I have no legal training but it seems to me the current AIG mess reveals
an informative resolution of a clash of values. All of the discussion about
a contract to pay executives regardless of performance has never mentioned
the interests of stock holders. Individuals who invest in companies do so
for a return on their investment. When there are profits, they expect a return
on their investment. If a company fails to return a profit, or loses money, it
seems to me that it is theft to reward those with whom the investor entrusted
their money. Rewarding those who lost the money further depreciates the
value of my investment which is a violation of the contract my investment
implies. So, from my unlearned perspective, there are at least two contracts
in effect. At the present time, it appears only one of those contracts has value.
Who speaks for the stockholders? How would the courts value their interest
should stockholders sue for the return of money awarded to individuals who
essentially ripped them off?
Tags: americaneconomics, bail, capitalism, out
Share
You need to be a member of IRONY PLUS to add comments!
Join this Ning Network