AIG

Ian Swanson's online article "AIG staff: We deserve the money" (2009), she asserts that AIG's new management team last year proposed that its employees chose to give up their "retention" bonuses, or at least reduce them. A response from 370 or so employees set to scrape in about $450 million in bonuses until 2010. The AIG staff quoted "We suggested that early on, but there are people who feel this money was due to them", a source close to the company AIG informed The Hill. Swanson supports her claim about taxpayers providing $170 billion and counting to bail out AIG using proven facts. "Quants", The people who put together the computer-programmed algorithms,but between the complicated hedges and trades are what brought the company down, they refused to sacrifice their bonuses still. Her purpose is to resolve certain assumptions about the taxpayers and lawmakers not being so warm in the heart because most of the AIG staff who received bonuses already made enough money to the point where they don't have to work ever again in their life time. Ian Swanson is saying it's not fair to the people in the United States.

Clarification: How do the taxpayers and lawmakers plan to tackle this problem differently?

Clarification: How will AIG's staff affect the continuation of their company after coming out of a debt that taxpayers paid for to keep them in business?

Application: Do you think they feel guilty about what there doing or not?