# Democrats Pass 90% tax on AIG bonuses **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 19, 2009, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058 "2009-03-19T19:06:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2009, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/201 "2009-03-20T22:48:31Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > This is, more or less, a democracy. WE are the government. It is easy to forget that when most political activity happens by courageous leaders who duck their head down and plow forward, damn the masses, but the truth is they represent us, they do not command us. It is the other way around. They made a deal the public thought stunk. We are not helpless in the face of it. First of all, we do not live in a democracy. We vote for people to represent our best interests. They’re not hired guns. The contract was entered into in order to get the job done. It was done with full congressional transparency and specifically protected by legislation toward that goal. Instead of backing up and explaining a good decision it was turned into class envy political fodder by Obama. This poisoned environment put politicians from both parties into spin mode. This is behavior I would expect from Castro or Chavez, not the President of the United States. Not only has Obama endangered the lives of AIG executives and their families he has torpedoed every other bailout endeavor. He has guaranteed that good talent will walk away. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2009, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/202 "2009-03-20T23:02:03Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > First of all, we do not live in a democracy. We vote for people to represent our best interests. They’re not hired guns. > > The contract was entered into in order to get the job done. It was done with full congressional transparency and specifically protected by legislation toward that goal. Instead of backing up and explaining a good decision it was turned into class envy political fodder by Obama. This poisoned environment put politicians from both parties into spin mode. This is behavior I would expect from Castro or Chavez, not the President of the United States. Not only has Obama endangered the lives of AIG executives and their families he has torpedoed every other bailout endeavor. He has guaranteed that good talent will walk away. So, you think that if the president had said “No, really, we rich politicians are perfectly okay with the rich AIG executives funnelling the bailout money we collected from you poor people into their own pockets. In fact we knew about it when we wrote the bailout and are perfectly happy with this state of affairs”, that the average underpaid fellow would say “Oh, okay I wasn’t aware that these guys need millions of dollars to be convinced to keep working, and that they really deserve our money much more than we ourselves do. Thanks for explaining!” I’m sure you’re right. Why, before Obama turned this into a class war, everybody was quite happy with AIG and was wishing openly that even _more_ of the public money would go to bonuses for them, to thank them and the entire financial industry for the wonderful state of the economy. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2009, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/203 "2009-03-20T23:03:11Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > When did #6 become top 5? 😕 Probably answered already, but #5 and #6 are actually tied for fifth place, which is why you see six entries. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2009, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/204 "2009-03-20T23:15:18Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > you think that if the president had said “No, really, we rich politicians are perfectly okay with the rich AIG executives funnelling the bailout money we collected from you poor people into their own pockets. In fact we knew about it when we wrote the bailout and are perfectly happy with this state of affairs”. Not sure if this has been pointed out yet, but he _ **was** _ OK with that. In fact, his adminsitration specifically called for an exemption for the bonus money because they were worried about getting sued. [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090320/ap\_on\_bi\_ge/aig\_bonuses](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090320/ap_on_bi_ge/aig_bonuses) > [@](#): > > The Senate voted last month to block the AIG and other bonuses as part of the $787 billion stimulus bill, but Democrats then watered down the measure allowing them after Treasury Department officials warned that the move could trigger lawsuits against the government. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2009, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/205 "2009-03-20T23:19:30Z")
> [@hobscrk777](#): > > You raise a good point. $250k is an equally arbitrary line to draw. Someone obviously thought it was an appropriate point to make a distinction. And to some extent, it seems to be a good one. $250k+ is considered upper class by most measures, although it would make more sense if it coincided with the top federal tax bracket.I also agree that the government should have specified more stringent terms for the usage of every dollar given over the AIG. As others have pointed out, though, Congress was in such a scramble to pass a stimulus of some kind that some specifics couldn’t be hashed out as well as they should have. This tax on bonuses is an unfortunate consequence of the way the stimulus bills have apparently been written. $250K is not totally arbitrary - it is the point above which people don’t get a tax cut. But I would have rather seen the cutoff be on the person’s income, not the family’s, since what a spouse makes should be immaterial in this case. