's egregiously uninformed/incompetent and therefore absolutely unfit to hold one of the most important economic offices in our country.

American International Group: Recipients | OpenSecrets

And who is the top 2008 congressional AIG money recipient?:eek:


They write in faux outrage on the teleprompter don't they ;)

So what do all the Obama voters have to say?









G&P

[inthebox]

Fallout: Dems in disarray over AIG - Lisa Lerer and Victoria McGrane - POLITICO.com

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), tagged by Republican aides for sponsoring an amendment to the stimulus bill that allowed the bonuses, shifted the blame to the Treasury Department and “the bill conferees,” saying he had no idea that the AIG bonuses were coming

Ahh, the fingerpointing among the Dems begins as they play CYA.

Seems like the Dems have been in bed with the banks and wallstreeters all along.









G&P

[tomder55]

Yesterday Barney Frank ,in his best Joe McCarthy impersonation... or was that Madame Defarge... was asking for names of AIG employees who received bonuses. Dust off the guillotines! When asked if he would keep the names confidential he said NO... that it was his intent to haul their a$$es up to Capitol Hill for some bullying . It did not disuade him to hear that AIG employees were already receiving death threats.

President Obama lied yesterday when he claimed that Geither wasn't involved in TARP. As head of the NY Fed. Geithner was not only involved in the negotiations ;but I've heard he led the meetings. Also the President was asked if he intended to return the donations made by AIG execs last year to his campaign. The President ducked the question and the reporter (suprise surprise ) did not ask a follow-up.

[excon]

Hello lefty's:

From my CONSERVATIVE viewpoint, I think the AIG execs were ENTITLED to their bonus's.

After all, if they're too big to fail, that means we want them around for SOME purpose. Whatever purpose it is, apparently it CAN'T be carried out by ex McDonald's employees. So, if we want them to DO, what we think they SHOULD do, then we need to adhere to their contracts.

A contract is a contract, in this country. No? But, in the name of consistency, how come you lefty's think we can abrogate THESE contracts, but not the Auto workers??

And, you righty's out there, how come you think we can abrogate the Auto workers contracts, but NOT these??

I'm just curious about your TWO different mindsets... You lefty's are silly.

excon

[450donn]

Hello lefty's:

From my CONSERVATIVE viewpoint, I think the AIG execs were ENTITLED to their bonus's.

After all, if they're too big to fail, that means we want them around for SOME purpose. Whatever purpose it is, apparently it CAN'T be carried out by ex McDonald's employees. So, if we want them to DO, what we think they SHOULD do, then we need to adhere to their contracts.

A contract is a contract, in this country. No? But, in the name of consistency, how come you lefty's think we can abrogate THESE contracts, but not the Auto workers????

And, you righty's out there, how come you think we can abrogate the Auto workers contracts, but NOT these???

I'm just curious and your TWO different mindsets... You lefty's are silly.

excon

Morning koolaid sipper.
Well, IF and that is a big IF the auto industry were to go into chapter11 then the union contracts could be renegotiated along with every contract that the auto companies have with every employee and subcontractor. This would allow them to get contracts that are more in line with salary/benefit packages that the foreign companies are paying their workers. Which by the way are quiet generous In my opinion. Personally this whole thing is smoke and mirror's to shift the Americans focus away from something far bigger and potentially far worse that is happening or about to happen. Like maybe the cap and tax legislation that will all but kill business in America? I don't know, but there is something far worse and this AIG fiasco is being used to cover it up. Seems like politics as usual in Washington to me!

[excon]

I don't know, but there is something far worse and this AIG fiasco is being used to cover it up. Seems like politics as usual in Washington to me!

Hello 450:

I think you're right. Yesterday, while we were howling about $165 million, the fed printed another $ TRILLION!

Buy gold.

excon

[tomder55]

I am not faulting AIG employees .If it were me I'd pull a 'Clark Griswold' and say the bonus was already spent on the built in swimming pool.

The contracts should've been REnegotiated during the negotiations of TARP . That was not done and Paulson ,Geithner,Bernanke et al are at fault . When Geithner approved an ADDITIONAL bailout for them a couple of weeks ago these bonuses had not been paid out then ;and another opportunity to renegotiate was lost.

