Suppose you were CEO of a firm that lost US$50 million, but you were given a bonus of US$10 million.

Suppose you were CEO of a firm that lost US$50 million, but you were given a bonus of US$10 million. You were vilified in the media and brought before a Congressional committee that accused you of financial outrage. However, you pointed out that the most optimistic forecast for your firm had been that it would lose over US$6 billion. There was no significant change in markets, the economy, or anything else during the year other than the new strategy that you implemented—a strategy that reduced losses by US$5,950,000,000 to only US$50,000,000, and thus you felt that you were actually underpaid. But the politicians felt that it still looked bad and that if you had been socially responsible, you would have refused the bonus. How do you respond?