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2009, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/206 "2009-03-20T23:22:28Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Not sure if this has been pointed out yet, but he _ **was** _ OK with that. In fact, his adminsitration specifically called for an exemption for the bonus money because they were worried about getting sued. > > [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090320/ap\_on\_bi\_ge/aig\_bonuses](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090320/ap_on_bi_ge/aig_bonuses) Yes, and then when the public found out about it, they gave subtle hints that they weren’t satisfied with the situation. The question here is, if Obama and the democrats (and half the republicans) had chosen to rally against the american public on the matter, what would the likely reaction and consequences be? Presumably some here think that Obama “endangered the lives of AIG executives and their families” by not doing so; I’m wondering if they seriously believe that the Government cheerily saying that the AIG employees were special people who get more things than everybody else would have really made the populace _less_ mad at them. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2009, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/207 "2009-03-20T23:32:30Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Not only has Obama endangered the lives of AIG executives and their families he has torpedoed every other bailout endeavor. He has guaranteed that good talent will walk away. After these genius derivative traders brought the economy down in flames, this “keeping good talent” bullshit just doesn’t wash anymore. Somehow I am convinced there may be, just might be, one or two unemployed derivatives traders out there who would be willing to do the same job for much less money. I work in software development, and more than one time I’ve been in a project where there is one “hero programmer” who produces huge amounts of code in a short amount of time, he’s the only one who understands it, and he ends up being the go-to guy for everything. Management acts as if he’s indispensable because he’s saved a couple of critical deadlines. But in the long view, the more time he spends there, the more of a liability he becomes because everything depends on him. The sooner you boot out these prima-donnas and replace them with team players, the better. ---
**Author:** ![Monster104](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Monster104](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monster104)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/208 "2009-03-21T00:05:28Z")
> [@MichaelQReilly](#): > > No one is going to feel sorry for these people who aren’t going to get a 100k plus bonus. You efforts, though admirable, are doomed to failure. You certainly _are_ going to be sorry, along with everyone else, when AIG folds because it can’t offer the competitive pay they need to be able to provide in order to retain the intelligent and capable workers it needs to get out of the mess it’s in. Congratulations, your mindset has now resulted in ~$150 billion going to _complete waste_ in the name of moral outrage. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/209 "2009-03-21T00:15:19Z")
> [@Monster104](#): > > You certainly _are_ going to be sorry, along with everyone else, when AIG folds because it can’t offer the competitive pay they need to be able to provide in order to retain the intelligent and capable workers it needs to get out of the mess it’s in. The last thing they need is more incompetent greedheads. It’s the people attracted by that “big pay for executives regardless of performance” corporate model who screwed the company and to a large degree the economy up in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/210 "2009-03-21T01:17:30Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I can’t agree with that either. The interest of economic efficiency is served when people do the work that is most in demand. That demand is determined by wages. These people were ready to leave AIG because it looked like AIG was going down, and other financial firms who were sound were making bids for the best people. That’s what you WANT them to do. And you want those people to take those offers unless a better one is made. The bonuses were set in March 2008. They were set at the same level as in 2007. Was AIG in bad shape back then so that they needed to pay to keep people? Do you think retention bonuses begin when a company is in trouble? Or are they a nice excuse to give them that have even more. Before the crash the absurdly high levels of bonuses for financial people was well known, but it was assumed that they were creating real value, so there was at least some justification for it. When it turned out that they were not creating value, but only a house of cards, the justification kind of vanishes. There is now a lot of talk of clawbacks - keeping bonuses in escrow, to be paid only if it turns out the results are valid. There have been plenty of cases of CEOs and CFOs misstating results, getting whoppers, and then getting fired when the problem is discovered, but never having to give back the money earned based on their lies. The problem here is not intentional deceit, but the principle that rewards should be based on real value remains. > [@](#): > > A touchy-feely world in which workers just take it on the chin and stick it out with a company out of loyalty despite the fact that it can no longer pay them competitive salaries is a world in which businesses failures are much more severe, and in which ‘zombie’ companies which consume resources better spent elsewhere continue to stumble along on the backs of their employees, who could be more productive elsewhere. > > And if you spent 20 years working your way up in the financial industry and got to the point where you were making $500,000 per year, would you stick with a company if it said, “Sorry, but we have to eliminate the majority of your compensation and pay you a fraction of what the company down the street is offering”? In the real world, out here in the Valley anyway, companies going through hard times do cut bonuses. People do leave, and some people do stay. The computer business staggers on even with this impossible restriction on retention. > [@](#): > > These people did nothing wrong. They had other options, and AIG bid