Comments on: AIG Must Fail

By: Ulrich Wettstein

Ulrich Wettstein — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:56:20 +0000

I know, AIG is not exactly a laughing matter, but sometimes humor is the most
effective way to deal with a problem of such magnitude, that it defies human
understanding. I have written a spoof that requires some input from knowledgeable
people. I don’t know, if Hank Greenberg is the culprit, but you can change the characters.
This document is on Google and can be viewed, if you provide an e-mail address.
Please feel free to send me your own version plus suggestions what to do with it.

By: Economic News March 19, 2009 » Harry Tranâ€™s Daily 101 » Blog Archive

Economic News March 19, 2009 » Harry Tranâ€™s Daily 101 » Blog Archive — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:44:58 +0000

[...] News Why AIG Must Fail Some say banks choose to lose money Obama’s No Socialist. I Should Know. Administration says [...]

By: RobertWesley

RobertWesley — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 08:42:19 +0000

Better English ???
They make you look AS THOUGH you do not know … etc
is closer to the mark. Y f RW.

By: eh

eh — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:04:32 +0000

TsoyYeshchoZhivyot,
I don’t think that is a sentence fragment. It’s pretty similar to “They are dumb.”

By: Peter

Peter — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:51:15 +0000

Let AIG fail. They provide nothing of real value to the economy – just insurance. People live without insurance everyday. No health insurance, no life insurance, even without earthquake insurance on their homes (if you live in California). Life is riskier without insurance but is the world going to fall over and die because there is more risk out there?

Let the debt unwinding go forward so we can get to the bottom of this mess.

By: TsoyYeshchoZhivyot

TsoyYeshchoZhivyot — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:16:42 +0000

Chuck,

You put the following sentence fragment in your written piece. You should avoid sentence fragments. They make you look like you do not know how to write using correct English.

“Many of which are those who were directly responsible for the catastrophic failure and reckless risks that AIG put themselves in.”

By: Eric deCarbonnel

Eric deCarbonnel — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 07:41:54 +0000

Hi Chuck,

Great entry.

One comment: for the sake of completeness, could you label the Royal Bank of Scotland as a UK bank? Or even better, label it as the UK government since the the Royal Bank of Scotland was nationalized last year.

Thanks

By: Tran Harry

Tran Harry — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 07:27:22 +0000

@dc-student,
I think this is what the author was trying to say, AIG being a systemic risk was the “sky is falling” argument AIG used for government funding. In actuality, AIG could have chopped off their CDS arm of the business and kept their more profitable businesses in tact. There remaining businesses such as life insurance weren’t doing badly, but like the author points towards, many banks were set to lose out if the CDS arm died. AIG as a whole could either sell off the bad unit or write it off and continue operating their other business units.

By: dc-student

dc-student — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 04:46:43 +0000

I think the reason AIG is a systemic risk is because they insure a lot more than mortgage backed securities. If they became insolvent then the more legitimate parts of the company (life insurance, etc) would also go under, which could cause a systemic risk to the global economy.

By: MaineLobster

MaineLobster — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:07:05 +0000

I believe that we are not being told the whole story.

What if the US gov was investing in Bond-CDS Negative Basis trades that were marketed as “a risk-free way to lock-in 5-10% to maturity”. AIG the guarantor.

http://www.acredittrader.com/?p=24

I want to hear about all the details of the whole mess.