On Monday, The Outrage ripped into the Commerce Department’s Advanced Technology Program, calling it Welfare for the Rich.

Some Outraged readers took exception, saying that any technology research is good technology research, we have to keep up with other countries that subsidize the private sector, and various other irrational rants and raves.

Here at The Outrage we are, of course, shocked when we encounter any disagreement with our outrageous selections. Since Monday, we’ve been plotting our revenge on those readers who so foolishly disagreed with us.

We came into our ammunition earlier than we thought.

One reason taxpayers shouldn’t have to subsidize private companies, among other compelling reasons, is the fact that the people running those companies often do things just as outrageous and foolish as politicians and bureaucrats. This is especially true when it comes to executive compensation.

Here at The Outrage, we’re all for getting obscenely rich, and we will no doubt accept Rupert Murdoch’s forthcoming billion dollar buy-out offer. But everything else being equal, we’d rather get paid for success than failure — a view which seems in stark contrast to corporate America’s current policy.

You have no doubt heard that Gilbert Amelio was fired after he led Apple Computer further away from recovery. His payment for 17 months of unsuccessful work? An estimated $13.5 million.

Now John R. Walter has quit after AT&T realized that he would never be fit to assume the top job at the giant telco. Walter’s reward for failure? Over $25 million for nine months of unsuccessful management training.

If the shareholders of AT&T, Apple, and other corporate behemoths get bamboozled into paying these sums, we guess that’s their business, but we’re sure at a loss to figure out why US taxpayers should have to subsidize companies which can afford to compensate failure so generously.

(Source: MSNBC.)

(Second source: Washington Post.)