Comments on: Liberty Or A Bailout? You Can’t Have Both http://www.msunderestimated.com/2009/04/liberty-or-a-bailout-you-cant-have-both/ Reality Bytes Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:41:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Champ http://www.msunderestimated.com/2009/04/liberty-or-a-bailout-you-cant-have-both/comment-page-1/#comment-118712 Champ Sat, 11 Apr 2009 03:31:38 +0000 http://msunderestimated.com/?p=3327#comment-118712 Actually, "economic freedom" has placed so many restrictions on share holder rights that you can have both a bail out and freedom. <br>------<br>We’re Not the Boss of A.I.G. <br>By CARL ICAHN<br>Published: March 28, 2009 <br> BARNEY FRANK, the Massachusetts Democrat who heads the House Financial Services Committee, recently said that the government should sue American International Group to recover the $165 million in bonuses it paid to executives in its financial products division. “We own this company, in effect,” Mr. Frank said, referring to the government’s 80 percent stake. “As the owners of the company, we do not think we should be paying bonuses or should have paid bonuses to people who made mistakes, who were incompetent.”<br><br>Sadly, though, under American corporate law share ownership does not count for much. Mr. Frank might be surprised to learn that a lawsuit would have almost no chance of success in court, even for a majority shareholder like the government. A.I.G. would most likely argue that the oft-cited “business judgment” rule gives management wide latitude to set compensation without shareholder interference. What the government should have gotten was board representation in return for its large investment in A.I.G. Actually, “economic freedom” has placed so many restrictions on share holder rights that you can have both a bail out and freedom.
——
We’re Not the Boss of A.I.G.
By CARL ICAHN
Published: March 28, 2009
BARNEY FRANK, the Massachusetts Democrat who heads the House Financial Services Committee, recently said that the government should sue American International Group to recover the $165 million in bonuses it paid to executives in its financial products division. “We own this company, in effect,” Mr. Frank said, referring to the government’s 80 percent stake. “As the owners of the company, we do not think we should be paying bonuses or should have paid bonuses to people who made mistakes, who were incompetent.”

Sadly, though, under American corporate law share ownership does not count for much. Mr. Frank might be surprised to learn that a lawsuit would have almost no chance of success in court, even for a majority shareholder like the government. A.I.G. would most likely argue that the oft-cited “business judgment” rule gives management wide latitude to set compensation without shareholder interference. What the government should have gotten was board representation in return for its large investment in A.I.G.

]]> By: Champ http://www.msunderestimated.com/2009/04/liberty-or-a-bailout-you-cant-have-both/comment-page-1/#comment-117933 Champ Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:31:38 +0000 http://msunderestimated.com/?p=3327#comment-117933 Actually, "economic freedom" has placed so many restrictions on share holder rights that you can have both a bail out and freedom. <br>------<br>We’re Not the Boss of A.I.G. <br>By CARL ICAHN<br>Published: March 28, 2009 <br> BARNEY FRANK, the Massachusetts Democrat who heads the House Financial Services Committee, recently said that the government should sue American International Group to recover the $165 million in bonuses it paid to executives in its financial products division. “We own this company, in effect,” Mr. Frank said, referring to the government’s 80 percent stake. “As the owners of the company, we do not think we should be paying bonuses or should have paid bonuses to people who made mistakes, who were incompetent.”<br><br>Sadly, though, under American corporate law share ownership does not count for much. Mr. Frank might be surprised to learn that a lawsuit would have almost no chance of success in court, even for a majority shareholder like the government. A.I.G. would most likely argue that the oft-cited “business judgment” rule gives management wide latitude to set compensation without shareholder interference. What the government should have gotten was board representation in return for its large investment in A.I.G. Actually, “economic freedom” has placed so many restrictions on share holder rights that you can have both a bail out and freedom.
——
We’re Not the Boss of A.I.G.
By CARL ICAHN
Published: March 28, 2009
BARNEY FRANK, the Massachusetts Democrat who heads the House Financial Services Committee, recently said that the government should sue American International Group to recover the $165 million in bonuses it paid to executives in its financial products division. “We own this company, in effect,” Mr. Frank said, referring to the government’s 80 percent stake. “As the owners of the company, we do not think we should be paying bonuses or should have paid bonuses to people who made mistakes, who were incompetent.”

Sadly, though, under American corporate law share ownership does not count for much. Mr. Frank might be surprised to learn that a lawsuit would have almost no chance of success in court, even for a majority shareholder like the government. A.I.G. would most likely argue that the oft-cited “business judgment” rule gives management wide latitude to set compensation without shareholder interference. What the government should have gotten was board representation in return for its large investment in A.I.G.