for their services. They had every right to enter inito that contract, and to expect AIG to live up to it. Of course, AIG could go bankrupt and wind up forfeiting some of it, but I’m sure that was part of the equation that set that price in the first place. True, but millions who have done nothing wrong have lost bonuses at best and jobs thanks to this mess. Is it asking too much of those at ground zero (and I’m using that term properly) to not get giant bonuses. People lose out all the time even when their company doesn’t go bankrupt - and even when their senior managers get big bonuses for firing them. > [@](#): > > Populism is a terrible way to analyze problems. Tempting as it is to point fingers at rich people and blame them for everything, it’s no substitute for actually thinking through the issues. And it’s this kind of populist rage that got the Kulaks hung from trees in the Russian revolution (which led to mass starvation once they’d killed all the people who knew anything about agriculture). We’re not at the point yet where bankers will be put in front of firing squads, but it comes from the same place - unreasoning hatred and a desire to find scapegoats for your problems. Equally bad is the entitlement of our monied classes, especially in the financial sector, who seem to have lost track of the real impact of their activities. People are going to lose their jobs due to industry shifts, sure. That’s part of capitalism. But losing ones job because this asshole company did absolutely brain dead policy writing is another - and it is worst when you hear employees of the very division that did it demand the same pay as when they were supposedly doing a great job. BTW, they know damn well they aren’t getting another cent of bonus money, no matter what happens to this round. How’s that going to work for retention? Even if they got the money, anyone who can walk would to a place where they could get a bonus. So, to keep people, this is a total waste. Or do you think they deserve bonuses as far as the eye can see for their excellent work and AIG’s excellent profitability? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/211 "2009-03-21T01:30:34Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > So, you think that if the president had said “No, really, we rich politicians are perfectly okay with the rich AIG executives funnelling the bailout money we collected from you poor people into their own pockets. In fact we knew about it when we wrote the bailout and are perfectly happy with this state of affairs”, that the average underpaid fellow would say “Oh, okay I wasn’t aware that these guys need millions of dollars to be convinced to keep working, and that they really deserve our money much more than we ourselves do. Thanks for explaining!” I think if the President had pointed out that the people who caused this problem were gone and that we needed to fix it then the news story would be about how the problem was caused in the first place. Obama should have pointed out the Robert Willumstad, who replaced Martin Sullivan, turned down $22 million in severance pay (Sullivan got $28 million plus consulting fees). It was Maurice Greenberg who caused the problems with Credit default swaps and he’s long gone. The people getting paid for their success are getting a lot less than the people who got paid for failure. > [@begbert2](#): > > I’m sure you’re right. Why, before Obama turned this into a class war, everybody was quite happy with AIG and was wishing openly that even _more_ of the public money would go to bonuses for them, to thank them and the entire financial industry for the wonderful state of the economy. The President shouldn’t react to an angry crowd as if he was Judge Roy Bean handing out justice. ---
**Author:** ![Monster104](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Monster104](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monster104)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/212 "2009-03-21T01:38:58Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > The last thing they need is more incompetent greedheads. So…the plan is to attract competent employees…by offering less pay than other companies? :dubious: > [@](#): > > It’s the people attracted by that “big pay for executives regardless of performance” corporate model who screwed the company and to a large degree the economy up in the first place. Too bad most of the people we’re talking about here are not executives, and are the people currently working to _fix_ the problems caused by the people you’re talking about. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/213 "2009-03-21T01:42:23Z")
> [@Cosmic Relief](#): > > After these genius derivative traders brought the economy down in flames, this “keeping good talent” bullshit just doesn’t wash anymore. Somehow I am convinced there may be, just might be, one or two unemployed derivatives traders out there who would be willing to do the same job for much less money. The genius derivative traders are gone. That part is over. > [@Cosmic Relief](#): > > I work in software development, and more than one time I’ve been in a project where there is one “hero programmer” who produces huge amounts of code in a short amount of time, he’s the only one who understands it, and he ends up being the go-to guy for everything. Management acts as if he’s indispensable because he’s saved a couple of critical deadlines. But in the long view, the more time he spends there, the more of a liability he becomes because everything depends on him. The sooner you boot out these prima-donnas and replace them with team players, the better. The people who received the bonuses were paid for meeting specific short term goals so your analogy of long term indispensability is wrong. If you had a year-long project and half the programmers walked away the project would fail. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/214 "2009-03-21T01:46:46Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > You worked at Enron or Worldcom? If so then I suppose you do have some idea of what these guys are going through. If not…then not so much. Oh, I see, now I have sympathy. