That's how the game is played. Executive Bonuses were signed into contracts by the board of the company which are composed of the people who own the majority of the shares. -omega4(omega) @安省华人论坛:安省枫下论坛 The Rolia Forum of Ontario

枫下茶话 / 政治经济 / 向了解金融及法律的朋友请教：象近日AIG向金融派生品高管派发巨额奖金一事，O8总统虽表示谴责，但又说阻止派发奖金在法律上行不通。我想，法律是国会制定的，可以提请国会通过一项动议，不就解决了吗？请指教，谢谢！ -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-16 (#5119854@0)

没有绝对真理．如果不让步，行政和立法都是没辄的，最终的解决方案在法官手里边． -is4life(随流逐波); 2009-3-16 (#5119899@0)

法官要有现有的法律条文才能加以制止吧？如果现有法律并没有禁止派发这笔奖金，大法官又有什么折呢？ -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-16 (#5119931@0)

签的都有合同的，说实话我不认为打上３年官司，一直打到最高法院obama就能赢．这儿不是中国． -is4life(随流逐波); 2009-3-16 (#5119944@0)

国会能不能通过一项新法律，特定废除相关的合同？当然建立在对AIG亏损进行调查的基础上。他们已经亏损这么严重，奖金显然是有问题的我想。 -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-16 (#5119968@0)

美国的立国基础是宪法+N修正案,宪法保护私产,依法选出国会(lawmakers),总统． -is4life(随流逐波); 2009-3-16 (#5119991@0)
下次再bailout的时候可以试图限制高管的收入,不过就怕其中太过繁杂，时效太差,另外如果试图提前ceo,这个成本也许更大 -is4life(随流逐波); 2009-3-16 (#5120003@0)

上次bailout已经达成限制高管薪酬的协议了，这次奖金好象是给衍生金融产品的高管的吧？不同的。 -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-16 (#5120021@0)

上次的协议只对新合同有效。无法改变以前签订的合同。另外，根据分析，如果美国政府要一路打官司到底的话，最后花的钱会更多。 -lionel(Lionel); 2009-3-16 (#5120037@0)

我也觉得，而且行政的手太长,非常不好 -is4life(随流逐波); 2009-3-16 (#5120055@0)

你这不是打议员和国会的屁股吗？ -statstar(tiger); 2009-3-16 (#5119925@0)

何以见得呢？ -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-16 (#5119936@0)

80%的议员不懂经济，搞这些，对搞的人没好处，谁干？政客大多搞那些争取“国家利益”的条文，就象2001年3月宣布退出国际“京都条约”。明明知道于政治道义和经济无意，但大家都很积极。为什么？爱国，老美最爱国，爱的离上帝越来越远了。 -statstar(tiger); 2009-3-16 (#5119969@0)

国会也会生病的, PP上扎针还不是小护士说了算 -super_man(veryman); 2009-3-16 (#5119975@0)

通过法律也未必有用。大法官可以判定这条法律违宪。 -lionel(Lionel); 2009-3-16 (#5120012@0)

先通过一项宪法修正案(比如紧急金融状态)，然后通过一项制止派发这种“无理”奖金的动议，行不行呢？ -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-16 (#5120032@0)

修宪太困难了。需要两院2/3以上的票通过，然后3/4的州还要通过。等修宪完成，人家的钱都不知道上什么地方去了。一旦修宪成功，这条法律要永远在宪法修正案里，不能被删除的。 -lionel(Lionel); 2009-3-16 (#5120136@0)

Breach contract是违法的，国会不可能制定一个新法律去为违法者背书。但法官可以根据自己对法律的解释Rule out AIG，如果法官能够成功地在Breach contract的前提下阻止AIG，这将是一个新的有划时代意义的判例，对惩治那些华尔街的Greedy guys有积极的作用，但要花时间。。。 -noproblem(密西洒家。o O); 2009-3-16 (#5120013@0)

花儿街，NGO可以让这个官司打到下一任总统 -is4life(随流逐波); 2009-3-16 (#5120028@0)

其实这事和上次坐飞机去国会山接受质询类似,更多的为左的舆论造势 -is4life(随流逐波); 2009-3-16 (#5120046@0)
民主党国会议员Carolyn Maloney提出议案，要向AIG发出的奖金征收100%的税。如果成功的话，那就是世界历史上最高的税率了。 -lionel(Lionel); 2009-3-16 (#5120173@0)

耶，这真是个好点子。对某项经济活动的征税税率又国会说了算，是这样吧？ -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-17 (#5120854@0)

国会参众两院通过，加上总统签字，就可以名正言顺地收税了，这样也不用违背合同。只是这个100%的收入税有点儿太狠了。新闻主持人说这是以暴易暴。 -lionel(Lionel); 2009-3-17 (#5121040@0)

征99%税就可以了我觉得！ -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-17 (#5121048@0)

