Friday, March 27, 2009

AIG: The rest of the story

Imagine working 14-hour days — for a year  on a $1 salary with the understanding that at the end of the year, you would receive a financial reward for your hard work.  Then imagine how you would react if Congress, angry mobs and a state Attorney General decided to take it all away.  This is the other side of the AIG story.

The following is from a letter sent on Tuesday by Jake DeSantis, an executive vice president of the American International Group’s financial products unit, to Edward M. Liddy, the chief executive of A.I.G. 

It is with deep regret that I submit my notice of resignation from A.I.G. Financial Products. I hope you take the time to read this entire letter. Before describing the details of my decision, I want to offer some context:

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in — or responsible for — the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company — during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 — we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

Ed Morrissey's reaction:

If the public threatens the safety of their families, the Attorney General threatens to prosecute them, and Congress threatens to take the money away they got paid for not seeking employment elsewhere, why should they stay?  And here’s an even better question: why should anyone take their place?   Would you work for $1 a year just so you could put your children in the gunsights of lunatics doing bus tours past your house and have the state’s top prosecutor pledging to come after you with all the tools at his disposal?  [snip]

This is what mob hysteria produces, and we can thank Congress and our “shaking with outrage” President for fomenting it.  They’ve put people in danger who had little to do with the actual wrongdoing, and deliberately encouraged the drooling, mindless reaction around the nation.  They’ve probably kneecapped any possibility of getting our money back out of AIG.  I hope people enjoyed their outrage parties, because we just paid $150 billion for them.


Obama's aunt fighting deportation

Obama brother may have cholera

Southpark's demented take on how the treasury system works:


robert verdi said...

cuomo is a thug plain and simple.

RightKlik said...

RV: Cuomo's outrageous behaviour is a story in and of itself.

suek said...

Gives a whole new meaning to "going Galt", doesn't it!

RightKlik said...

suek: Yes it does. It's not just an idea, it's reality.

Franklin's Locke said...

The mob mentality created by Congress is a disgrace and un-American. This should backfire on them and show the real side of the Left in America. The side of the Marxist.

RightKlik said...

FL: My concern is that Congress shows almost no respect for the constitution...and for Obama it's just a nuisance.

Anonymous said...

RightKlik said...

Anon: I like the post...thanks for the link.

adagioforstrings said...

I'm not certain if the option provided to the headless chicken in South Park are necessarily mutually exclusive, such as "bailout" vs "sell to the Chinese".

The kabuki theater over the AIG bonuses is just an attempted distraction to the fact that the entire bailout of a failed business, that happened to legally bribe politicians' votes with campaign donations, was wrong in the first place.

RightKlik said...

ADF: As flawed as the headless chicken system is, I think it would be an improvement over what we have now. At least it would be impartial to special interests.

The AIG charade...? Probably the most agregeous example of governmental smoke and mirrors that I've ever seen.