Since the New York Times is and has been in the tank for the current administration and insurance companies are the latest target for supporting the national health care, single payor initiatives, it’s not surprising every method to demonize insurance companies is in vogue. The Times is not credible, nor are hardly any news organizations these days since practically all blindly support this socialistic administration.
I don’t know that the Times is so wrong here, and it is disturbing that the NAIC continues to defend a company that seems so inclined to screw up again and again. It actually may be, when the other shoe drops, that the NAIC is the one blindly supporting this administration.
Who would ever even believe anything in this newspaper anymore. I can get better information reading in line at the grocery store than picking up a copy of the NY Times.
To be so critical of the NYT or of any other commie-liberal newspaper is very politically incorrect and shows lack of concern on your part for the environment .
Whenever I see the NYT, Washington Post, LAT, & etc. in any golf club locker room, I always take the front page section (or on Sundays, the section with the editorials & opinion pages), wet the section, and use it for my wet rag to wipe of my club faces.
Look, we all need to be more conscientious about the environment. Everything has a use that serves mankind while also allowing the user to be green. So, let’s all try to use these liberal-leaning, commie-a*s newspapers to wipe our a*sses.
All of us who have been in the business for very long understand that AIG is like a big row of dominos. (Emphasis on BIG)All of the cousins have reinsured each other since inception.
Always has been – always will be. that is the way Maurice set it all up.I think it fits well enough for me to keep putting business with them, regardless of what is their name today.
I guess it all fits – Who really knows? Not 50 different state regulators who do not share data. Not the lady that wrote this article. Sometimes you just have to do what is right for the customer at the moment.
You have the same ax to grind as Ms. Walsh and the Times. Instead of offering your opinion, get the facts first, and then you can “prove” your point with evidence. I, for one, believe the NAIC. It bothers me to no end how this issue is so clouded with smoke, that no one thinks about WHO took all this money out of the global economy (investors hiding behind capitalism) and WHERE it went. I’d bet that the Fed, Treasury and our global partners could find it, if they only wanted to follow it. But I think that they are afraid of what they would find, and like you, take a quick swipe at the easiest, and financially most healthy, target they can find: insurance companies that are NOT allowed by law to underwrite business they can’t support. Don’t you know that these “investors” paid off the regulatory bodies, but no one is seriously going after the SEC or Moody’s or Fitch? Remember Arthur Anderson? But they are all in it together so no one will actually go down, lobby money goes far…
Ed…do your homework. The insurance entities of AIG are and always were sound only because the financial products divisions couldn’t get their hands on the cash. Why? State regulations. In this case the states did the job..no need for Fed oversight.
The Times knows this but won’t report it. Why? THEY’RE IN THE TANK FOR OBAMANOMICS NOW MATTER WHAT THE ISSUE.
Sorry..not credible.
Putting aside the juvenile knee-jerk comments criticizing the New York Times (and they need to be put aside), it is apparent that the reporter relied primarily on sources involved in a lawsuit against AIG. In short, the article was not properly sourced.
Good for the NAIC for stepping in and offering accurate information. This is a simple case of poor reporting that needed to be corrected. While the usual invective from the wing-nuts in the peanut gallery may be entertaining, so is Homer Simpson…and fortunately, we haven’t elected Homer president…(wait a minute…maybe we did a few years ago…)
Yes, I get all my news from Fox News. They say it is fair and balanced, so it must be.
Noq let me go write a racist note to “The Man” because I am a white male victim of reverse racism, the new topic for the Crazy Right.
Hey, Michelle Malkin–did I write this just the way you wanted me to? Would Rush like it and Glenn too? Oh, I am so confused and my head hurts trying to figure all this out…
This is merely another attempt to assisinate “AIG” by the Marxist elements of society — the same folks who conducted the mindless demonstrations –“everybody jump” — outside 70 Pine, and wore funny tee shirts outside of executive houses.
Now that there is news of the insurance units being spun off from the financial company that actaully engaged in the now notorious credit swaps, they are trying to use the same inane tactics to damage the insurance units.
The Times reporter is a pawn in the Marxist agenda
Hey Republicbot – I too enjoy FOX along with CNN and a minimum of one daily newspaper. I tried watching MSNBC but each and every episode of Olbermann or Maddow includes repeated warnings/complaints about Bush, Cheney, Palin, and Glenn Beck, none of whom are relevant today. But when I cross check FOX against CNN and daily news I find that indeed, FOX does provide balance. Have you noticed that FOX does a good job of bringing in opposition views to that of O’Reilly and Hannity?
