Meltdown 101: Why Did the AIG Bailout Get Bigger?

November 12, 2008

  • November 12, 2008 at 4:12 am
    Jennifer says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    They are going to go bankrupt. And all our tax money is going to go into a black hole. This company is too big to let go down? We’re just delaying it and wasting taxpayer money. This capital injection into the FIs is ridiculous too. Were injecting them with cash and still they aren’t lending. The treasury department is talking about Sweden’s bank crisis like a model. Bush appointees talking about a socialist country as a something to mimic. And now they are looking into making sure banks lend to individuals again. Hey maybe individuals should save their money. Maybe badly run companies should go out of business. Im a democrat for crisssake and I think this socialization of private enterprise is more scary than a strong economic downturn. Because were headed for one anyway and spending this money is not just prolonging it.

  • November 12, 2008 at 4:14 am
    Fed Up with AIG says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The AIG bailout is nothing more than redistribution of wealth with the poor being forced to pay the rich. Remember, some of the AIG stockholders are worth billions.

    Why do I say this? AIG made billions of dollars writing credit-default swaps. They immediately booked all premium as profit (no loss reserves) thus increasing the corporate profit. This increased both the stock price and the dividends for current policyholders. It is also amazingly stupid to assume there can never be any losses just because there haven’t been any.

    Now, after this inconceivable level of stupidity causes the organization to go bankrupt, we poor taxpayers are told that it’s our responsibility to make sure these amazingly rich people don’t lose any money because of the stupidity.

    AIG was run into bankruptcy by its amazingly stupid management team much like many other companies were in the past. It is not a good company that just needs a little help. ($150 billion is not just a little help)

    AIG should be allowed to die with its subsidiaries sold at fire sale prices. A higher price benefits only the stockholders, not the taxpayers. Please don’t tell me the taxpayers are the stockholders – we’re only one step away from Paulson and Bush giving up our 80% ownership – expect it in December.

    When you buy a stock, you take your chances. AIG has no guaranteed right to exist regardless of the stupid decisions made by its management team.

  • November 12, 2008 at 4:23 am
    Left around to the Right says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Can you spell, S-0-C-I-A-L-I-S-M ?

  • November 12, 2008 at 4:26 am
    the idiots says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    We idiots don’t understand the ramifications of a failure of AIG? It seems to me the idiots weren’t smart enough to understand all the CDO’s and the like a few years ago. How have those turned out? Maybe if you can understand it, you should stay away from it. Please, in laymans terms (we’re idiots you know), outline what a failure of AIG would mean. Also, outline how the continued “loans” are going to be successful in allowing the tax-payer to come out ahead. We would really like to be enlighted by someone as gifted as you.

  • November 12, 2008 at 4:32 am
    dum dum says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Sir, you have just enough ignorance to make yourself dangerous. CDS did cause the problem…however, had they avoided these instruments the stockholders would have wondered why we were not participating in this (at that time untapped market) very profitable area. Further, w/o fed or state reg you could leverage out to 40 to 1. Unfortunately 2 people in a bank holging comp AIG sank the ship. However, even today the subsidaries or insurance companies were and remain profitable. that means 120,00 people in 130 countries are paying for the immense greed of 2 idiots.had the majority of people at AIG known this they would have terminated their influence early on.You are to stupid to see that and think this thinking is corporately systemic.You also failed to understand the impact of the credit rating agerncies on the luquidity of AIG. You also fail to understand the mark to market accounting principle driving these issues. Continue to read the “paper” written for 6th graders! When you understand sector systemic risk chime in. You were probably against saving western europe as well.

  • November 12, 2008 at 4:37 am
    jim morrison says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Cranky. That was nice. Thanks.

  • November 12, 2008 at 4:42 am
    dum dum says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    keep reading

  • November 12, 2008 at 4:44 am
    Ralph says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    dum-dum, why all the hostility? Can’t you make a point without calling somebody stupid (especially in a post so rife with simple spelling mistakes)?

    Granted, I had to look up a few of the words in your post, but nobody here is STUPID.

  • November 12, 2008 at 4:52 am
    bart says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I don’t think the top management at AIG was stupid either. They obviously knew what they were doing and where it would lead. Mistakes? No. Highstakes mismanagement with stockholders money, yes!

  • November 12, 2008 at 4:57 am
    Fed Up with AIG says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Hi Dum Dum

    Of course the stockholders would have wondered why AIG wasn’t doing this. It is the job of management to explain Finance 101 to the stockholders and tell them that with that amazing level of profit comes an equally high level of risk. They were more than happy to take the outragious profit. Now they should be required to live with the consequences of the risk.

    AIG was amazingly stupid for thinking that a return of that extent comes with no risk.

    As for the worldwide employees, most of those working for solvent subsidiaries should soon be working for new employers (remember St. Paul and Kemper). There will be some disruption but not what you indicate.

    Again, AIG is not some special company that cannot be permitted to fail. I don’t care how many employees were involved. Management let it happen.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*