Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dear A.I.G., I Quit

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–77 of 77 posts

Re: Dear A.I.G., I Quit

#71

Post by ams6110 »

Rod wrote: post #41
zurla wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The company should have gone bankrupt (and certainly would have, without US government intervention), in which case none of these people would have seen any bonuses at all. he should be grateful for the $1 :-)

Do you realize what the consequences of letting AIG go bust could be? Do you realize that bailing out crippled financial institutions is entirely different from bailing out Motown's idiot car companies? Do you realize that AIG has various divisions and only one of them was trading the toxic financial products that destroyed the company? Your comment sounds like demagogy.

Going into bankruptcy does not mean going out of business, at least not immediately. It basically just lets you put your debts "on hold" while you either reorganize or wind down under court supervision. Gives everyone time to take a breath and think rationally. Sounds pretty good in comparison to what happened?

Re: Dear A.I.G., I Quit

#72

Post by jimbokun »

smallpaul wrote: post #17
aagnihot wrote: post #13

If the government had not bailed out AIG, it would have declared bankruptcy. In such a case, he would have been effectively jobless. Also, a bankrupt company cannot award bonus. So even as he keeps his job, he dares to complain about bonus. Hypocrisy at its best!!

He kept his job for a salary of $1.00, rather than go and enjoy a year with his family. I have no idea why they would have structured the compensation that way though...the result is kind of predictable.

"He kept his job for a salary of $1.00, rather than go and enjoy a year with his family."

He obviously made a poor decision.

Re: Dear A.I.G., I Quit

#73

Post by moe »

endtime wrote: post #30
moe wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't speak for ankhmoop, but what bothers me here is the whiney letter. I already knew that ridiculously overpaid jobs exist and that you usually get them by being born into the right family - or with an unusual amount of luck. I don't like that part of reality but I can't change it. So, this guy has one of these jobs. Fine, someone has to do the dirty work after all! But is there really a need to whine in public…

What he's complaining about is that he's been made a scapegoat for something that isn't his fault, been pressured to return all his payment (but $1.00) for a year of hard work, and has state AGs threatening to announce his name publicly as one of the evil AIG execs. I think his being upset is pretty reasonable.

Poor guy. Maybe he should take some of his $700k to a lawyer instead of crying for public sympathy. It's about the scales. He may have a legal right to be upset. But with presumably a few millions in the bank he should have the dignity to know that he 's still on the bright side of life.

Re: Dear A.I.G., I Quit

#74

Post by Rod »

ams6110 wrote: post #71
Rod wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you realize what the consequences of letting AIG go bust could be? Do you realize that bailing out crippled financial institutions is entirely different from bailing out Motown's idiot car companies? Do you realize that AIG has various divisions and only one of them was trading the toxic financial products that destroyed the company? Your comment sounds like demagogy.

Going into bankruptcy does not mean going out of business, at least not immediately. It basically just lets you put your debts "on hold" while you either reorganize or wind down under court supervision. Gives everyone time to take a breath and think rationally. Sounds pretty good in comparison to what happened?

I have read articles written by so-called "experts" explaining clearly and forcefully why we should let AIG go bankrupt. Then I have read articles written by other "experts" who claim the opposite, also in a convincing manner. When experts look at the same problem and draw entirely different conclusions, then:

i) their own interests are clouding their judgement.

ii) they don't all have the same data.

iii) their "expertise" is greatly overrated.

In the last few months there has been so much irrationality and lack of transparency, that I now truly find it hard to believe anything I read on this topic.

Re: Dear A.I.G., I Quit

#75

Post by dcurtis »

petercooper wrote: post #68
bcostlow wrote: post #6

Sorry Jake, but I don't feel sorry for you. Well, maybe a little, if your claims about being tarred unfairly with the CDS debacle are true. But stop whining. All over the USA, people who work hard, who get great reviews from bosses, customers and peers, who were promised bonuses and profit sharing, are seeing instead slashed pay and benefits. That is, if they are lucky, and not getting RIFed. Your company is in the c…

Is there any way to find out what the original URL was on "dead" items? There really should be a way, even if it's some crazy tiny nofollow link someplace ;-) (I can Google in this case, but that's not always true.)

Change the word "item" to "edit" in the URL.

Re: Dear A.I.G., I Quit

#76

Post by Dilpil »

moe wrote: post #19
Dilpil wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now now, don't bring logic into this.

I can't speak for ankhmoop, but what bothers me here is the whiney letter. I already knew that ridiculously overpaid jobs exist and that you usually get them by being born into the right family - or with an unusual amount of luck. I don't like that part of reality but I can't change it. So, this guy has one of these jobs. Fine, someone has to do the dirty work after all! But is there really a need to whine in public…

Actually, many people get those jobs by working hard in high school to get into a prestigious college, and then working hard in college to get into a prestigious banking or accounting firm. What many see as luck is actually 10+ years of hard work.

Re: Dear A.I.G., I Quit

#77

Post by endtime »

chris11 wrote: post #14
ankhmoop wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find myself unable to identify with -- or muster any empathy whatsoever -- for an individual who received $742,006.40 (post-tax) and can readily afford to donate it to charity without concern for his family's well-being despite the current economic climate.

I see your point. But assuming he had nothing to do with the derivative crisis, he is just basically cleaning up a mess made by someone else. And he has now effectively been paid nothing for his work. Sure, he can afford it, and he was a senior vp at AIG, so I am sure there is a lot more he could have done. But he played an ancillary role in this crisis. And this is basically turning into a witch hunt. If he had been…

>It seems to me like the government is going after AIG only because of all the public outrage.

This is very true. Honestly, I'd go so far as to call it a lack of leadership by Obama.

Post reply on HN