Ayn Rand, call your office. According to the AP, a "busload" (three times the size of a buttload but about one fifth of a boatload) of normal folk were noisily admiring the accomplishments of executives at AIG. Of course, their tone is a little different. More like "exploited workers express righteous outrage at bourgeois monsters". Some highlights from the article for you:
Well, Ms. Bravo-Blackport, I think that scarf your wearing could be used in a more appropriate way to sop up some water I just spilled. Why don't you go ahead and give it to me. No? What, it's yours? Okay, fine, I'll just extort it from you by force under the guise of government. This here gun ought to do the trick... don't worry, you have plenty of them. This one is going to a better use.
I'm sorry we have to specify. I'm also sorry the AP can't be bothered to find out a simple matter of fact for their story. It isn't AIG's theory or claim that they were contractually obligated, it is a matter of - say, what? - contract! I'm sure this reporter could have found out as a matter of hard fact whether the contract actually so obliged the company, or whether it was a discretionary payment.
Finally, the sagely Mary Huguley gives us this pearl:
True enough. But God blesses charity as a disposition of the heart. It is with those who give cheerfully and out of love that God is pleased! The anecdotal support is the woman that has little but gives all of it, compared to those who have much and give little, even if their little is more than the poor woman. The Lord left out (for good reason) the scenario where the Emperor extorts money from a wealthy landowner and gives it to some poor wretch under the guise of charity.
Mary is right, even while being chronically wrong in the sense of "Hey, Mary, are you right about anything?" But those of us blessed in life with industry, talent, intelligence, and, in some cases, financial inheritance, can help others. There are things we can and should do as private citizens, and you will see a number of conservative Christians doing that very thing. (Of course others do as well, but God's people are notoriously generous.)
What is unacceptable is expecting the state to seize by force the assets of others and dispense them to you, simply because you are threatened with a scenario of having less than you want! Marxist says what?
Here is the formula for what the Marxist says:
"We think/feel/believe that [insert property of someone else] should be [insert code phrase meaning 'expropriated by force'] and used for [insert project of choice]."