Skip Navigation
Megan McArdle

Megan McArdle - Megan McArdle is a senior editor for The Atlantic who writes about business and economics. She has worked at three start-ups, a consulting firm, an investment bank, a disaster recovery firm at Ground Zero, and The Economist. More

Megan was born and raised on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, and yes, she does enjoy her lattes, as well as the occasional extra-dry skim-milk cappuccino. Her checkered work history includes three start-ups, four years as a technology project manager for a boutique consulting firm, a summer as an associate at an investment bank, and a year spent as sort of an executive copy girl for one of the disaster-recovery firms at Ground Zero … all before the age of 30.

While working at Ground Zero, Megan started Live From the WTC, a blog focused on economics, business, and cooking. She may or may not have been the first major economics blogger, depending on whether we are allowed to throw outlying variables such as Brad Delong out of the set. From there it was but a few steps down the slippery slope to freelance journalism. She has worked in various capacities for The Economist, where she wrote about economics and oversaw the founding of Free Exchange, the magazine's economics blog. She has also maintained her own blog, Asymmetrical Information, which moved to The Atlantic, along with its owner, in August 2007.

Megan holds a bachelor's degree in English literature from the University of Pennsylvania and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago. After a lifetime as a New Yorker, she now resides in northwest Washington, D.C., where she is still trying to figure out what one does with an apartment larger than 400 square feet.

What do do about AIG?

By Megan McArdle
Mar 16 2009, 3:16 PM ET Comment

For all my sympathy with people whose stupid bets got us into this mess, I am not overeager to hand them more of my hard-earned money.  But the AIG retention bonuses raise a question the government is going to have to ask again and again before all this is over:  do we want to make a point, or do we want to make money?

This is a very common problem in business literature, and bankruptcy law.  One of the unnoticed provisions  of the 2005 bankruptcy reform made it much more difficult to use KERPs, or Key Employee Retention Plans.  The problem is that these funds, often large, were frequently used by management as a slush fund to keep themselves from suffering too much in bankruptcy.  The other problem is that without these funds, bankruptcy often doomed hurting companies, because the only employees willing to stay on a sinking ship were the ones who couldn't get a job anywhere else.

Which is it, at AIG?  The problem is, there's no way to tell from the outside.  The employees of AIG know which traders are good, and which ones are idiots who made a bad mess worse.  But they're not going to tell us--or rather, they'll tell us, and the idiot traders will point the finger at someone else.  From what I understand, you can't even just ask which traders lost money--some of the traders will be able to argue, with justice, that they lost money because they were helping the company cut its risk exposure rather than taking bets they might win.  Others made good trades that were Overtaken By Events. 

Why not just say "no bonuses for anyone at AIG"?  To hell with the bums!  Well, we now own the company.  If we hasten the flight of quality employees out of the company, that will cost us money.  The answer might be some kind of performance bond.  But as in other financial firms, traders often take as bonus what should be salary, which means that they need at least part of their bonuses to maintain their lifestyle.  If they're faced with bankruptcy, the traders who are talented will go elsewhere--the financial market is shrinking, but the top traders still have other opportunities.  AIG has a lot of positions to unwind.  Do we want to leave the job to the dregs of the organization?

I don't know the answer to this question.  Perhaps it is true, as my interlocutors accuse, that I am too stupid to understand the obvious.  On the other hand, perhaps excessive confidence in your diagnosis means that you just haven't asked the right questions.


Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Using the Internet as Matchmaker: The Drawbacks to Online Dating Internet as Matchmaker: The Drawbacks to Online Dating
The Weakening of Nations: How Tax Work-Arounds Undermine Our Society Those Cayman Islands Accounts Will Undermine Our Society
Sarah Palin Brings Out the Barbs at CPAC Sarah Palin Ends CPAC With Rousing Speech
What Do Republican Voters See in Rick Santorum? What Do Republican Voters See in Rick Santorum?
The Myth of Energy Independence: Why We Can't Drill Our Way to Oil Autonomy The Myth of Energy Independence

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Special Report
Submit Your Photos of America at Work AP Submit Your Photos of America at Work
Send us your images of friends, family, and neighbors on the job. We'll publish the best. Read more ›
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

The Civil War, Part 3: The Stereographs

Feb 10, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

Megan McArdle
from the Magazine

Why Companies Fail

GM’s stock price has sunk by a third since its IPO. Why is corporate turnaround so difficult…

The Graduates

Busted banking careers, crashed consultants, and shrunken incomes: the author attends her 10-year…

Romney’s Business

The Republican contender touts his business experience—but does it really matter?