Interesting

Here is an interesting counterpoint.

I understand what she is saying. However, desperate times call for extreme action. Part of the problem is that the companies progressed so far beyond any regulation, in many cases nothing "illegal" was done. The problems need to be fixed. And if TEMPORARY, with NON-EXTENDABLE time limits, were made that makes it easier for the government to forcibly renegotiate contracts so be it.

She has 3 main fallacies to her argument.

1. That cutting the bonuses would drive people off. Where are they going to go? Sure, maybe a few of the top people would find jobs. But right now, this is not a bull market for these positions.

2. We need people who understand this stuff to fix it. THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND IT! They understand the theory. But, theory doesn't mean crap in reality. Nobody knows how to fix this. That's why they are going to keep sinking more money in. They think if it fails, the whole system will. But, there isn't an end in sight (after over 150 billion) of the money AIG will need.

3. That this will set some sort of precedent. Well, it might. But, I look at this like surgery. Sometimes you have to remove something to save the body. That's how this economy has become. I want the goverment to have powerful, yet focused abilities, to drastically rework things. But for a limited time. 1 year, 2 years. Something like that.

Nothing longer or they will foul it up worse.

The whole issue is they shouldn't have gotten bonuses at all. They should have gotten a healthy salary as they are highly trained, but this whole "bonus" farce is laughable.