(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

AIG gets another chunk

external_link and McCain were whining about this during the debate. Since the Treasury dept supposedly "seized" control of the company when they made the first $85,000,000,000 loan sounds like external_link and McCain have met the enemy and it is them.
 
Well agreed. It is Paulson and the administration doing the bailout of AIG. At least the first 80 billion was anyhow.
 
Yesterday when I posted about the party they already had...someone mentioned it was a different division of AIG. My response is so what? Its still one company! If the other divisions had THAT kinda surplus of money why didnt they bail themselves out!


Where is the government control?
Now Pulson is saying the bailout is going to only help some banks NOT all the banks...some are going to fail.
 
Quite different from what they told us before the bailout passed. Then it was for main street not Wall Street. After it passed they admitted the bailout would only help to stabilize the banks and not really affect main street. More would have to be done. That's what they say now. Next bailout do you think they'll try and sell us the same bill of goods?
 
Interesting how both parties dance around this issue knowing they are both at fault and neither know what to do because us common citizens are just finding out that we have been given the shaft big time and will be looking for blood soon.
 
I"m not trying to defend AIG"s exec"s, and I don"t approve of lavish parties...that being said, remember AIG is an agglomeration of insurance companies/divisions...
It"s my understanding that under that arrangement, a division losing money CAN"T get/take money from a division making money, that these provisions were established to keep a shell division from looting profitable divisions...however, this"s not my field, and I"m open to correction...
It"s also my understanding that it"s the division that jumped into CDS"s etc that"s in trouble.
 
In the "first" AIG bailout, one of the terms was that the government got a 79.9% equity stake in the company. Did the government get a larger stake for the additional money?

Accourding to the headlines today, it appears that the government is going to own some banks as well. Looks like while we were busy defending the country from the nnalert coming in and creating a socialist state--where the government owns the businesses--the current administration is doing it before the nnalert get the chance.

Kinda like the guy Dad always told about, during the rationing that went with WWII...This old boy had never owned more than one or two pairs of overalls in his life, but one day he goes to town and comes out of the department store with six or seven pair of overalls in his arms. When someone asked him why he bought so many pair of overalls at once, he said, "I wanted to get 'em before the hoarders did." And so today our government is taking over banks and insurance companies, so the socialists can't.
 
What part of my post isn't true, a/k/a spin?

Haven't the party in power been calling the nnalert socialists--or worse--for years, and haven't they been warning us about how the nnalert are out to socialize our society?

Is socialism NOT a system in which government controls businesses?

Dost the government NOT now own a 79.9% equity interest in AIG?

Is the government NOT mulling over the idea of taking ownership of some banks?

And is this NOT taking place under the control of an administration that is something other than nnalert?

I stand by my original post...because it's all true. If you have cancer in "only" 1/10th of 1% of your body, is it not true that you have cancer? Then is it not also true that if you have socialism going on in "only" the financial sector, that there is socialism going on in your country? Like cancer, unless it's destroyed early, socialism will only get worse.

I don't really care WHO let socialism in, the fact is that it's already in the door...and once we have that "precedent," I don't see any end in sight.
 
Only the part where you kinda say that the repugs had to socialize so the nnalert couldn't. maybe I read you wrong but the repugs have always wanted control. Just in different areas than the nnalert.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Meangreen
1954 70 gas tank breather tube
Replies
7
Views
468
Disowned
D
M
Brought another one home.
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
rustred
rustred
rockyridgefarm
Too bad hay does not stay this beautiful green
Replies
13
Views
532
rockyridgefarm
rockyridgefarm
B
8630 hydraulic issues
Replies
1
Views
183
wore out
wore out
M
Best 4wd 45hp tractor from 1980s era
Replies
19
Views
2K
T in NE
T in NE
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top