Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-19-2009, 01:14 PM
 
Location: Savannah GA/Lk Hopatcong NJ
13,378 posts, read 28,629,015 times
Reputation: 12014

Advertisements

took bailout money
House passes bill taxing AIG, other bonuses - Capitol Hill- msnbc.com

As much as I detest these bonuses I'm not entirely sure that Pelosi & company are acting within the law
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-19-2009, 01:22 PM
 
Location: In My Own Little World. . .
3,238 posts, read 8,770,545 times
Reputation: 1614
I hate AIG, I hate that they threw that huge resort trip for their staff after getting the bailout money, and I hate that they gave bonuses with the bailout money also. However, that being said, I'm a little nervous that congress can pass a law to single out one group of people to raise taxes on. I think this sets a bad precedent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2009, 01:27 PM
 
Location: Savannah GA/Lk Hopatcong NJ
13,378 posts, read 28,629,015 times
Reputation: 12014
Quote:
Originally Posted by colleeng47 View Post
I hate AIG, I hate that they threw that huge resort trip for their staff after getting the bailout money, and I hate that they gave bonuses with the bailout money also. However, that being said, I'm a little nervous that congress can pass a law to single out one group of people to raise taxes on. I think this sets a bad precedent.
I agree 100%..I have to read up on the Bill of Attainder

I hate hate hate those bonuses and the gov is just covering their azz for not investigating before they gave the money...but to inact this is a dangerous slippery slope
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2009, 01:29 PM
 
505 posts, read 1,758,471 times
Reputation: 208
What really unnerves me is that Congress is in an uproar and is acting like this towards bonuses that were allowed in the stimulus package.

First Congress says bonuses are ok, then the company hands out bonuses and due to the public outcry Conrgress villifies the big bad corporation for acting so greedily.

A government that behaves like that scares the crap out of me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2009, 01:34 PM
 
1,110 posts, read 4,361,675 times
Reputation: 438
Our government has been so corrupt for so long, this is really nothing. Our government has been doing tons of worse stuff than this ruling. Its just to cover up their own mistake on this, just like they try to do with all their other mistakes.

What they should have done was take back all the loans they gave to AIG instead.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2009, 01:47 PM
 
744 posts, read 1,403,274 times
Reputation: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by colleeng47 View Post
I hate AIG, I hate that they threw that huge resort trip for their staff after getting the bailout money, and I hate that they gave bonuses with the bailout money also. However, that being said, I'm a little nervous that congress can pass a law to single out one group of people to raise taxes on. I think this sets a bad precedent.
Of course they can, everytime they change the rate of the top bracket or the cutoff for the top tax bracket they are doing that.

They aren't singling out AIG, it's a general rule that would apply to anyone who earns over $250k working for a company that received $5+ billion in bailouts. That that happens to be AIG (and some others) is a coincident I'm sure

It does seem a little retroactive, then again tax rules do seem to change midstream at times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2009, 01:55 PM
 
2,312 posts, read 7,505,879 times
Reputation: 908
Yes, it will be interesting to see what this does to business development in this country, where contracts aren't honored and paychecks are confiscated by the government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2009, 01:56 PM
 
3,859 posts, read 10,297,505 times
Reputation: 2751
Look at the picture of those smug a-holes Pelosi, Rangel and others-so proud of themselves-what a sick joke. Way to go voters! How dare they do this. If they wanted the $$ back then they should have demanded the $$ back directly from AIG. Better yet-how about there should have been NO bailouts to begin with. Instead their answer is a tax-big surprise. The best is I saw Lawrence Summers on tv yesterday and he said that he could not rule out another AIG bailout.

If they were really concerned about "getting the $$ back" as Nancy Pelosi mentioned, why is there an income limit? Don't we taxpayers deserve all of the $$ back? Seems to me, if you want to punish companies who received bailouts, then income limit should have nothing to do with it. If you are going to penalize companies who are paying bonuses and who received bailouts then eveyone should be treated equally, should they not?

I am normally against most lawsuits, but I hope that someone takes this to court. How is this even legal? How can only certain bonuses be taxed at the 90% rate?

What are the politiicans going to do with this tax money? Give it back to AIG in another bailout? Fund more programs? Somehow I doubt it will be returned to the taxpayers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2009, 01:57 PM
 
Location: Weehawken, NJ
2,179 posts, read 6,703,114 times
Reputation: 1167
I am all for free market capitalistic money making, but the 90% tax on these bonuses is well deserved. Why reward awful management? If I screwed up that bad, I would expect to be fired on the spot, not given a million dollar bonus - from the taxpayer nevertheless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2009, 02:03 PM
 
174 posts, read 430,307 times
Reputation: 95
The real intent is to hit AIG, despite the fact it will apply to other bailout companies in the future. Had this been stipulated up front, it would have been up to AIG to explain it to their employees. This is Big Brother at it's worse and un-Constitutional. And I find it scary as hell.

One other thing, if the bonuses are disallowed from now on, will this hurt companies involved in these complicated schemes attract truly qualified managers? Because if we act "emotionally", we may very well be hurting ourselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top