I do not approve of the mock outrage by the administation or Congress.

You are right ;in the scope of things the money being talked about is chump change... and we need our best money manipulators to launder the bailout money through AIG to all those foreign banks and Goldman Sachs.
I agree with 450donn that had they been allowed to go belly up then all contracts would've been subject to revision . Chapter 11 was set up to deal with these types of situations and that is how both the financials and the auto industry should've been handled .

[tomder55]

By the way ;why haven't they asked Franklin Raines return the money he plundered from Fannie ?

[George_1950]

"It strikes me that the A.I.G. financial products division received an unbelievably sweet deal. Did its managers slip it under the radar? Did the managers act in good faith? And who at A.I.G. signed off on this and did they focus on the risks and rewards? Yet more avenues for possible litigation.

"But of course, this is all merely a diversion for what should be the main focus: Where did the $170 billion go that taxpayers spent on A.I.G and why, and what we are going to do with A.I.G. going forward."
Dissecting the A.I.G. Bonus Contract - DealBook Blog - NYTimes.com

[speechlesstx]

Dodd (again) can't make up his mind on his role in this.

After denying having anything to do with crafting language in the stimulus bill that allowed bailed-out insurance giant American International Group to keep its bonuses, Sen. Christopher Dodd admitted that he and the Treasury Department were responsible for the loophole.

BTW ex, I haven't advocated abrogating anyone's contract.

[tomder55]

Yesterday, while we were howling about $165 million, the fed printed another $ TRILLION!

Yup and with interest rates in the effective negative rates ,there is a sell off the dollar.

Sad thing is that it is still one of the strongest currencies and with worsening conditions around the globe ,the dollar weakness may not last long.

Good call Ex ! While everyone is still taking about $165 million a $trillion move was made under our noses.

Bernanke looked so cool on 60 Minutes .But this move seems like a panic move to me. So much for incremental easing of credit . I doubt the Fed has too many moves like this left in it's arsenal .

But my guess is that this could work to end deflationary trends. The question then becomes how fast does the Fed reverse course when the inevidible inflationary cycle begins ?


The left got what it wants , the government managing the economy .

The Wall Street Journal observed :

After their experience with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, you'd think that Congress would no longer be interested in creating companies seen by the market as backed by the government. Yet that is exactly what the relevant congressional committees — the Senate Banking Committee and the House Financial Services Committee — are now considering.
In the wake of the financial crisis, the idea rapidly gaining strength in Washington is to create a systemic risk regulator. The principal sponsor of the plan is Barney Frank, the chair of the House Financial Services Committee. A recent report by the Group of Thirty (a private sector organization of financial regulation specialists), written by a subcommittee headed by Paul Volcker, also endorsed the idea, as has the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Securities Industry Financial Markets Association. …

If implemented, this would give the government the authority to designate and supervise "systemically significant" companies. Presumably, systemically significant companies would be those that are so large, or involved in financial activities of such importance, that their failure would create systemic risk.

Congress Is the Real Systemic Risk - WSJ.com

Even more... the President wants to seize the assets of these companies

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...eizure-powers/

[asking]

How come when I posted this here in October (twice) and again in December, nobody even acknowledged it, let alone expressed outrage?

As for the bailout, it's not clear yet how much will go to mortgages. Of the $700 billion given to financial institutions so far, $40 billion is going to a handful of executives who are owed various bonuses and deferred compensation. They are apparently getting paid right off the top, so they don't have to wait or worry about not getting their "due."

You read it right. Forty billion dollars to just a few people whose bad decisions helped wreck our economy. Hopefully, we can at least agree that's pretty offensive.

This was under our beloved last president, Bush. Big business is basically blackmailing the government. "Clean up the mess we made because it'll be worse for you if you don't." Maybe if enough people protest, more executives will give back the money and downsize to smaller houses and boats.

[George_1950]

How come when I posted this here in October (twice) and again in December, nobody even acknowledged it, let alone expressed outrage?



This was under our beloved last president, Bush. Big business is basically blackmailing the government. "Clean up the mess we made because it'll be worse for you if you don't." Maybe if enough people protest, more executives will give back the money and downsize to smaller houses and boats.