Stay objective, Republicbot, and keep up the good work. We are not giving up on our republic just yet?
Worrier, I am afraid that your concern is rational. I am also concerned that AIG’s insurance business will suffer from adverse selection. My experience is that AIG has to be the clear price winner to write or retain new business. All things being equal, insureds seem to prefer Chubb or other carriers.
I have been in the business for just under 50 years. So I have seen a lot of weird stuff, good and bad. But I learned probably thru trial and error long ago to just follow the money, and when I do that, the red faces that appear to me are on AIG, The Fed and the NAIC in that order.
well, let’s put it this way, if you believe everything you read, then you must believe everything on the www. does that mean Gore founded the WWW or his expertise is the global climate? we can always write an article based on a few facts and then make our own conclusions. like many articles written in IJ, where the whole story has not been written. how many times do we react w/o complete information?
so back to AIG, will this story ever end? we know re-insurance is there, but how much have you actually kept inhouse? how much inhouse can keep it afloat? will there be enough? how much of our money (taxpayer)will be used to support a disaster? when will i get a dividend?
But state regulatory filings offer a different picture. They show that A.I.G.’s individual insurance companies have been doing an unusual volume of business with each other for many years — investing in each other’s stocks; borrowing from each other’s investment portfolios; and guaranteeing each other’s insurance policies, even when they have lacked the means to make good. Insurance examiners working for the states have occasionally flagged these activities, to little effect.
I guess those are the same regulators who confirmed that such transactions does not prejudice the ability to pay claim. To have one or two observations should not lead to conclusion using “Easy Target” and make an issue from nothin.
IF, an insurance broker/agent or, another insurance company published, even utter such misleading facts as the NYT they would be subject to discplinary action of severe action…why not the NYT, They are a embarrassement to the U.S.
Since the New York Times is and has been in the tank for the current administration and insurance companies are the latest target for supporting the national health care, single payor initiatives, it’s not surprising every method to demonize insurance companies is in vogue. The Times is not credible, nor are hardly any news organizations these days since practically all blindly support this socialistic administration.
Really: does anyone place any credibility with that rag anymore??!! The New York Times?!
Get real…..
The Times never let the facts get in the way of a sensational story.
I don’t know that the Times is so wrong here, and it is disturbing that the NAIC continues to defend a company that seems so inclined to screw up again and again. It actually may be, when the other shoe drops, that the NAIC is the one blindly supporting this administration.
Who would ever even believe anything in this newspaper anymore. I can get better information reading in line at the grocery store than picking up a copy of the NY Times.
Bill,
To be so critical of the NYT or of any other commie-liberal newspaper is very politically incorrect and shows lack of concern on your part for the environment .
Whenever I see the NYT, Washington Post, LAT, & etc. in any golf club locker room, I always take the front page section (or on Sundays, the section with the editorials & opinion pages), wet the section, and use it for my wet rag to wipe of my club faces.
Look, we all need to be more conscientious about the environment. Everything has a use that serves mankind while also allowing the user to be green. So, let’s all try to use these liberal-leaning, commie-a*s newspapers to wipe our a*sses.
All of us who have been in the business for very long understand that AIG is like a big row of dominos. (Emphasis on BIG)All of the cousins have reinsured each other since inception.
Always has been – always will be. that is the way Maurice set it all up.I think it fits well enough for me to keep putting business with them, regardless of what is their name today.
I guess it all fits – Who really knows? Not 50 different state regulators who do not share data. Not the lady that wrote this article. Sometimes you just have to do what is right for the customer at the moment.
R.J.
You have the same ax to grind as Ms. Walsh and the Times. Instead of offering your opinion, get the facts first, and then you can “prove” your point with evidence. I, for one, believe the NAIC. It bothers me to no end how this issue is so clouded with smoke, that no one thinks about WHO took all this money out of the global economy (investors hiding behind capitalism) and WHERE it went. I’d bet that the Fed, Treasury and our global partners could find it, if they only wanted to follow it. But I think that they are afraid of what they would find, and like you, take a quick swipe at the easiest, and financially most healthy, target they can find: insurance companies that are NOT allowed by law to underwrite business they can’t support. Don’t you know that these “investors” paid off the regulatory bodies, but no one is seriously going after the SEC or Moody’s or Fitch? Remember Arthur Anderson? But they are all in it together so no one will actually go down, lobby money goes far…
Ed…do your homework. The insurance entities of AIG are and always were sound only because the financial products divisions couldn’t get their hands on the cash. Why? State regulations. In this case the states did the job..no need for Fed oversight.