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/215 "2009-03-21T01:49:58Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > First of all, we do not live in a democracy. We vote for people to represent our best interests. They’re not hired guns. Yes, they represent our interests. Right now, they are representing mine, and quite a few others. > [@](#): > > The contract was entered into in order to get the job done. It was done with full congressional transparency and specifically protected by legislation toward that goal. Instead of backing up and explaining a good decision it was turned into class envy political fodder by Obama. And just today I was reading about how the administration was trying to backpedal in the face of public pressure, when really, they orchestrated it that way! How devious of them. > [@](#): > > Not only has Obama endangered the lives of AIG executives and their families he has torpedoed every other bailout endeavor. He has guaranteed that good talent will walk away. Oh well in that case they should double their bonuses. What was I thinking? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/216 "2009-03-21T02:43:37Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > There are plenty of legal experts out there of the opinion that it is probably legal. [Laurence Tribe](http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/03/18/would-an-aig-bonus-tax-pass-constitutional-muster-a-tribe-calls-yes/) for example. That doiesn’t necessarily mean it is legal, but it isn’t a situation where it is clearly illegal, as you suggest. Mr. Tribe’s “sufficiently broad” caveat could cover a multitude of sins. The patently obvious intent of the law to obtain the exec’s bonuses would make any judge scrutinize the law with some serious attention. I still think it’s a no go. An OBVIOUS no go. If this isn’t a bill of attainder, nothing is. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/217 "2009-03-21T03:08:43Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > Yes, they represent our interests. Right now, they are representing mine, and quite a few others. The people who got bonuses raised over a trillion dollars. What exactly are your interests? > [@erislover](#): > > And just today I was reading about how the administration was trying to backpedal in the face of public pressure, when really, they orchestrated it that way! How devious of them. I don’t think it was a well thought out venture. Kinda like wasting a day and $400,000 of taxpayer money flying out to LAX to insult the mentally handicapped. He had to backpedal on that too which has to be tough with one foot in his mouth. You would think someone trying to deal with an economic crisis had better things to do with his time (and our money). President Obama still doesn’t have a full staff of people under Geitner who is the person dealing with this. Taxing away the wages of the people hired to fix the problem is one whopping bridge to burn down. In the case of AIG, they still have 1.7 trillion of assets to liquidate. The people getting screwed should donate their bonuses for a tax credit and walk away. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/218 "2009-03-21T04:40:20Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You would think someone trying to deal with an economic crisis had better things to do with his time (and our money). There is always something more important than something else. ---
**Author:** ![straight\_man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/straight_man/32/3027_2.png) [@straight\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/straight_man)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/219 "2009-03-21T05:50:44Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > Yes, they represent our interests. Right now, they are representing mine, and quite a few others. See, _this_ is where it gets ridiculous. As has been pointed out, cutting down the income of 10% of AIG doesn’t represent the interests of the people; you don’t destabilize a company that you just poured $170bil into! Congress is representing its constituents’ _anger_ (well, deflecting it, anyway.) That’s not really what I would think of as good governance. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 8:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058/220 "2009-03-21T08:59:49Z")
[Banker fury over tax ‘witch-hunt’](http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4ff2f77e-1584-11de-b9a9-0000779fd2ac.html) > [@](#): > > Bankers on Wall Street and in Europe have struck back against moves by US lawmakers to slap punitive taxes on bonuses paid to high earners at bailed-out institutions. > > Senior executives on both sides of the Atlantic on Friday warned of an exodus of talent from some of the biggest names in US finance, saying the “anti-American” measures smacked of “a McCarthy witch-hunt” that would send the country “back to the stone age”. > > There were fears that the backlash triggered by AIG’s payment of $165m in bonuses to executives responsible for losses that forced a $170bn taxpayer-funded rescue would have devastating consequences for the largest banks. > > “Finance is one of America’s great industries, and they’re destroying it,” said one banker at a firm that has accepted public money. “This happened out of haste and anger over AIG, but we’re not like AIG.” > … > “There are three big industries where the US has global leadership: financial services, media and technology. Introducing this 90 per cent tax is like taking one of those industries out the back and shooting it,” said a top Wall Street executive. > > In Frankfurt one employee at a US investment bank said the new tax measures would “send [the US] back to the stone age”. > > “Commodity traders are already moving to companies like BP where they can make as much money as they used to,” said another banker at a US firm. > > **Bankers at Deutsche Bank said it could benefit from the proposed legislation by poaching its US rivals’ most talented employees.** Yeah, this is working out real well. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-pass-90-tax-on-aig-bonuses/490058.md?page=12)