Another example of class warfare?

X, we have had this discussion many times and it leds back to the same point that is not resolved. I agree that Congress should not have bailed out the banks, but again show were where it is that CONGRESS was talking about this before Bush, and Paulson ran in claiming the sky is falling, the sky is falling? You can blame Congress all you want, but the people that pushed this through congress were the president, and the secritary of the treasury. They have alot more blame in this than congress does. But, the two men that are to blame for this, rode off into the sunset with and left the largest finacial crisis in the last 70 years for someone else to fix.

I swear dude, you are absolutely pathalogical sometimes about this, what does it matter who the president was? It was wrong. And besides, the same people are still running congress and heading these things up. Dodd, Frank, they were there then, they are there now. Tim Geitner, who was then head of the new york FED was chief player in the bail out then, is head of the treasury now and still a top player. Berneke, head of the federal reserve then, head of the federal reserve now. the faces haven't changed much other than a president and places on the chess board in a few cases. Don't you get it? It's an illusion, smoke and mirrors, slight of hand, how many cliche's do I need to use to point it out? Come on, your not stupid. You should be even angrier than I am because you supported these people and they duped you. You should be furious with them and yet here you are, clinging desperately to a shiny glittery party letter.

The contract that was agreed to between the US Government and AIG said that AIG Executives could receive their bonus and the government would give them the bail out money. With the Auto Industry and UAW is if you want the bail out then you need to renegotiate your contracts. They can CHOOSE to take the money or not. IF GM and the UAW decide not to change the contract they will get no bail out. If AIG was told before they accepted the bailout that the bonus would have to go and they accepted the bail out then I would say no bonuses, BUT the government promised them the bonus and now wants to take them away. This is breach of contract.

Bob, the CEO of AIG said that the employment contracts that the bonuses were attached couldn't be renegotiated without legal actions, and breach of contract fines. Why couldn't any member of the UAW sue any of the big three for the very same reason? These contracts aren't "magical", they are no different than those of the UAW, and can be broken, or modifided to suite the times we are in. The problem is this is Wall Street, and they only care about themselves. It was their greed and arrogance that got the world in this mess, and now they just want to pretend it didn't happen and go on with live as if nothing happened. They don't care that they are suing tax payer dollars for their bonuses, one trader was on CNBC saying that he paid taxes, atleast now he is getting some of that money back.

You are incorrect more (I know that this can not be, but you are), they are both employement contracts that can be and modified easily. The CEO of AIG could have modified them, but he decided not to upset the employees, and just take the heat. Many of these people in this division worked for little or no money, but they received large bonuses. These men make a ton of money when the company makes alot, and still make alot of money when it doesn't. The are not different contracts, if you do some research you will see this to be the case