Good call, but who is black-mailing whom? As for the original observation of $40B for bonuses and deferred compensation, are you a bit high? The AIG issue is $165M.

[asking]

Not high and not specific to AIG. The $40 billion was the Wall Street Journal's estimates back in October. It was a pretty detailed analysis of what was contractually owed to these guys. It was a front page story. I couldn't believe that hardly anyone was talking about it.

[George_1950]

From my CONSERVATIVE viewpoint, I think the AIG execs were ENTITLED to their bonus's.

Acontract is a contract, in this country. No? But, in the name of consistency, how come you lefty's think we can abrogate THESE contracts, but not the Auto workers????
excon

"The embattled insurance giant, which has received about $170 billion in federal bailout money, has said it is legally bound to pay the bonuses because of a provision in the Connecticut Wage Act. Many of those receiving the bonuses work for AIG's financial products unit in Wilton...
"If AIG failed to pay the bonuses, under state law the company could be forced to pay a double penalty, legislators said."
AIG Bonuses Required Under Connecticut Labor Law, Company Says: CONNECTICUT AS SCAPEGOAT

[tomder55]

asking . Your 1st posting was towards the end of a 123 response posting ,and the 2nd one was not on this board.

It would be helpful if links to claims like that were included .

Back in the fall the $40 Billion figure was for the gvt to buy preferred shares of the company. Not for executive compensation.
Government Adds $40 Billion To Aid For AIG

[asking]

Back in the fall the $40 Billion figure was for the gvt to buy preferred shares of the company. Not for executive compensation.
Government Adds $40 Billion To Aid For AIG

Tom,
You are talking about a different $40 billion. The $40 billion I'm talking about was for executive compensation.

Banks Owe Billions to Executives
Financial giants getting injections of federal cash owed their executives more than $40 billion for past years' pay and pensions as of the end of 2007, a Wall Street Journal analysis shows.

The government is seeking to rein in executive pay at banks getting federal money, and a leading congressman and a state official have demanded that some of them make clear how much they intend to pay in bonuses this year.

But overlooked in these efforts is the total size of debts that financial firms receiving taxpayer assistance previously incurred to their executives, which at some firms exceed what they owe in pensions to their entire work forces.

The sums are mostly for special executive pensions and deferred compensation, including bonuses, for prior years. Because the liabilities include stock, they are subject to market fluctuation. Given the stock-market decline of this year, some may have fallen substantially.
Some examples: $11.8 billion at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. $8.5 billion at J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and $10 billion to $12 billion at Morgan Stanley.
Few firms report the size of these debts to their executives. (Goldman is an exception.) In most cases, the Journal calculated them by extrapolating from figures that the firms do have to disclose.
Most firms haven't set aside cash or stock for these IOUs. They are a drag on current earnings and when the executives depart, employers have to pay them out of corporate coffers.

MORE AT:
Banks Owe Billions to Executives - WSJ.com

The October 31 story goes on to quote Bush's Treasury:

Asked about the Journal's calculation, the Treasury said, "Every bank that accepts money through the Capital Purchase Program must first agree to the compensation restrictions passed by Congress just last month -- and every bank that is receiving money has done so."

But in December, it was revealed that there were in fact no restrictions, due to a technicality in the wording of the bailout agreement.

I'm not giving the Obama administration a free pass, but this problem had momentum long before he came on board.

[tomder55]

I'm not giving the Obama administration a free pass, but this problem had momentum long before he came on board.

Correct . No doubt about that . Geithner chaired the TARP meetings with AIG .

However ; he also negotiated an additional bailout for AIG just a couple of weeks ago knowing the compensations were coming due. For the President to claim ignorance is a flat out lie.


Thanks for the link . It illustrates the folly of using bailouts over the bankruptsy option.

[asking]

I agree with 450donn that had they been allowed to go belly up then all contracts would've been subject to revision . Chapter 11 was set up to deal with these types of situations and that is how both the financials and the auto industry should've been handled .

I agree too.

I also agree that the congressional outrage is disingenuous and hypocritical.

[speechlesstx]

All the populist rage has led to this...



Dude, what happened to my country?