- Sep 30, 2003
- 26,907
- 173
- 106
We, the US citizens, now own 80% of AIG.
It is said that we have $170 Billion in it, although apparently that amount includes some assets the government purchased from them. I heard Liddy (AIG CEO) claim the more accurate amount of our investment is $40 billion when not including those assets.
Obama et al started this furor Saturday when, unprompted, they disclosed the $165 million in bonuses, and their outrage, to the MSM at a press breifing.
$165M is less that even one-half of 1% of our investment. It's pitifully small.
Why did Obama start this furor and keep stoking it? He's been pumping it for days now, calling it all sorts of bad things getting everyone all riled up.
Why?
We now know these bonuses were well disclosed long ago to pretty much everyone (bailout meetings where Geithner was present, Congressional testimony, SEC filings etc).
Now they want to all act like they didn't know and berate these employees publicaly, impose conviscatory & punative taxes on them for their own political cover since this sh!t-storm was started (seemingly irrationally) by the Obama administration this weekend.
For all this rage over $165 million will lose our $40 Billion invetsment? The bonuses are less than .005 of our $40B investment, is that wise?
What happens if these employees leave? Will new people (if they can find anybody decent to work) be able to figure out what the others and did and unravel this mess? (Seems doubtful to me.)
Some Think Not and That We're Jepeordizing Our Investment .
(By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN of the NYT, in part)
I think it's a safe bet that the ones who get other (good) jobs and leave are not the ones who were 'losers'. As with every 'early retirement program' I've seen over 25-30 years, the only ones who take it and leave are the ones you really want to stay. the 'loser' employees can't find another job.
The ones who made money for AIG will get jobs, and IMO are being pushed away by all this recent fuss. Does that make sense considering our $40B investment? I think it's crazy stupid (that and possibly doing this bailout in the first place as politicians are not competent enough in business to handle it properly).
Liddy is the guy the federal government put in as CEO, he himselves has said the bonuses are needed to keep these good people and keep our investment safe. Why the h3ll did Obama start this crap over such a minuscle percentage of our investment?
Then they threw Dodd, one of their strong supporters, under the bus. Today's reports say that bonus protection clause was pushed on them by Geithner/Treasury.
People, such as Congresspersons, Geithner, and Obam are saying these bonuses are all 'news' to them and thus outraged. But it's now reported that these bonuses have been well known and publicized for a long time. Liddy has been testifying to Congress about them since the first bailout etc.
This looks like a clusterfvck of extreme proportions unleashed on the Obama Admin by themselves; will this screw up cost us taxpayers $40 Bill (low side amount)?
Is it too late to do anything about it?
The facts seem to changing day-by-day, and they're getting worse and worse as far as this admin and our policians are concerned. Financial catastrophe was predicted if AIG falls, now after putting in billions is Washington causing this to happen by way of their scramble to demonize AIG and it's employees for political cover?
Fern
It is said that we have $170 Billion in it, although apparently that amount includes some assets the government purchased from them. I heard Liddy (AIG CEO) claim the more accurate amount of our investment is $40 billion when not including those assets.
Obama et al started this furor Saturday when, unprompted, they disclosed the $165 million in bonuses, and their outrage, to the MSM at a press breifing.
$165M is less that even one-half of 1% of our investment. It's pitifully small.
Why did Obama start this furor and keep stoking it? He's been pumping it for days now, calling it all sorts of bad things getting everyone all riled up.
Why?
We now know these bonuses were well disclosed long ago to pretty much everyone (bailout meetings where Geithner was present, Congressional testimony, SEC filings etc).
Now they want to all act like they didn't know and berate these employees publicaly, impose conviscatory & punative taxes on them for their own political cover since this sh!t-storm was started (seemingly irrationally) by the Obama administration this weekend.
For all this rage over $165 million will lose our $40 Billion invetsment? The bonuses are less than .005 of our $40B investment, is that wise?
