Bail out of AIG unconsitutional

[Toro]

The bail out of AIG gives the Federal Government an 80% controlling Share of the company. This is a clear violation of the constitution, and it is bad economics. Throwing good money after bad is never a good idea.

Our government is not suppose to be able to spend tax payer dollars to benefit the share holders of a cooperation, and end up owning a Company.

yes I know it is not the first time, but that does not mean we should ignore it.

This is the action of a Democrat Congress. Ignore the law and the constitution, and spend more money we do not have, on a company that made poor decisions and was failing.

Economics 101 people, do not throw good money after bad.

This was a takeover of a company by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury. It has absolutely nothing to do with Congress.

It was probably necessary given the interconnectedness of the financial system and the credit derivatives swaps sold by AIG.

Frankly, I think the government got a hell of a deal. They're lending at LIBOR + 8.5% and get 80% of a company that was about to go under.

 

[dilloduck]

but how do they get so big that they are indespensible ? I certainly didn't do it, Ravi..DID YOU ???

I guess like this
On the Line for Others' Losses



100,000 employess--wow

 

[Zoomie1980]

The bail out of AIG gives the Federal Government an 80% controlling Share of the company. This is a clear violation of the constitution, and it is bad economics. Throwing good money after bad is never a good idea.

Our government is not suppose to be able to spend tax payer dollars to benefit the share holders of a cooperation, and end up owning a Company.

yes I know it is not the first time, but that does not mean we should ignore it.

This is the action of a Democrat Congress. Ignore the law and the constitution, and spend more money we do not have, on a company that made poor decisions and was failing.

Economics 101 people, do not throw good money after bad.

The ironic thing about this whole "crisis" is that the only people really getting hurt are the people that DESERVE to get hurt. The greedy Wall St. fools that bet their farm on sub prime mortgages and derivatives, and equally foolish morons who chose to attempt to live way beyond their means.

If you have a job (94% of us do) and you are making enough to pay your mortgage and credit cards (roughly 90% of us that have mortgages are) you are completely UNAFFECTED by ANY of this crap! In fact, if you have variable rate credit cards and mortgages you are enjoying the lowest rates of your lifetime right now.

In the light of all of this we have yet to even descend into an official recession. Much less a DEEP one, ala early 1982.

Now it could begin to cascade to the mainstream economy but it is still largely a crisis isolated to the banking system and is actually serving to clean that system up and giving it a scrubbing it has badly needed for a LONG time now. There is really no place in our economy for unlimited greed or unlimited envy. Since the .com bust and now this, it will be a long time before such excesses are going to be allowed to happen again.

 

[Zoomie1980]

This was a takeover of a company by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury. It has absolutely nothing to do with Congress.

It was probably necessary given the interconnectedness of the financial system and the credit derivatives swaps sold by AIG.

Frankly, I think the government got a hell of a deal. They're lending at LIBOR + 8.5% and get 80% of a company that was about to go under.

Feds are also going to own a LOT of real estate (foreclosed properties) that may not be worth a great deal today but still have value and will have a lot more value down the road. So what do the Feds do with hundreds of thousands of homes they will now own?

 

[dilloduck]

Feds are also going to own a LOT of real estate (foreclosed properties) that may not be worth a great deal today but still have value and will have a lot more value down the road. So what do the Feds do with hundreds of thousands of homes they will now own?

Have a garage sale ?

Seriously--I was sorta wondering the same thing.

 

[Zoomie1980]

What???

Do you know what moral hazard is in this context? Evidently not.
Do you understand the concept of cleansing the excesses and misallocation of capital ... of course in an economics context?

These are very important issues. Particularly in this discussion. This is an economics board, is it not?


Evidently I completely lost you in my previous post. This is not even remotely close to what I was referring.


I meant that you are naive with respect to the economic, monetary system, and financial market problems at hand. Not generally as a person.

