Corporate Bonuses

My kids are running around with knives.

I can't believe they are doing that. I mean last time they ran around with knives, I gave them candy, and a very stern talking to about never doing it again.

Ok, its not a great analogy, but I do think there are a lot of parallels with the AIG debacle. Maybe a better analogy would be that last time they cut themselves badly, but a band-aid and enough anesthetics and opiates were applied so quickly that they barely noticed the pain. They were on a playground with all their friends, I didn't want to take them into a hospital, where actual treatment could take place, 'cause then the other kids would get scared.

On the other hand, that may be a whole lot more faith in the process of bankruptcy than it deserves. It does seem to me that the power to renegotiate legal agreements and a suspension of some obligations that were part of the problem sounded better than a blank check with no strings and then inflicting random consequences when angry.

executive bonuses

So at one point I had a lot of time and I was going to write about my thoughts on a lot of different subjects on this blog, then for various reasons I lost my motivation and extra time.  I'm toying with the idea of resurrecting it, but we'll see.  I don't really want to add this to the list of blogs that have less then a dozen posts and haven't been updated in a year, so if I'm not good at keeping up with it, I will eventually kill it.

Obama and Democrats in Congress have been killing companies that have taking public money and given large executive bonuses immediately afterwards (AIG, etc.).  Rightfully so, but I read an article on CNN today about a woman who had been laid off and was forced onto public assistance, but her luck was starting to turn around because she managed a big win at a slot machine, won a scratch off lottery ticket, and almost hit the powerball jackpot all in the same week (total winning approx. 52k).  Of course she was going to buy her daughter a car with the proceeds.  Now, if the point of a safety net is for people to buy necessities, why exactly are we condoning gambling for people who are down and out?  How about a law that says that if you are on welfare or get unemployment benefits, you are ineligible to win the lottery?  The states may not like it since it will probably hit their lottery revenue pretty hard, but if receiving public money gives the government a say in how corporations or households are run, why not?  What about going further and saying that if you're on welfare you can't spend money on cigarettes or liquor, I'm sure this type of spending is a large percentage of the budget in some households that are "down on their luck".