Should AIG force its executives to give back their bonuses after they have created the need for multiple government bailouts totaling in excess of $170 billion?

Should AIG force its executives to give back their bonuses after they have created the need for multiple government bailouts totaling in excess of $170 billion?
  • Nurses treated unfairly at va

    Yes , becausses I work for the government and the hands on person get nothing . Our DON got a bonus greater than our yearly salary, while the ones on the floor doing the work got nothing. We have to take care of sick and dying, abusive and confused patients while the executives sit in a plush office pushing papers.

  • Yes, because the entire situation is unfair to the taxpayer.

    These rich executives probably have great lawyers who keep them from
    having to pay much in taxes to begin with. They are overpaid to begin
    with. Why should Jane and Joe Taxpayer foot the bill, any more than they
    already have for these people and their companies?

    Posted by: MarsBIue
  • I do believe that the AIG executives need to pay back the government bailout money, and they should give back whatever proportion of their bonuses and paychecks it takes to meet that obligation, with interest.

    Aside from the fact that it's utterly ridiculous for a company to give away $170 billion in bonuses, it's completely ludicrous for that company to then accept money from the government for not being able to manage their assets. Mere humans, like you and I, would be forced to pay back any money we accepted to keep our business afloat. I believe the same should be true for AIG. If that means recalling bonuses to the top executives that mismanaged the funds, so be it. There should be some responsibility in the corporate world, not just this gimme, gimme attitude.

    Posted by: TrainLock
  • AIG should force its executives to give back their bonuses, because they are not entitled to them.

    It is just such an incredible shame the way AIG handles their money. Their company was failing, the executives made bad financial decisions, and yet they thought that they deserved to pay them bonuses? What kind of a world is it where you get rewarded for failing? All the AIG executives who got bonuses should be forced to give them back. If they got paid bonuses, then they did not need the bailout money that was given to them, and they should give it all back.

    Posted by: eyeslikethat
  • AIG should force its executives to give back their bonuses, because they were the ones responsible for the need for a bailout.

    AIG should absolutely have to force its executives to give back their bonuses after creating a situation in which government bailouts in excess of $170 billion were needed to keep the company afloat. There is no reason that executives should be permitted to keep such large bonuses at the taxpayers' expense.

    Posted by: MannP4rk
  • AIG should force the return of the bonuses. Executives should not be given bonuses for making decisions that put the company at risk.

    These same executives would fire someone for not performing at their jobs. Yet they approved policies that caused AIG to lose billions. It would seem they did not care that their actions would cost stockholders dividends, cost employees their jobs or even cost employees possible pensions. Given these facts AIG should recoup the bonuses.

    Posted by: B0rdKool
  • Yes, AIG executives deserve no bonus, because we had to spend billions to pay for their errors.

    AIG executives deserve no bonuses, and taxpayers have the right to demand that the bonuses be returned. Bonuses are for people who have achieved positive goals. AIG executives created losses that taxpayers had to cover to the tune of $170 billion. We should be handing out prison sentences, not bonuses, to the people responsible for those losses. I say "we", because the U.S. taxpayers now own some 80% of AIG. As the majority owners, we should demand the return of bonuses that the executives never deserved.

    Posted by: LuciaL
  • Yes, it is an insult to taxpayers to give these executives bonuses after accepting a government bailout.

    This action by AIG is a slap in the face to taxpayers forced to shell out billions of dollars to a private company that wasn't able to stay solvent without a massive government bailout. To reward their executives with any kind of bonus flies in the face of common sense. They are so out of touch with the opinion of the American public about such actions that they need government intervention once again, this time to take back bonuses that are clearly unwarranted.

    Posted by: NettN355
  • Yes, that is pure greed to even consider accepting a bonus after asking for that help from the government.

    I can't fathom how those executives could even consider taking a bonus. How could they think that they deserved a bonus after they took help from the government, when the predicament they found themselves in was their own fault? That is pure greed. The bonuses should be given back and used to help all the people they screwed. Someone there should have learned something from that experience, but the lesson should not be that even if you mess up, you still get rewarded.

    Posted by: PinkMych
  • They did not earn a bonus. They should not receive one if the company is underwater.

    Performance bonuses are rewards for performance above and beyond expected performance. The AIG executives not only failed to perform above their job requirements, they failed to keep the company in business. It was only because of the government's decision to bail them out for the sake of insurance policy holders and pension funds that the company did not go under. This means that the company management failed in its most basic responsibility to keep the company profitable or break even. If the company had not received government money, they would not have received a bonus. To receive taxpayer money and then receive a bonus is to reward them for total failure, which should be an oxymoron.

    Posted by: Pir4And
  • Many of the executives that received bonuses were the only ones competent enough to clear up the mess made by others.

    It is understandable to want to punish whoever made the financial mess, but the bonuses paid by AIG to high level employees were contractual agreements. Many of the people that received bonuses were not the ones that got AIG into their position. These were the competent professionals that were trying to clean up the mess.

    Posted by: ddeathnote
  • I do not think that AIG executives should pay back their bonuses, because it is not their fault that they got something for doing nothing

    AIG executives should not have to pay back their bonuses. Not because they somehow deserved the money, but because the federal government allowed them to receive it. It was the government's responsibility to regulate the banks and other companies who received bailout money. They are at fault for these bonuses being paid out.

    Posted by: MakeshiftJospeh80
  • No, the bonuses should stay, because they were contractual obligations.

    AIG should be punished financially somehow, or at least pay back to the government the bailout money, plus some return on the investment. However, AIG cannot and should not force executives to give back their bonuses. That money was contractually obligated, and it sets a very bad precedent that employees would have to give pay back to their employer, simply because a mob mood across the nation had turned against them.

    Posted by: FlakyHerb64
  • Laws should be followed.

    AIG is required to follow through on their financial obligations. If they made a bad financial deal to lure executives, the government should accept that. The government shouldn't have gotten involved in bailing out the company in the first place, but since they did, they should be required to follow through on ALL of AIG's financial obligations.

    Posted by: R34d3Homey

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.