AIG: Wondering out loud

In the news again with bonus payouts. There is something almost laughable about the argument by any of these firms that required intercession from the government because they ran their businesses so badly claiming that the bonuses are a requirement to keep their so-called talent.

In AIG's case, they said that the bonuses were legally binding. A reasonable person has to wonder how the clause surrounding the measurement and payment of bonuses for performance is crafted which would allow performance that led to insolvency and financial chaos in world markets to be compensated with a bonus.

Lastly, one has to wonder that if these wunderkinds routinely negotiate employment contracts that allow for payment of bonuses under such circumstances (not to mention leading the company to experience 'such circumstances') how can the company be considered competent to extricate itself out of this mess?

Here's the English Setter girl, Belle, I transported yesterday: