Some perspective - AIG Financial Products Employee's Public Resignation Letter

I kinda agree. I think they are trying to compensate for being blindsided by these bonuses by being extra-outraged. In reality, the issue of bonuses (and other expenditures of bailout monies) should have been addressed when they entered this agreement with AIG. Now, they look like idiots for not doing proper due diligence so they need to loudly shift blame to AIG workers.

 

Quit thinking my profession makes anywhere remotely near that amount. The vast majority of CPAs are not rich. For that matter, most doctors don't make anywhere near that much.

I don't necessarily feel bad for the guy, but to insult him just because he is better off than you is unfair. This isn't about feeling sorry for him, but rather not vilifying everyone that received a bonus.

 

What problem does this solve?

 

That's true, but $850K is $850K.

By the way, good for Dodd:

http://www.newstimes.com/latestnews/ci_11941866

 

Yup... I'm pissed at our guberment for handing out money that they have no clue what is going to happen to.

This company was integral to one of the largest financial disasters in history and our guberment gives them HUGE bank with no strings attached? I think we should be pissed all right but not at these AIG guys.

 

Thank you for asking.

First, I picked the $5M and 250 times figures out of the air. Congress, since they are intent on regulating business to the hilt, could set the top figure and ratio at whatever they deem reasonable. I say this first because it affects everything else. Even earning $5M annually as a top before 100% taxation kicks in, one can live quite comfortably.

Second, inflation and deflation would be curbed because overpriced products would not move, which would in turn force the vendors to keep their prices in check. The price of tickets for the movies, theater, sporting events, etc. would stabilize because who wants to have their excess earnings taxed at 100%.

Third, unions would be unnecessary because the greed of CEOs and board members would be curbed by the fact that, if their salaries and benefits go up, so do the salaries and benefits of every employee. Lets say the CEO wants to make $10M per year (if that is the top level before 100% taxation), then the worst paid employee is still making $40K at 250 times earning rates (bottom to top).

Fourth, it closes the gap between rich and poor and greatly expands the earnings trough. For example, if an actor or attorney hits the $5M mark, they are likely to settle back into a vacation posture, which in turns leaves more opportunity for another actor or attorney. They can go for the gusto again the following year. Hence, the income distribution sector is satisfied while still allowing the maximum number of people to achieve a comfortable lifestyle.

Fifth, the flat tax coupled with a 100% tax rate for excess income would generate more money for governmental coffers, as would eliminating tax shelters or other means to protect income.

See, I'm learning to be a compromise socialist capitalist.

 

I include CPAs because my CPA just finished my taxes and my bottom still hurts.

However, don't be mad until you make over my suggested $5M limit. Up to that point you would pay less on a graduated flat tax that starts at $40K.

 

He was only making $1 this year anyway, because he gave up his salary. He'll easily make up that money at any job. Somebody that is making money for his division will be snapped up, right away.