[WoolyGoat]

90%

unconstitutional or no?

[BIRD33]

Dangerous precedent.You shouldnt pass laws that only effect a hand full of people.I get the urge to do it though.

[WoolyGoat]

agreed.

though it's a little disturbing that, after giving AIG $144 BILLION, they're kicking up such a fuss about a tiny percentage of that money. geithner and dodd are acting all outraged when they knew about the bonuses all along and created the loophole allowing them to be paid in the first place. all this pomp and circumstance isn't much more than a smokescreen.

I'm glad they seem to be giving back the bonuses, though. although putting the money "back in the hands of the american tax payer" is a little disingenuous.

[BIRD33]

To me once the word billion is tossed around I totally lose interest in the keeping track of how they spent it on the small stuff.

We lost track of millions in hard cash over in iraq to sooth certain tribes or whatever and no congressman gives a shit if it ended up in Iran.

This just looks bad but you have to spend money to keep your talent.I would have preferred they went down the list of people who were getting bonuses and really figured out if they were dead weight or not.

This whole thing is a joke I can barely pay attention to.

[Flumper Barflusterbutt]

I don't personally think its about the amount of money. I think its the point.

I totally disagree with a 90% tax or any tax to take care of it. I think pressuring them to return the bonuses is the right thing to do.

What scares me more than anything, is what comes next. All these wall street guys that made millions on these corrupt loans and derivatives and other sneaky financial schemes are still out there. What will they come up with next. They aren't just going to go away and start driving buses and working construction.