Obama Backpedals on Bonuses
Once again, the Obama administration proves to be ruled by political expediency. According to the New York Times, the administration has known about AIG's planned bonuses for months. It is only now, after much public outcry, that Obama expresses his own outrage. Just more proof that the more things change in Washington the more they stay the same.
Go Figure!
Reply to this
I understand that it was Gietner who crafted the original bailout of AIG while George Bush was still president. Now we are to believe that the Obama administration is surprised and outraged...give me a break! Thanks Citizen X for letting me vent.
Reply to this
Yes, Gietner was one of the architects of Bush's Big Bailout. As Jame Ostrowski writes, though, all of this outrage is over a miniscule percentage the money the government has spent so far.
Reply to this
If my math is correct, it amounts to 0.00096%. Funny how there's all this outrage on the bonuses, but none over the fact that AIG is slated to receive another $30 billion in tax dollars. Alan Bock of the OC Register had a great column on the alleged "too big to fail" theory, basically saying that if a company, which just posted a $62 billion loss despite receiving the bailout money, is the only thing propping up the global financial system, it's probably too big to exist.
Reply to this
According to AIG they were legally bound to hand out those bonuses. I thought that statement was highly amusing. However, our democrats are livid now - haha yeah right. I guess the government has to try to sell as much propaganda as it can.
Reply to this
Cmon X! Democrats tried to add provisions to limit bonuses and salaries to bailed out companies and repubs (including free market types) threw a fit. To lay AIG at Obamas feet is a stretch, especially given the fact that the first bailout was under Bush and that bailout is super secretive and no one knows where that money went. And the Times naver states that Obama knew several months in advance, only Obama admin officials. Anyway, this is why there should have been many strings attached to lending that money to the banks, now we are seeing the abuses of not properly governing. You cant give a loan to a crack addict without first getting him to rehab, if you dont...then why would you be suprised if he used your money to go buy more crack.
Reply to this
Rockysci,
I'm not laying it at the Democrat's feet; just proving once again that a politician is a politician is a politician. Whether or not Obama himself knew is irrelevant. He's the boss now and the buck stops with him.
There should have been no strings attached to the "loans" because there should have been no loans.
By the way, the architect of the original bailout was Timothy Geitner--Obama's secretary of the treasury.
As always, thanks for your comment and opinion.
Reply to this
You are one hell of a guy there, Citizen X. Not only do you keep this site updated, and there is no chaos around here. Thanks for keeping me up-to-date politically and economically.
Reply to this
This is what I've been saying all along. You can call it anything you want but ultimately a politician is a politician! I was glad for the milestone of the first African American president, but the fact remains he's still a politician. When will America wake up and realize that the old adage is true that everything that sounds too good to be true probably is? Thanks for the post, X!
Reply to this
How many months do you mean, keeping mind the Obama administration has only been in place for 2 months? Did Bush know about it? If so, why didn't HE act before it went as far as it has?
Typical comment from someone who has his or her mind made up BEFORE all the facts are known. Give the guy a chance. He will make mistakes, everybody does, so criticise him then.
But somehow I can't imagine Obama sitting in a clasroom doing nothing while the US was under attack.
Reply to this
X
here is an excellent article in Rolling Stone by Matt Taibbi chronicling the massive *&^%storm that is TARP and how this is affecting our economy. Ron Paul gets several quotes in it.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/26793903/the_big_takeover
Reply to this
Thanks. It was posted on LewRockwell.com as well. I'll check it out.
Reply to this
The controversy over the AIG bonuses is a diversion. So much more has been given to Fannie, Freddie and many more. The problem is the monetary system itself. If we end the private federal reserve and put us back on an asset based monetary system. 90% of this crisis ends over night. Repeal the federal reserve act of 1913. www.endthefed.ning.com
Reply to this
Amen to that!
Reply to this
Wow, this is ON THE SPOT! I agree 100%! It's a shame that many of these so-called economic "EXPERTS" don't seem to get it, or at least TRY to go beyond all the talking and get to actions to fix this problem!
Reply to this