The Times knows this but won’t report it. Why? THEY’RE IN THE TANK FOR OBAMANOMICS NOW MATTER WHAT THE ISSUE.
Sorry..not credible.
Putting aside the juvenile knee-jerk comments criticizing the New York Times (and they need to be put aside), it is apparent that the reporter relied primarily on sources involved in a lawsuit against AIG. In short, the article was not properly sourced.
Good for the NAIC for stepping in and offering accurate information. This is a simple case of poor reporting that needed to be corrected. While the usual invective from the wing-nuts in the peanut gallery may be entertaining, so is Homer Simpson…and fortunately, we haven’t elected Homer president…(wait a minute…maybe we did a few years ago…)
Is any one worried about how much money is going out the back door to counterparties due the the derivitive mess?
Who is watching? How much is going out? Is it being regulated? is it being negotiated? And who is getting the payout?
We may be upset when we find out. And it’s not just AIG who has counterparties.
Yes, I get all my news from Fox News. They say it is fair and balanced, so it must be.
Noq let me go write a racist note to “The Man” because I am a white male victim of reverse racism, the new topic for the Crazy Right.
Hey, Michelle Malkin–did I write this just the way you wanted me to? Would Rush like it and Glenn too? Oh, I am so confused and my head hurts trying to figure all this out…
Republicbot
This is merely another attempt to assisinate “AIG” by the Marxist elements of society — the same folks who conducted the mindless demonstrations –“everybody jump” — outside 70 Pine, and wore funny tee shirts outside of executive houses.
Now that there is news of the insurance units being spun off from the financial company that actaully engaged in the now notorious credit swaps, they are trying to use the same inane tactics to damage the insurance units.
The Times reporter is a pawn in the Marxist agenda
Hey Republicbot – I too enjoy FOX along with CNN and a minimum of one daily newspaper. I tried watching MSNBC but each and every episode of Olbermann or Maddow includes repeated warnings/complaints about Bush, Cheney, Palin, and Glenn Beck, none of whom are relevant today. But when I cross check FOX against CNN and daily news I find that indeed, FOX does provide balance. Have you noticed that FOX does a good job of bringing in opposition views to that of O’Reilly and Hannity?
Stay objective, Republicbot, and keep up the good work. We are not giving up on our republic just yet?
Worrier, I am afraid that your concern is rational. I am also concerned that AIG’s insurance business will suffer from adverse selection. My experience is that AIG has to be the clear price winner to write or retain new business. All things being equal, insureds seem to prefer Chubb or other carriers.
I have been in the business for just under 50 years. So I have seen a lot of weird stuff, good and bad. But I learned probably thru trial and error long ago to just follow the money, and when I do that, the red faces that appear to me are on AIG, The Fed and the NAIC in that order.
well, let’s put it this way, if you believe everything you read, then you must believe everything on the www. does that mean Gore founded the WWW or his expertise is the global climate? we can always write an article based on a few facts and then make our own conclusions. like many articles written in IJ, where the whole story has not been written. how many times do we react w/o complete information?
so back to AIG, will this story ever end? we know re-insurance is there, but how much have you actually kept inhouse? how much inhouse can keep it afloat? will there be enough? how much of our money (taxpayer)will be used to support a disaster? when will i get a dividend?
But state regulatory filings offer a different picture. They show that A.I.G.’s individual insurance companies have been doing an unusual volume of business with each other for many years — investing in each other’s stocks; borrowing from each other’s investment portfolios; and guaranteeing each other’s insurance policies, even when they have lacked the means to make good. Insurance examiners working for the states have occasionally flagged these activities, to little effect.
weird stuff seem like fraud to me.
I guess those are the same regulators who confirmed that such transactions does not prejudice the ability to pay claim. To have one or two observations should not lead to conclusion using “Easy Target” and make an issue from nothin.
IF, an insurance broker/agent or, another insurance company published, even utter such misleading facts as the NYT they would be subject to discplinary action of severe action…why not the NYT, They are a embarrassement to the U.S.
Great reliance must be placed on the NAIC’s assurance that there is no accumulation risk in AIG’s reinsurance cessions