So the new commentary I've been seeing re. the AIG bonuses is that people are blowing it out of proportion. That is to say, that the millions in bonuses is very small, compared to the billions given in bailout money. So, like, "Hey it's only a small percentage of your bailout money... so chill!"
I feel like this massively misses the point, especially in light of the fact that the bonuses went to the division guilty in large part for the economic mess. To me, the scandal isn't that bailout money is going to bonuses, but that these people are getting bonuses at all.
First: What is the point of giving bonuses that aren't tied to performance? Oh I remember... to retain talent. Ah. If they're so durned talented... won't they show great results, and still earn performance-based bonuses?
Second: Even just one million dollars is totally obscene to the overwhelming majority of Americans who make Ordinary Incomes, pay taxes, and are being affected by this depression.
The income disparity between Wall Street Fat Cats and Ordinary Folk is obscene at the best of times... but for the WSFCs (who are in part TO BLAME) to still be taking home millions, when the OFs are losing their jobs and homes...
As Judge Judy would say: Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I can haz revolution now?
Martin D. Weiss in his book Ultimate Safe Money, gives a pretty good explanation of how huge performance bonuses produce a conflict of interest in stock brokers and other institutional "players." The temptation to misreport earnings to manipulate stock prices, and to invest in risky high-return ventures to produce big pay-offs and bigger bonuses is problematic.
gmc
Post a Comment