Yes that was sarcasm about officers steering a company, I laid it out there as such to highlight the fact that the letter writer was an officer of the company. Please note the sentence that immediately follows it.

I understand the point you make with regard to VPs not having a lot of say in a company, and that the VP title is a bit inflated. That addresses vice presidents, but not Executive VPs. I realize it is a subtle semantic, but one that makes all the difference at corporations, as I’m sure you are well aware. And given that of the bonuses handed out, the largest single payout was about 6 million. So… 700k (after taxes) isn’t exactly chump change for the bonuses. Additionally, seeing as how CEO Liddy mentioned that the 25 top paid individuals at AIG agreed to take a $1 salary for the year, it seems that dear DeSantis is near the top of the food chain. So I am even less likely to try and feel sorry for this guy, which is the point of his letter.

You say posters are only complaining because the writer made more money than they did. I disagree. I think the posters realize that there are things that the letter writer could have done to help out his company. I think the posters here are rejecting the claim that the letter writer is entitled to the bonus, simply because A.I.G. promised him that bonus. The claim that he is donating the total bonus to charity serves as fodder for notion that the letter writer, by virtue of their own lifestyle is disconnected from the realities that the rest of America has to deal with. In fact, I glean from reading the posts, that most posters seem to wonder why A.I.G. felt compelled to give out bonuses over wages.

It boils down to the bonus, and why was it paid. Why does the employee of a failed company that took government money get a bonus, while tons of Americans that aren’t fortunate enough to get a bailout do not get a bonus? That is the question that Americans want answered satisfactorily. Saying, “because that employee makes more money than the rest of you,” implies that America is only for the rich. I reject that notion.

His contract is inviolate, is that the gist? And you are telling people to not be upset with greed?

His salary, by his own admission was $1, with bonuses to be paid. By your contract logic he is "entitled" to $1 salary for the work done, the bonuses come after. Is that a fair contract? That all his work was worth $1? If he didn't think that was fair, he should not have opted to take that contract.

Now that the contract portion is covered, we can talk about "bonuses". Correct me if this is a wrong definition for bonuses, but bonuses are compensation that go above and beyond the salary. These are rewards for exemplary work, yeah? Not entitled to just because they did the job, right? If A.I.G. meant that +$700k to be a salary and not a bonus, they should have contracted as such.

And now greed... a big question here: "Is greed good?" You know, most religions say it isn't. Most moral codes say greed isn't good, either. Yet our capitalistic society says greed is good. And we throw our hands up in the air if someone mentions changing that capitalistic society. I refrain from calling it good or evil, I accept that humans are greedy. I accept that people will be greedy and act in greedy self-interest. I do not accept greedy humans that get whiny when their greed isn't satisfied. I also refuse to accept that a greedy person has rights over me, just because of their greed. Their greed does not entitle them to success, their hard work does.