What gave you the impression that I was at all in favor of a corporate bailout? They were part of the problem. But not the root cause. And we as citizens are responsible for the root cause because we let it happen. And the reason why we let it happen is because we are so dumbed down when it comes to simply understanding our money.


If you are referring to folks in the financial media and the press ... no, many of them are not naive. But some are ... these folks are not especially well versed in the deep issues surrounding the problems of our financial and monetary system. But as for these folks as well as the professional money managers and investors that you have seen around the clock recently, it is not that they are necessarily naive. It is that they have a vested interest in the bailout (Bill Gross has been a perfect example). All folks that work in the financial industry do. Think about the vested interest of those that you see on TV or hear on the radio when you hear them expressing their opinions. Also, there is, in fact, a reasonable opposition to the bailout in the media.

Brian

This is the one big point that the media and politicians simply will not elaborate on. the REAL fault of all of this lies with the AMERICAN PEOPLE. WE, not Bush, not Congress, not the Federal Reserve, not the Treasury, not Wall St.....but WE did it ALL TO OURSELVES.

We elected and re-elected the fools who appointed officials and policies that either over de-regulated, or encouraged or outright forced lenders to extend loans to people who could NEVER pay them back. And then WE borrowed the money to buy houses we couldn't afford or we bought the financial stocks or 401k Mutual funds that invested in these.....

WE did this TO OURSELVES.

For me, I'd have NO regulation, let the greed run its course and let the whole thing simply COLLAPSE. SO what? We are a free people, and if we want to crucify ourselves, we should be allowed to do just that!

 

[sealybobo]

The bail out of AIG gives the Federal Government an 80% controlling Share of the company. This is a clear violation of the constitution, and it is bad economics. Throwing good money after bad is never a good idea.

Our government is not suppose to be able to spend tax payer dollars to benefit the share holders of a cooperation, and end up owning a Company.

yes I know it is not the first time, but that does not mean we should ignore it.

This is the action of a Democrat Congress. Ignore the law and the constitution, and spend more money we do not have, on a company that made poor decisions and was failing.

Economics 101 people, do not throw good money after bad.

The Federal Reserve socialized our finances, not the democrats. You are such a right wing wacko. Look into who owns the federal reserves. The world bankers do. They are not liberals.

Anyways, this is disaster capitalism at its finest. They just consolidated power into fewer hands. This shows that even millionaires get hurt by republicans. Only billionares are benefitting from bushanomics.

You denied there was even a problem when the dems warned you, so don't pretend now to be right.

Republicans are liars. Charles even lied about being one. lol

 

[Charles_Main]

The Federal Reserve socialized our finances, not the democrats. You are such a right wing wacko. Look into who owns the federal reserves. The world bankers do. They are not liberals.

That has nothing to do with the bail out of AIG jack ass.

 

[gonegolfin]

The Federal Reserve socialized our finances, not the democrats. You are such a right wing wacko. Look into who owns the federal reserves. The world bankers do. They are not liberals.

If you read your monetary history and researched the folks that conceived of the Federal Reserve (elitist bankers, and some help from key politicians, from both Europe and America), you will find that many of them were in fact extreme socialists. Many were part of the Fabian society.

Brian

 

[Charles_Main]

If you read your monetary history and researched the folks that conceived of the Federal Reserve (elitist bankers, and some help from key politicians, from both Europe and America), you will find that many of them were in fact extreme socialists. Many were part of the Fabian society.

Brian

Don't Bother Brain Bobo does not read anything he does not want to hear!

 

[Ravi]

That has nothing to do with the bail out of AIG jack ass.

It has to do with your accusation that congress bailed out the AIG. It did not. Not even the president bailed them out. The Federal Reserve acted on its own.

You've turned into an idiot. Who the hell is doing your thinking for you these days?

 

[editec]

The argument that a federal bank is socialist is absolutely correct IF you are using the word sociaism correctly.

The argument that the American LEFT controls our Fed is, of course, completely absurd.

The rightest of the right (the Chicago school of economics) currently has its mitts on the rudder of that organization.

words have meanings. Until we agree what words mean, we will never be able to discuss these issues clearly.