]]> By: Champ http://www.msunderestimated.com/2009/04/liberty-or-a-bailout-you-cant-have-both/comment-page-1/#comment-117162 Champ Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:31:38 +0000 http://msunderestimated.com/?p=3327#comment-117162 Actually, "economic freedom" has placed so many restrictions on share holder rights that you can have both a bail out and freedom. <br>------<br>We’re Not the Boss of A.I.G. <br>By CARL ICAHN<br>Published: March 28, 2009 <br> BARNEY FRANK, the Massachusetts Democrat who heads the House Financial Services Committee, recently said that the government should sue American International Group to recover the $165 million in bonuses it paid to executives in its financial products division. “We own this company, in effect,” Mr. Frank said, referring to the government’s 80 percent stake. “As the owners of the company, we do not think we should be paying bonuses or should have paid bonuses to people who made mistakes, who were incompetent.”<br><br>Sadly, though, under American corporate law share ownership does not count for much. Mr. Frank might be surprised to learn that a lawsuit would have almost no chance of success in court, even for a majority shareholder like the government. A.I.G. would most likely argue that the oft-cited “business judgment” rule gives management wide latitude to set compensation without shareholder interference. What the government should have gotten was board representation in return for its large investment in A.I.G. Actually, “economic freedom” has placed so many restrictions on share holder rights that you can have both a bail out and freedom.
——
We’re Not the Boss of A.I.G.
By CARL ICAHN
Published: March 28, 2009
BARNEY FRANK, the Massachusetts Democrat who heads the House Financial Services Committee, recently said that the government should sue American International Group to recover the $165 million in bonuses it paid to executives in its financial products division. “We own this company, in effect,” Mr. Frank said, referring to the government’s 80 percent stake. “As the owners of the company, we do not think we should be paying bonuses or should have paid bonuses to people who made mistakes, who were incompetent.”

Sadly, though, under American corporate law share ownership does not count for much. Mr. Frank might be surprised to learn that a lawsuit would have almost no chance of success in court, even for a majority shareholder like the government. A.I.G. would most likely argue that the oft-cited “business judgment” rule gives management wide latitude to set compensation without shareholder interference. What the government should have gotten was board representation in return for its large investment in A.I.G.

]]> By: Kevin http://www.msunderestimated.com/2009/04/liberty-or-a-bailout-you-cant-have-both/comment-page-1/#comment-117125 Kevin Wed, 08 Apr 2009 18:46:41 +0000 http://msunderestimated.com/?p=3327#comment-117125 Good point.<br><br>That was a good posting on Gary Sinise on "The View", by the way. He was much too gentlemanly for those "ladies". Good point.

That was a good posting on Gary Sinise on “The View”, by the way. He was much too gentlemanly for those “ladies”.

]]> By: MsUnderestimated http://www.msunderestimated.com/2009/04/liberty-or-a-bailout-you-cant-have-both/comment-page-1/#comment-117113 MsUnderestimated Wed, 08 Apr 2009 10:22:27 +0000 http://msunderestimated.com/?p=3327#comment-117113 Relax, Kevin... it's a cartoon. You can hardly tell a long story in one panel. ;-) Relax, Kevin… it's a cartoon. You can hardly tell a long story in one panel. ;-)

]]> By: Kevin http://www.msunderestimated.com/2009/04/liberty-or-a-bailout-you-cant-have-both/comment-page-1/#comment-117110 Kevin Wed, 08 Apr 2009 04:59:41 +0000 http://msunderestimated.com/?p=3327#comment-117110 "Give me the liberty to keep my slaves and continue conquering Indian territory."<br><br>Sorry, I know you're a heroine and a patriot, but I don't think government can be reduced to a simple dichotomy. That was tried during World War II, and all that happened was America did not know how to deal with Liberalism in the 1960s. Better to have declared all forms of Socialism godless.<br><br>Once you've let the freedom genie out of the bottle, how do you stop the declaration of a "right to privacy". “Give me the liberty to keep my slaves and continue conquering Indian territory.”

Sorry, I know you're a heroine and a patriot, but I don't think government can be reduced to a simple dichotomy. That was tried during World War II, and all that happened was America did not know how to deal with Liberalism in the 1960s. Better to have declared all forms of Socialism godless.

Once you've let the freedom genie out of the bottle, how do you stop the declaration of a “right to privacy”.

]]>