What happens if these employees leave? Will new people (if they can find anybody decent to work) be able to figure out what the others and did and unravel this mess? (Seems doubtful to me.)
Some Think Not and That We're Jepeordizing Our Investment .
(By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN of the NYT, in part)
So here is a sobering thought: Maybe we have to swallow hard and pay up, partly for our own good. I can hear the howls already, so let me explain.
But what about the commitment to taxpayers? Here is the second, perhaps more sobering thought: A.I.G. built this bomb, and it may be the only outfit that really knows how to defuse it.
A.I.G. employees concocted complex derivatives that then wormed their way through the global financial system. If they leave ? the buzz on Wall Street is that some have, and more are ready to ? they might simply turn around and trade against A.I.G.?s book. Why not? They know how bad it is. They built it.
So as unpalatable as it seems, taxpayers need to keep some of these brainiacs in their seats, if only to prevent them from turning against the company. In the end, we may actually be better off if they can figure out how to unwind these tricky investments.
Now we can debate why A.I.G. felt it necessary to guarantee seven executives at least $3 million apiece when the economy was clearly on shaky ground. Perhaps we will find out these contracts were a bit of sleight of hand to enrich executives who knew this financial Titanic had hit the iceberg. But another possible explanation is that A.I.G. knew it needed to keep its people.
That is the explanation offered by Edward M. Liddy, who was installed as A.I.G.?s chief executive when the government effectively nationalized the company last fall. (He is being paid $1 a year.)
?We cannot attract and retain the best and brightest talent to lead and staff? the company ?if employees believe that their compensation is subject to continued and arbitrary adjustment by the U.S. Treasury,? he said.
There?s some truth to what Mr. Liddy is saying. Would you want to work at A.I.G.? Sure, maybe for $3 million. But not if you could go somewhere else for even more ? or even much less.
?The jobs are terrible,? said Robert M. Sedgwick, an executive compensation lawyer at Morrison Cohen who represents a number of employees of banks that have taken government money. ?You have to read about yourself in the paper every day. These people are leaving as soon as they can.?
Let them leave, you say. Where would they go, given the troubles in the financial industry? But the fact is, the real moneymakers in finance always have a place to go. You can bet that someone would scoop up the talent from A.I.G. and, quite possibly, put it to work ? against taxpayers? interests.
?The word on the street is that A.I.G. employees are being heavily recruited,? Ms. Meyer says.
I think it's a safe bet that the ones who get other (good) jobs and leave are not the ones who were 'losers'. As with every 'early retirement program' I've seen over 25-30 years, the only ones who take it and leave are the ones you really want to stay. the 'loser' employees can't find another job.
The ones who made money for AIG will get jobs, and IMO are being pushed away by all this recent fuss. Does that make sense considering our $40B investment? I think it's crazy stupid (that and possibly doing this bailout in the first place as politicians are not competent enough in business to handle it properly).
Liddy is the guy the federal government put in as CEO, he himselves has said the bonuses are needed to keep these good people and keep our investment safe. Why the h3ll did Obama start this crap over such a minuscle percentage of our investment?
Then they threw Dodd, one of their strong supporters, under the bus. Today's reports say that bonus protection clause was pushed on them by Geithner/Treasury.
People, such as Congresspersons, Geithner, and Obam are saying these bonuses are all 'news' to them and thus outraged. But it's now reported that these bonuses have been well known and publicized for a long time. Liddy has been testifying to Congress about them since the first bailout etc.
This looks like a clusterfvck of extreme proportions unleashed on the Obama Admin by themselves; will this screw up cost us taxpayers $40 Bill (low side amount)?
Is it too late to do anything about it?
The facts seem to changing day-by-day, and they're getting worse and worse as far as this admin and our policians are concerned. Financial catastrophe was predicted if AIG falls, now after putting in billions is Washington causing this to happen by way of their scramble to demonize AIG and it's employees for political cover?
Fern