How do you feel about the bailout now?

Masher88 · #1 10-07-2008, 04:38 PM

AIG executives take "well deserved" vacation on tax payers dollars after their company was bailed out.

http://consumerist.com/5060290/after...ifornia-resort

crimson_basser · #2 10-07-2008, 04:44 PM

thats a horse load of crap if you ask me.
not a new thing either, which is the sad part...

but thats what you get living in a greedy, capitalist society.

fenderhutz · #3 10-07-2008, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crimson_basser

thats a horse load of crap if you ask me.
not a new thing either, which is the sad part...

but thats what you get living in a greedy, capitalist society.

Nothing new, they just got the spotlight.

When you make 40+ million a year you have to spend it somewhere.

crimson_basser · #4 10-07-2008, 04:49 PM

maybe they could have used that money to try and keep their company afloat

now theyre off spending whatever money they have left while the governments bails them out?
(from my understanding that's whats happening)

i dont think so buddiesss

Masher88 · #5 10-07-2008, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenderhutz

Nothing new, they just got the spotlight.

When you make 40+ million a year you have to spend it somewhere.

It's one thing when it is your personal salary (however obscene it is) but the paper trail seems to lead to the vacation was a "company expense" when the company has NO MONEY...except what it borrowed
(was given?) from taxpayers

fenderhutz · #6 10-07-2008, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Masher88

It's one thing when it is your personal salary (however obscene it is) but the paper trail seems to lead to the vacation was a "company expense" when the company has NO MONEY...except what it borrowed
(was given?) from taxpayers

Corporate offsite training, companies do it ALL of the time and list it as such.

No that I am saying it's right, but it happens.

MJ5150 · #7 10-07-2008, 05:10 PM

Wow.

-Mike

HollowBassman · #8 10-07-2008, 05:25 PM

I was against the bailout before it passed. I'm against the bailout now that it has passed. I'll be against the bailout after the economy continues to sink, only to be rescued by means not yet known, and I'll be against the bailout ten years from now when this happens all over again.

Unrepresented · #9 10-07-2008, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HollowBassman

I was against the bailout before it passed. I'm against the bailout now that it has passed. I'll be against the bailout after the economy continues to sink, only to be rescued by means not yet known, and I'll be against the bailout ten years from now when this happens all over again.

These things usually turn around after a good war goes and gets the economy...

...what's that? Two? Two simultaneously? And we're blowing how much money on them? And we're still in trouble?

Crap. I have a feeling that number three is going to be a doozy.

jkritchey · #10 10-07-2008, 05:36 PM

This was from a very productive and profitable division of AIG that sold regular insurance products through a network of independent insurance agents. This was an annual 'meeting' thrown for the independent (Not AIG employees) agents.

Timing is horrible, they deserve the bad press. But it's normal business as stated above, and the beneficiaries were the independent agents, not just executives.

It was a seperate division of AIG that got into deep kim-chi with Credit Default Swaps that tanked the balance sheet (but not their profitable businesses).

Also, the Gov bought 80% of AIG, including their considerable assets, for pennies on the dollar. They weren't just given money. Unraveling their Credit default Swap business will be a chore, but that ownership stake will likely profit to taxpayers, IMHO.

Still an ugly affair.

standupright · #11 10-07-2008, 05:40 PM

i just threw up a little

GregC · #12 10-07-2008, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkritchey

This was from a very productive and profitable division of AIG that sold regular insurance products through a network of independent insurance agents. This was an annual 'meeting' thrown for the independent (Not AIG employees) agents.

Timing is horrible, they deserve the bad press. But it's normal business as stated above, and the beneficiaries were the independent agents, not just executives.

It was a seperate division of AIG that got into deep kim-chi with Credit Default Swaps that tanked the balance sheet (but not their profitable businesses).

Also, the Gov bought 80% of AIG, including their considerable assets, for pennies on the dollar. They weren't just given money. Unraveling their Credit default Swap business will be a chore, but that ownership stake will likely profit to taxpayers, IMHO.

Still an ugly affair.

+1. It was really stupid of them to go ahead with this thing right now, which was probably planned well in advance. They should be embarrassed as hell for doing it. But that $440,000 represents 0.05% of the company's current, very depressed market value.

SteveC · #13 10-07-2008, 07:15 PM

Just another reason we should have let everybody burn and rebuilt.

mike_v_s · #14 10-07-2008, 07:17 PM

With regard to the two previous posts, I make my opinion known based on an opinion formed before I read that article. The following statement pretty much sums it up:

Quote:

Originally Posted by HollowBassman

I was against the bailout before it passed. I'm against the bailout now that it has passed. I'll be against the bailout after the economy continues to sink, only to be rescued by means not yet known, and I'll be against the bailout ten years from now when this happens all over again.

They were grasping at straws. They ended up with the $800 billion dollar one. Morons. Absolute morons. Thanks.

I'm going to go grab a beer. I've been training my three and five year old to answer a series of predetermined questions with short concise responses designed to impress the other 3 and 5 years olds.

Power phrases like "I like toys and want everyone to have the best ones" and "you shouldn't have to eat green stuff if you don't want to" get everyone talking about how smart they are.

Mike

Pilgrim · #15 10-07-2008, 07:29 PM

I've thought all along that what we need to do is buy up the bad mortages, transfer ownership to the feds, and eventually sell the properties. If it takes 10+ years, who cares? We'll more than break even in the long run. If people are still in their homes but have ARM problems coming, we ought to force the banks to keep the loan rate at the lower initial rate, and use the bailout monies available to guarantee the banks would not be in the hole. They don't have to make money on those loans, but they shouldn't be in the hole.

If even part of the bailout addresses these problems, it will be a good thing and it will mitigate the overall cost. That 800 billion was just that idiot Paulsen throwing a dart at a board with numbers on it - it has no basis in reality. He just picked a number.

StyleOverShow · #16 10-07-2008, 07:35 PM

How do I feel about the bailout now: RAPED!

fenderhutz · #17 10-07-2008, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StyleOverShow

How do I feel about the bailout now: RAPED!

Little harsh wording. It hasn't affected you yet and it MAY never affect you if the plan ACTUALLY works.

msquared · #18 10-07-2008, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HollowBassman

I was against the bailout before it passed. I'm against the bailout now that it has passed. I'll be against the bailout after the economy continues to sink, only to be rescued by means not yet known, and I'll be against the bailout ten years from now when this happens all over again.

Yep.

And McCarthy would be having a field day right now.

mike_v_s · #19 10-07-2008, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilgrim

That 800 billion was just that idiot Paulsen throwing a dart at a board with numbers on it - it has no basis in reality. He just picked a number.

The problem is that once that figure got put on paper, it was as good as gone. Needed or not, it'll most likely get used. I'm just gonna mail my whole wallet in next tax season.

Mike

Scarlet Fire · #20 10-07-2008, 07:40 PM

I never supported it in the first place. Actually, I was out on my campus campaigning against it and telling people to contact their congressmen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crimson_basser

but thats what you get living in a greedy, capitalist society.

This is not capitalism. Not even close. This is corporatism. Privatize the profits, socialize the losses. There is nothing here than even remotely represents true free-market capitalism.