“The AIG bonuses are disgusting, but a 90% tax on anything is equally disgusting. I don’t like the precedent.”

- Jason Fried’s Twitter

A tax to make up a mistake by the government in order to return the money that was stolen back into the system is equally disgusting? You mean, when an equation is presented on what is more atrocious:

AIG Bonuses released while on government loan welfare = Government taxing bonuses after making a mistake of not renegotiating bonus releases.

To say this is to welcome the notion that the government is shameful when trying to fix its mistakes in favor of the American people. For Jason Fried to say this, especially on a service where he cannot elaborate this statement, is a testament that butterskin knowledge of a complex problem will lead to a poppycock reaction.

The precedent is subjective, and the evidence that this policy will persist isn’t provided by history since there is no correlative crisis in the history of mankind ( in terms of the complexity and conflicting ideologies within the entire world civilization compared to other meltdowns in other countries/ superpowers in other years ).

Jason Fried could be disgusted by the bill because it will affect employees in bailout companies who have little to do with the current crisis and are improving their companies’ prospects. But the government took control of a situation, and are sending a clear message to financial companies that they will not overlook excesses ( or would fight against them if they weren’t able to manage it in time ).

For anyone to get mad at the tax, must not be fans of Robin Hood. To get mad at this tax is would also be to get mad at your friend for taking back a bicycle that was stolen from him. If you are able to justify your ire at this situation, please write a book and publish it. I guarantee a New York Times bestseller on pomp alone.

Will this bill be a consistent action against bonuses by any company under TARP? For such a complex process to audit and oversee huge financial conglomerates, I highly doubt it. Could you even say if this becomes a rigid law for taxing bonuses, that it does set a precedent. Maybe.

If I could think that the tax is as equally disgusting ( repeat it in your head: equally disgusting ) as people in a company taking huge bonuses after receiving a bailout during a financial meltdown, I would also be guaranteed a vacation to the Lake of Fire after I die.

I am not downing Fried. His company makes amazing web products that make operations a lot more efficient. I do ask, for someone of his stature who can influence others, that he thinks before he writes. Or, in the instance he is adamant on his position, to begin writing to publishers immediately.

I do concur, with others, that this is a minor situation in comparison to un-winding the debt and putting this company back in place. The bonuses are a tenth of just one percent of the whole loan. I can say that the news is overrated, as well as the reactions and responses. Including my own. Which is why I will end the subject now.

Linnebank, a senior advisor to CEO at Reuters, had proposed that to keep up with the conditions of the changing media markets, to seek out better ways to engage the audience. The site the article was on, Corante.com, has a great deal of content for people who want to immerse themselves in thoughtful analysis about the media and news industry, its past, present, and future.

Some of the articles I browsed through had been written by Susan and Kevin Anderson, the latter a current editor and feature producer of BBC. All the articles are based on media, science, and its interactions with the web, social structures, and the journalism industry.

It is very varied, with a lot of authors and a lot of content. The only true qualm I have about this site ( becasuse its a big one ), is that the navigation is horrible.

Nonetheless, if you can get around it, you will find some great resources on the media industry, and this information could make you a better publisher, blogger, and/or website developer.