Comments on: A few thoughts on the AIG outrage

By: Michael T. Burr

Michael T. Burr — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:25:41 +0000

It’s possible to be outraged by the AIG bonuses and also disgusted by the grandstanding we’re seeing in Congress. The bill of attainder approved by the House is unconstitutional. The lawyers on Capitol Hill know that, but they’re using it as a vehicle for populist pandering. The bill will die, because President Obama the legal scholar doesn’t want to be put in the position of having to veto it.

By: Al

Al — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:41:22 +0000

I think you’re forgetting that it was the free-market executives who you seem to idolise who got the world into this mess, not the politicians or bureaucrats. The politicians fell into the trap of believing the completely free-market ideals peddled in the interest of the bankers’ short-term bonuses and declined to do their job (and empower bureaucrats to do their job) properly. The real outrage is that the federal government did not use its position as majority shareholder to prevent these bonuses being paid.

There are countries where the banking system is in much less of a mess, Sweden and Spain for example. It is no coincidence that these are also the countries with relatively strong regulation. And if you think that either of these countries are some kind of totalitarian socialist hell then you really haven’t got a clue what you’re talking about.

By: Fat Man

Fat Man — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 02:51:51 +0000

The feigned outrage over “bonuses” to AIG employees is like a three card monte game. The real purpose is distract the spectators while the card players confederates pick their pockets. AIG was a conduit for over $170 billion to its counter-parties like Goldman Sachs. The “bonuses” were 1/10th of 1% of that amount, and what is worse, 1/100th of 1% of the $1.5 trillion that Congress has appropriated since Jan 20. The spectators are the taxpayers. The three card monte players are the politicians.