Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

President Obama not so sure of tax on bonus

Administration officials said instead that President Obama would assess the potential effect of the bill that emerged from Congress on efforts to stabilize the financial system.

At the same time, as Wall Street executives anxiously pondered the ramifications of the measure quickly passed by the House this week, some Senate Republicans began to voice opposition to the legislation, saying it was hasty and abusive.

Interesting read, what do YOU think?

Answer Question

Asked by sweet-a-kins at 1:27 PM on Mar. 21, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (67,502 Credits)
Answers (10)
  • The best thing he could do is to refuse to sign it and clearly explain to the average uneducated americian just why...
    It is unconstitutional. Pure and simple. Just becuase the lawmakers say "Let's do this" doesn't mean they can. That's why we have three branches of government.
    If the law goes through, there will be lawsuits. Which the government will lose in the end. In the meantime, there will be all the legal fees - which we the taxpayers will have to pay.
    In the end, we will probably also have to pay for the legal fees of the executives once they win their case.
    So... the bonuses will still be paid and so will a TON of extra money.

    If he is concerned about saving taxpayer money, he will veto it. If he just wants to line the pockets of fellow lawyers and look good for his sound-bites to the happy masses, he'll sign it.

    Answer by kaycee14 at 1:34 PM on Mar. 21, 2009

  • I think the outrage over the bonus; are too large...We need to be outrages that they are still running business as usual

    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 1:38 PM on Mar. 21, 2009

  • The issue of causing false anger and outrage is a diversion to cause the public to look sternly at AIG employees instead of the dumbazzes that allowed the bonuses to remain in the bailout contracts by mutual agreements. I think the employees should be able to keep the bonuses with no additional tax and the government should have the fingers pointed at them for being inept and inadequate in office. Inexperienced is a better term. hehe
    Obama needs to leave the additonal tax issue alone and not let it go into effect, the aftermath of doing something like that will really piss off some major players. And, make the citizens start thinking what is next? The government has ultimate authority to do whatever it wants whenever it wants? That's how I see it.

    Answer by akinbottom2 at 1:56 PM on Mar. 21, 2009

  • I disagree with the punitive tax, I too feel it is probably illegal. However, I am not quite so willing as some that want to put all the blame on politicians for this. I mean, AIG is ultimately responsible for the crises themselves, and I'm not going to let them off the hook because they weren't regulated into acting responsibly in regards to the bonuses.

    Answer by stacymomof2 at 2:07 PM on Mar. 21, 2009

  • Obama and his administration knew that legally, they cannot deny AIG employees their bonuses...........

    Surely you know that?......................

    Answer by mustbeGRACE at 2:37 PM on Mar. 21, 2009

  • The bonuses HAD to be paid. There was no choice and everyone in AIG and the government knew it.
    When the first bailout was in the works in November, the government looked into what to do about the bonuses, could they be made smaller or even eliminated? The answer was a flat no. The employees were under contract. Their contracts stated the terms, including bonuses. The contracts can only be changed by common consent of both the company and the employee. No outside agency - like the govenment - can force anyone to change an existing contract. If anything was done to prevent those bonuses from being paid, lawsuits would be filed. So, the government gave the money to AIG KNOWING and ACCEPTING that the bonuses would be paid. Every single Senator knew. Every Congressman. And the President too. Claiming this was new and shocking is just play acting for the cameras and the uneducated back home.

    Answer by kaycee14 at 3:15 PM on Mar. 21, 2009

  • Geithner wrote the darn thing and Senator Dodd made sure to put in language that allowed for bonuses. Seems this is vindictive and they are scrambling to do something that is wrong. Where does it stop. We know how our government works this will not just be for those making over 250k and work for companies that got bailout money. In time they will extend this to those making 100k and work for any company. I hope this is not done we live in America and there is nothing wrong with making money. The Government made a huge mistake by not saying they could not give bonuses with the money. Going forward for any new funds they should put that condition on the money. Or just not bailout companies.

    Answer by Anonymous at 3:36 PM on Mar. 21, 2009

  • Doesn't really matter what he thinks, he has no balls and will go along with whatever Hellosi and Greed want.

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 4:10 PM on Mar. 21, 2009

  • kacey, akin and itsmesteph said it all.

    Answer by lovinangels at 6:29 PM on Mar. 21, 2009

  • AIG is sinking faster then the Titanic. Let it fail already!!

    Answer by Ibelongtojesus at 8:12 PM on Mar. 21, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.