I don't really care what meanings we decide to give these words, just so long as we're all on the same page regarding what they mean when we use them.

The Fed is damned hard to pin down because it is a both private and public entity.

But ultimately, as we saw this week, it acts without much input from the government.

Congress did not debate whether or not to confiscate AIG, did it?

 

[Care4all]

AIG is an insurance company right?

HOW ARE THEY involved in this housing bubble crash and the foreclosures?

How?????

 

[dilloduck]

AIG is an insurance company right?

HOW ARE THEY involved in this housing bubble crash and the foreclosures?

How?????

On the Line for Others' Losses

 

[Ravi]

AIG is an insurance company right?

HOW ARE THEY involved in this housing bubble crash and the foreclosures?

How?????

They insure the loans banks make to each other.

The housing market touches everything, Care. Everything.

 

[Ravi]

Care, read this, it pretty much explains how AIG ties in with the bank crisis.

AIG And The Trouble With 'Credit Default Swaps' : NPR

 

[Gunny]

this belongs in the conspiracy theory forum.

get used to that comment next year when you sick ken starr on president obama.

You're just flat-out stupid. Why must you continually prove it?

It is a fact the US government bought out approximately 80% of AIG. It is also a fact that the US government is not supposed to be engaged in buying and selling on the free market. There is nothing conspiratorial about it.

 

[Gunny]

The bail out of AIG gives the Federal Government an 80% controlling Share of the company. This is a clear violation of the constitution, and it is bad economics. Throwing good money after bad is never a good idea.

Our government is not suppose to be able to spend tax payer dollars to benefit the share holders of a cooperation, and end up owning a Company.

yes I know it is not the first time, but that does not mean we should ignore it.

This is the action of a Democrat Congress. Ignore the law and the constitution, and spend more money we do not have, on a company that made poor decisions and was failing.

Economics 101 people, do not throw good money after bad.

Oh it is not only the Dems fault, but then Dems are the ones in control of congress right now. They damn sure could have stopped it.

This so called bail out is a clear violation of our constitution. Do you at least agree with that?

The problem presented by your question is: is standing on the principle of law more important than the end justifying the means? It isn't like this is the first time our government has stepped in.

We're between a rock and a hard place. Conservatives are, that is. We're caught between the government becoming more and more involved in free enterprise; which, IMO is a slippery slope that leads to some bastardized version of socialism, and rampant, unchecked capitalism led by unscupulous people driven by individual, personal and/or corporate greed destroying our economy so they can get rich and get out.

This isn't the fault of Democrats nor Republicans. It's EVERYONE's fault. The unscrupulous greedy and the people who have for the past 30+ years been living n credit and/or at or beyond their means.

When all the prices jacked up 6 or so months ago, who DIDN'T see this coming? We lasted just about as long as extended lines of credit could be used up.

The govrnment needs to step in and get this shit under control, and not by bailing everyone out. This is a national crisis and I would hope that for once people could put their petty partisan politics aside and come up with a plan to straighten this shit out without bleeding the middle class closer to death than we already are.

This doesn't affect just Republicans, nor Democrats ... it's affecting us all.

 

[sealybobo]

If you read your monetary history and researched the folks that conceived of the Federal Reserve (elitist bankers, and some help from key politicians, from both Europe and America), you will find that many of them were in fact extreme socialists. Many were part of the Fabian society.

Brian

Show me that JP Morgan, Carnege and Rockafellor were socialists. They were the farthest thing from it.

The only thing they socialize are the losses.

I'm calling bullshit on your revisionist history Brian.

 

[Care4all]

They insure the loans banks make to each other.

The housing market touches everything, Care. Everything.

haven't read the link yet but if we are bailing AIG out who the banks have used to protect themselves from their own mistakes thru the insurance....then why do we have to still bail out the financial institutions who are protected by their AIG policy?

let me read the article, cuz this still doesn't make sense....