No YOU miss the point! I know that this is how the corporate world runs but I;m telling you if it doesn’t change this country is headed for disaster to be competitive in the world market.
We might as well all wrok at McDonalds or some service sector petty job.
I guess there is just no convincing people like you.You must be one of the forutnate that screw the general public.
But the whole criminal prosecution dimension of this smells, almost as badly as the business conduct of the Gen Re people. The reporting obligation is AIG’s alone–that’s why AIG’s officers sign the filed statements–and law was broken when those statements were filed. While Gen Re might arguably have had civil-liability or reputational exposure for this deal, it’s way too far a stretch to convict them of criminal wrong-doing. Prosecutors relied on the limited insurance-accounting understanding of the jury and upon inflammatory–indeed, histrionic–characterizations (e.g., “sham transactions” for funds-held arrangements).
I beieve hard work and results should be rewarded but c’mon.
I think bonus’ are excessive.NOT JUST INSURANCE COMPANIES.
(BIG TIME!)
Many insurance companies are not making money from what has been posted in the forum unless they increase rates continually.They can’t afford to pay out in high risk areas but they can sure put money in the big sheese pockets.
The only reason I purchase insurance is because it’s mandated by law!
I just as well take my chances rather than pay premiums,the way it was years ago before government and insurance coerced.
Wow, You must be a carpenter! You really hit the nail on the head. I agree with you 100%, we have allowed our values to be too easily swayed by PC’ness. Regretfully we have individuals amongst our ranks that to often seek the easy path, they exhibit the human flaw in the old equation of: (ethics+experience+values=Character).
Former Reinsurer
That’s my point. Gen Re did a transaction and accounted for it correctly. AIG may have (by their own corporate admission) accounted for it incorrectly. But the individuals punished are not the folks from AIG who misrepresented the transaction.
I wonder how the outcome of the trial would have been different if the jury of their peers consisted only of insurance/finance executives who could understand what actually happened rather than what the prosecutors made it out to be.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Now we know why Michael was escorted out.
Is this just the TIP OF THE ICEBURG?
You wanna run that one by me, John? What NCCI case? Who’s Michael? What’s the connection to this case?
No YOU miss the point! I know that this is how the corporate world runs but I;m telling you if it doesn’t change this country is headed for disaster to be competitive in the world market.
We might as well all wrok at McDonalds or some service sector petty job.
I guess there is just no convincing people like you.You must be one of the forutnate that screw the general public.
Judgement day will come for each one of us.
That BS you’d be cruscified!
It sure is GT, there are a lot of political careers to be made.
tip of the Greenberg, I would have thought…………
But the whole criminal prosecution dimension of this smells, almost as badly as the business conduct of the Gen Re people. The reporting obligation is AIG’s alone–that’s why AIG’s officers sign the filed statements–and law was broken when those statements were filed. While Gen Re might arguably have had civil-liability or reputational exposure for this deal, it’s way too far a stretch to convict them of criminal wrong-doing. Prosecutors relied on the limited insurance-accounting understanding of the jury and upon inflammatory–indeed, histrionic–characterizations (e.g., “sham transactions” for funds-held arrangements).
I beieve hard work and results should be rewarded but c’mon.
I think bonus’ are excessive.NOT JUST INSURANCE COMPANIES.
(BIG TIME!)
Many insurance companies are not making money from what has been posted in the forum unless they increase rates continually.They can’t afford to pay out in high risk areas but they can sure put money in the big sheese pockets.
The only reason I purchase insurance is because it’s mandated by law!
I just as well take my chances rather than pay premiums,the way it was years ago before government and insurance coerced.
Wow, You must be a carpenter! You really hit the nail on the head. I agree with you 100%, we have allowed our values to be too easily swayed by PC’ness. Regretfully we have individuals amongst our ranks that to often seek the easy path, they exhibit the human flaw in the old equation of: (ethics+experience+values=Character).
Former Reinsurer
That’s my point. Gen Re did a transaction and accounted for it correctly. AIG may have (by their own corporate admission) accounted for it incorrectly. But the individuals punished are not the folks from AIG who misrepresented the transaction.
I wonder how the outcome of the trial would have been different if the jury of their peers consisted only of insurance/finance executives who could understand what actually happened rather than what the prosecutors made it out to be.