参院财务委员会将在24小时内提交正式的议案，并暗示税率可能会高达90% "Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Florida, chimed in to suggest the tax could be as high as '90 percent.'" -lionel(Lionel); 2009-3-17 (#5121184@0)

This one is even better, A prominent US Senator has suggested that top executives of AIG ought to quit or kill themselves, which he described as the Japanese model of honorably taking responsibility. -omega4(omega); 2009-3-17 (#5121208@0)

The Wall Street Bonuses stuff really anger a lot of people, not just the leftist. Both Republican and Democratic parties come strongly against it. -omega4(omega); 2009-3-17 {1056} (#5120515@0)
本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛This behavior violate the basic principle of the capitalist system that you reward success, not failure and incompetence. How can the executives in companies that managed to lose tens of billions $ get rewarded with tens of millions of $ in bonuses, especially when these money come from the taxpayers? It is ridiculous. And also this incident shows the impotence of the US government. In the world largest democracy, the Congress elected by the people have no control when some fat cats apparently steal money from the public.
I don't believe the government really can't do anything at this stage. If the contracts with the autoworkers can be renegotiate, why can't the contract with the AIG executives? Also, since those AIG executives have now become public enemies, why not release their names and addresses, amount received to the media, and see how ashamed they will be. Better yet, release those information to the NYC mafia bosses, and let them know the police in the region will be on vacation for a week, let the gangsters take care of them.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net

对呀，所有的合同都是可是再谈的嘛，何况现在那些CEO们已经成为众矢之的了，他们再没有良知，惧怕之心总会有的吧？ -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-17 (#5120877@0)

工资奖金早就在在合同里定好了,凭什么不让人拿. -bully2007(2007); 2009-3-17 (#5120879@0)

公司是没有盈利的，钱是从国库中拿出来的，说得明白些，这些钱不属于AIG。问题变成如果AIG持续亏损，甚至倒闭，纳税人有理由为这个损失买单吗？ -kingsw(Steven); 2009-3-17 (#5120923@0)

1.这钱是要还的,企业用贷款发工资不可以吗? 2.是谁把纳税人投入到亏损的AIG?是政府.所以一切后果应该由政府负责. -bully2007(2007); 2009-3-17 (#5120974@0)

这件事政府肯定需要负责的，但是AIG高管拿用来救市的钱发薪水。涉及的就不仅仅是法律层面的，而是整个国家政治，严重的会引起整个美国的族群分裂。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-3-17 (#5120989@0)
有人说奥巴马有意识的煽动美国的左翼情绪，这话有点道理，不过需要指出的是奥巴马的弹药正是这些反对左翼的政客和银行家们提供的。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-3-17 (#5121000@0)

If there's no government bailout with taxpayers' money, AIG would have gone belly up months ago. Where do they get their bonuses from? -omega4(omega); 2009-3-17 {402} (#5120940@0)
The Government now controls 80% of AIG shares. It is their boss now, so it can fire those executives if they insist on receiving bonuses, release their personal information to the media, and tax the bonuses at 100%. The public have really got fed up with those fat cats who screwed up the economy, but continue to live like masters of the Universe while millions of others lose their jobs and pensions.

我喜欢这个：“tax the bonuses at 100%”。我是不是一下子左倾，一下子右倾我怀疑？：-) -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-17 (#5121044@0)

你不是左倾，也不是右倾。是自倾。倾向于对自己的有利的。所以你是左右都要争取的对象。政治天平上，摇来摆去的砝码。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-3-17 (#5121108@0)

呵呵，其实人人都是自倾啦。 -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-17 (#5121131@0)

那倒不是，我们一般人都是自倾。不过极左极右的可以为了立场和理念放弃个人利益。他们才是政治的两极。没有他们，我们又得再次重新划分左右了。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-3-17 (#5121149@0)

如果这样，AIG可能会花钱请牛人把规定改成TAX 110%。这样，就没有人想领了，钱还留在了AIG里面 -ignoreme(别当真); 2009-3-17 (#5121151@0)

很有才！我提请你做AIG主席。：-) -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-17 (#5121167@0)

通过一条法律很容易，但是这个法律会不会有副作用，会不会带来严重的后果都是很难完全保证的。 -canadiantire(轮胎 - Cornelius); 2009-3-17 (#5120901@0)
发奖金应该的。这个只能说，以后的合同，银行会很小心地签，估计大部分得和盈利挂钩，没有保本之说。这些银行的同志得了钱，爽了，重新杀入抄几个房子的底，应该有可能，这样就拉动了经济了。 -ignoreme(别当真); 2009-3-17 (#5120916@0)

我也想消费，钱发给我好啦，我保证全数消费以拉动经济，给我越多钱效果越好！：-) -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-17 (#5121030@0)

