If the government can legally get this money (ie rewrite 2008 tax law), they should do it

| Register

If the government can legally get this money (ie rewrite 2008 tax law), they should do it

Author: SouthPhillyDirtbag (808 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 12:41 pm on Mar 18, 2009

View All

Yeah, the govt f'd this up, but they can still correct this mistake without damaging the sanctity of a contract. Who wouldn't agree that this is a ridiculous extenuating circumstance?

Replies to: "If the government can legally get this money (ie rewrite 2008 tax law), they should do it"

Admittedly, I have not paid much attention to this AIG stuff, however... - LanceHarbor - 11:28am 3/18/09 (43) [View All]
- If they are contractually obligated, why is it called a bonus? - Lady_Irish_27 - 1:03pm 3/18/09
  - If someone has already answers this, I apologize. - Trucker2 - 2:49pm 3/18/09
    - Yeah, cause the IRS taxes "bonuses" less than "lump sum payments". Thanks. - NDFaninNJ - 2:54pm 3/18/09
      - I knew just you'd appreciate my imput! ;^) [NT] - Trucker2 - 3:02pm 3/18/09
        Almost as much as I'd appreciate your "input" [NT] - NDFaninNJ - 3:33pm 3/18/09
        Yup. - Trucker2 - 4:50pm 3/18/09
  - They were necessary to unwind the instruments that got them into the mess. - LanceHarbor - 1:51pm 3/18/09
  - Because that has become the terminology for any one-time lump sum payment. - NDFaninNJ - 1:32pm 3/18/09
    - I'm sorry, I don't think anyone is irreplaceable. Including entire corporations. - Lady_Irish_27 - 1:55pm 3/18/09
      - Don't misinterpret what I'm saying. AIG should have been allowed to fail. - NDFaninNJ - 2:04pm 3/18/09
      - That's all well and good we don't live in a utopia. - LanceHarbor - 2:00pm 3/18/09
        The provision that allowed for these payouts was very specific in the bill. - Lady_Irish_27 - 2:14pm 3/18/09
        They were payable anyway. They were agreed to in 2007. [NT] - NDFaninNJ - 2:16pm 3/18/09
        No, they weren't. The agreement was made in 2008 that folks would get as much as those in 2007. - Lady_Irish_27 - 2:34pm 3/18/09
        This populist bullshit is a spectacle created to distract people from the real problems. - NDFaninNJ - 2:41pm 3/18/09
        I think it highlights the real problem. - Lady_Irish_27 - 2:59pm 3/18/09
        
        Exactly [NT] - LanceHarbor - 2:22pm 3/18/09
- I'm not a BHO fan but I don't think this one is his fault... - Frank L - 12:56pm 3/18/09
- I think people think there should've been an exception, given that their cash came from the bailout. - jakers - 11:51am 3/18/09
  - Agreed. We gave them bailout money specifically for obligations like these. [NT] - LanceHarbor - 12:23pm 3/18/09
- Agree. - jabbadoody5 - 11:50am 3/18/09
  - That's the real issue - stop succumbing to fear of what might happen and let these losers fail. [NT] - LanceManion - 12:02pm 3/18/09
- Because they can - Hank Scorpio - 11:44am 3/18/09
- Based on article below - looks contractual + Feds knew about them last year. Retention bonuses - hah [NT] - LanceManion - 11:31am 3/18/09
- Agree. I can't wait to see if Barry and co. attempt to tax their bonuses 95%.... - Domer From Hell - 11:30am 3/18/09
  - This is hardly a partisan fight. - LanceHarbor - 11:33am 3/18/09
    - It's absolutely a partisan fight.... - Domer From Hell - 12:20pm 3/18/09
    - delete [NT] - Domer From Hell - 12:20pm 3/18/09
  - Equal protection suit waiting to happen, as well as ex postfacto legislation (money earned in 08 - LanceManion - 11:32am 3/18/09
    - Lance, you should know that's not a standard. - NDFaninNJ - 11:46am 3/18/09
      - Why is that bull shit? - SouthPhillyDirtbag - 11:53am 3/18/09
        Because, if the government wanted to avoid this, they should have done some due diligence... - NDFaninNJ - 12:11pm 3/18/09
        If the government can legally get this money (ie rewrite 2008 tax law), they should do it - SouthPhillyDirtbag - 12:41pm 3/18/09
        It doesn't sound like the government effed up. They specifically provided for these bonuses. - Lady_Irish_27 - 1:19pm 3/18/09
        There should be something stating that after date X, not another bailout penny will be handed out - LanceManion - 1:30pm 3/18/09
        I thought you were against a timeline for withdrawl - SouthPhillyDirtbag - 1:48pm 3/18/09
        I actually thought the same thing. Funny. [NT] - NDFaninNJ - 2:04pm 3/18/09
        
        Oh sure. But these are the people in charge - and we the people put them there. - Lady_Irish_27 - 1:37pm 3/18/09
        I the people didn't vote in this turd, and really if someone had said the blank check would continue - LanceManion - 2:04pm 3/18/09
        
        What would you need to hear to be convinced that the AIG bailout is worth it? - SouthPhillyDirtbag - 1:47pm 3/18/09
        That's not my point here. [LINK] - Lady_Irish_27 - 2:08pm 3/18/09
        
        Me. This is how AIG compensates its employees. That's why we gave them money. To pay bills. [NT] - NDFaninNJ - 12:58pm 3/18/09
      - Well, those guys have about 80 mil to figure out how to successfully defend the tax, if imposed [NT] - LanceManion - 11:49am 3/18/09