AIG's VP for financial division has resigned. Do you feel any symphaty for him?

Would you work for $1.00 a year? Would you expect the bonus that was guaranteed in your contract with the company?

I also pity for AIG VP Jake de santi,he is now jobless, what job he is going to have after this.

Would you take a job for $1.00 per year and 10% of all the businenss you could bring to the company. Would you work for $1.00 per year and 10% of all the money yo could recover from bad investments? Understanding the company may still lose money but you are cutting that loss. The are victims because they signed a contract and now the government is voiding the contract. How would you feel if the government cam in and told your employer that from now to the rest of the year he was to turn your salary over to the government instead of giving it to you?

Good day... I think one can never be called a victim when one is on the receiving end. Receiving end of a bonus. I mean they knew that America is on a downturn and their company is in trouble and yet they can stomach such lavish bonus and let it bear on the back of the taxpayers.

It's not right to go after the executive's family, under any circumstances. The AIG bonuses by Wall Street standards, are small even when compared to other companies that received bailout money. Congress perfectly well knew the bonuses were in the bill, and so to act surprised now, is a joke. The politicians seem to be in the business of perception rather than reality. I did not hear one politician ask the AIG CEO where all the bailout money went, and why didn't he disclose to Congress that some of the so called counter-parties were also companies that also had received bailout funds, such as Bank of America.

There is no sympathy for the people who landed us up in this mess today we are in ......... and AIG and lot of it's employees(not the hard working ones but the greedy ones) are among the many culprits who are responsible for the current mess. It's just ridiculous how much you can get paid for screwing up a company and in turn the economy. Please anybody give me one tenth of that bonus money and I would have done a better job that these guys.

I do feel SOME sympathy for him. First, this guy wasn't even in the top 50 for bonuses. There were 73 people at AIG who recieved bonuses over $1 million. I think there were about 6 of them that received bonuses over $4 million. This guy is pretty low on the ladder of bonuses and was thrown to the wolves. The real issue that makes me feel sympathy though is the fact that he and his family have been threatened by sick and disgusting people. I'm as angry over these bonuses as the next guy, but there is absolutely no excuse for the people threatening his life and threatening to harm his children. Those people should be arrested and thrown in jail.

Well, I kind of think the outrage was intentionally misdirected. A lot of people associate a bonus with a reward for good performance. Obviously, since AIG didn't perform well but quite the opposite, a performance based bonus was not warranted. However, the bonuses in question were retention bonuses. They were offered as a reward for staying with the company until a certain date, even if, as in this case, the salary would only be $1. Essentially, people worked for significantly less money and stayed with the company at a time, where they might have gotten a good job elsewhere. Those methods are quite common and often part of a severance package if a company is sold. Yet, somehow that never made it into people's minds. Seems like everybody thinks this is about a reward for performance. Congress messed up by intentionally taking the bonus cut stipulation out of the stimulus package. In fact they knew what was going on and the president must have known, too. All this 'outrage' of them is laughable. Let's face it, nobody works for a $1, especially not in such a position, without a reward for doing so at the end. They needed these people to stay because they knew they couldn't hire anybody else in their situation. Who would want to work for a company in a situation like that? Not knowing if they would recover and stay in business? Not anybody qualified enough. Everybody knew these deals were cut. It's crazy to be upset now. It's intentional provocation of public anger and only serves to push through other goals. It doesn't irk me that these people did get bonuses under these circumstances. The only thing that bothers me is the height of the bonus. Somebody messed up negotiating those. They should have been able to cut a better deal on behalf of the company as they most certainly knew at that point that these people most likely will not find a job elsewhere or if they did, might quickly lose it... Yes, De Santi is in a way a victim in this. He was misled by company officials and by the government. The public is, too. The government messed up, period, and then tried to cover up. That's what we should be angry at.