奖金是合法不合理而已．不能因为不合理而修法．再说了,次贷的责任不AIG,更不在这些人身上 -is4life(随流逐波); 2009-3-17 (#5120952@0)

报导说，AIG陷入困境主要是因为衍生产品的部门导致的。 -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-17 (#5121020@0)

次贷的问题是监管．最早可以涉及到clinton后期的一些法案．违法的话,就拿下，象十多年前的巴林银行案，既然不违法,国会山的那些人只是在play game -is4life(随流逐波); 2009-3-17 (#5121043@0)

立法机构不会制定一个反对从前法律的法律，如果以前的法律有问题，会使用修正案(Amendment)的方式对前法律修正。例如Contract是不可以Breach的，但在特例情况下允许Breach，然而这种法律条款的修正不是轻而易举的，时间就是代价。。。 -noproblem(密西洒家。o O); 2009-3-17 (#5120973@0)

“但在特例情况下允许Breach，” 以后可能被滥用，到时到处都是特殊情况了。看来副作用不小。 -peipeipei(小岛护士); 2009-3-17 (#5121037@0)
幻想而已． -is4life(随流逐波); 2009-3-17 (#5121056@0)

BONUS顾名思义是额外的，英文解释是：Something given or paid in addition to what is usual or expected.为什么在AIG却变成legally mandatory?有哪家公司的BONUS是无条件的啊，时间一到，有也得发，没有也得发，否则吃官司? -jjbb((wait for tomorrow)); 2009-3-17 (#5121215@0)

Actually, this is not unusal for Wall Street Bankers. They just believe they are entitled to live like kings and queens regardless of how much damage they have done to the economy, and how many people's lives they have ruined -omega4(omega); 2009-3-17 {352} (#5121276@0)
Reuters reported on Monday that Citigroup's CEO Vikram Pandit hauled in $10.82 million of compensation in 2008. This payout came as the bank received a $45 billion capital injection from the US government. Bank of America Corp. CEO Kenneth Lewis fared only slightly worse, getting $9.96 million as his bank also received $45 billion in bailout funds.
That's how the game is played. Executive Bonuses were signed into contracts by the board of the company which are composed of the people who own the majority of the shares. -omega4(omega); 2009-3-17 {521} (#5121315@0)
Those people are not ordinary folks, they are the billionares who are also CEOs, CXOs of other companies. You and I may own a tiny bit of stocks, but we will never be elected to the board. So here it goes, billionares A, B, C sit in the board of company run by billionare D and E, and award them tens of million $ bonuses every year regardless of performance. Billionaires D and E sit on the board of company run by billionares A, B, C and award them tens of million $ bonuses regardless of performance. You get the idea.

While I hate to see those executives to take big bonus after screwing up the company, I think we also need to be careful on the detail to see if any bonuses were given to low(est) rank people who really need it. They should NOT be penalized. -barbarian(粗人); 2009-3-17 (#5121604@0)

要是这么说那联邦储备和政府的高管们更要对这次经济危机负责,是不是应该先从奥巴马为首政府官员开始以身作则,减免工资奖金. -bully2007(2007); 2009-3-17 (#5121632@0)

That's actually a good idea. But, sadly, they will just shift all the blame to others, some maybe justified, but some definitely not. -barbarian(粗人); 2009-3-17 (#5121831@0)
就是。O8就职花了上亿美金倒不说，让他自己掏腰包补上。 -steve888(Steve曾经曰过); 2009-3-18 (#5123319@0)

合法就该发。这就是人治，法制的区别。至于某些人良心发现，捐出来，那是个人的事。另外说的通过法律征税，中止合同，都是违反法律的，此例一开，一个独裁政府立刻呈现在眼前。 -steve888(Steve曾经曰过); 2009-3-18 (#5123318@0)

问题是根本没有法律。是政府自己职权不明，这笔钱属于谁？AIG是实际的负资产。没有这钱它倒闭了。合同是AIG签的，政府注资的时候不明确资金的用途。现在政府去追究签合同时是否涉嫌骗资根本是本末倒置。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-3-18 (#5123620@0)

这笔奖金不付很难。首先这笔奖金是去年一季度敲定的，政府在九月份入资AIG时也知道这事。其次如果不发奖金员工和AIG打官司，AIG输的可能性极大，而且诉讼费按合同规定也要AIG出，AIG出就是美国政府出，也就是纳税人出，哈哈。。。 -nodream(～～～); 2009-3-18 (#5123630@0)

实际上国会吵吵闹闹就是为了掩盖自己无能。国家管理者没有能力管好国家，却怪老百姓觉悟不够高，不够爱国。 -steve888(Steve曾经曰过); 2009-3-18 (#5123861@0)

@Ontario

That's how the game is played. Executive Bonuses were signed into contracts by the board of the company which are composed of the people who own the majority of the shares.

Replies, comments and Discussions:

More Topics