To: MortMan
So, an executive from a failed company should get a taxpayer funded bonus?
That is socialism...
19 posted on
03/25/2009 11:30:47 AM PDT by
UCFRoadWarrior
(The Biggest Threat To American Soverignty Is Rampant Economic Anti-Americanism)
To: UCFRoadWarrior
Have you not read the letter, or can you not comprehend its content?
Socialism is the government buying into the company to begin with. Abrogating these contracts, under threat of vigilante violence, under color of law, is anarchy.
26 posted on
03/25/2009 11:37:26 AM PDT by
MortMan
(Power without responsibility-the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages. - Rudyard Kipling)
To: UCFRoadWarrior
Let's put this in a way you can understand.
Imagine the company you work for goes bankrupt. Would you want to continue to be paid if you continued to work there, while the company was reorganizing? I think you would, regardless of whether or not your standard level of payment is fifteen bucks an hour or fifteen million a year.
ALL of this is the government's fault, not the fault of the men on the receiving end of the money due to them. They expected to be paid by the company that employed them, as would you.
The government agreed to bail out the joint. When the capital is infused, it is supposed to go toward running a business, and paying employees is part of running a business.
Damn, you hopped right on that MSM Outrage Train, didn't you?
28 posted on
03/25/2009 11:40:06 AM PDT by
teenyelliott
(Soylent green should be made outta liberals...)
To: UCFRoadWarrior
So, an executive from a failed company should get a taxpayer funded bonus? That is socialism...
You either didn't read or couldn't comprehend the letter. This is still a private sector company.
Once the government bailed them out, they are required to honor those contracts. If the company had been allowed to go bankrupt, the contracts would probably have been voided by the bankrupty judge and the employees would have quit. Even in bankruptcy, the judge will often allow for bonuses because they recognize the benefit of keeping the key employees on board to retain some value for the creditors. Perhaps the government should have let AIG go into bankruptcy, BUT they didn't.
The company benefited (and therefore, the government shareholders) by those employees staying on when in fact many of the capable (and blameless) would have found positions elsewhere. Why should the employees stay? Would the taxpayer benefit from losing all of the management and key employees? Perhaps we'll see now. If I were one of the employees I would quit, keep the money I earned, and tell everyone to kiss my a$$.
34 posted on
03/25/2009 11:48:21 AM PDT by
terryt
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson