Isn’t Mr. Greenberg over 90 years old? He can’t take it with him… should the gov’t have let AIG crater and possibly collapse the world economy along with it?
Mr Greenberg’s age is of no concern; you’re foolish to think that amassing filthy lucre for his own account is his only concern.
He is fighting for the rights of all of the other shareholders of Starr & AIG; fighting to ensure that the government cannot seize companies for some vague policy aims of theirs, especially without paying just cmpensation; fighting for the survival of AIG’s employees; fighting to ensure that AIG’s customers and other stake-holders get what is due to them.
Just as in the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac cases, the government has overstepped it’s boundaries; it’s actions must be reversed, and penalties must be paid; the govenment people who hatched these schemes must be brought to account, fined and jailed if necessary … else our country will lose the faith of all investors in every company. When the government can illegally seize or asset-strip any company, the engines of capitalism will freeze up, and the country will die.
Whatever the amount was and whatever you feel about the bailout (I don’t think they should’ve been bailed out), can we at least agree that AIG paid back the bailout money and an additional $20+ million?
I just want to make sure we all agree that while AIG took the bailout money, at least they paid it back and then some.
The interest was $20 BILLION.
The government was bailing out numerous other banks and insurers that it felt were prevalent to the economy. The other institutions did NOT provide the majority of the company shares as collateral NOR did they pay it back in several cases.
The govt treated AIG differently. Seems that AIG did well for 40+ years under Greenberg until Hooker boy – Governor of NY stepped in and did not like the response he got from Greenberg and pushed him out of the company.
So, Spitzer actually caused the whole problem!!! LOL
I hear you loud and clear AZ Ins Man. Call it profit, interest, tax break – call it what you will.
AIG got $180B from the gov’t, paid that bailout money back in full, and gave the gov’t an additional $20B.
We good with that phrasing? I’m just tired of half-truths and want to make sure full context is provided.
Yes, AIG took $180B from the gov’t, but they actually gave back more than they took. That’s all I’m trying to convey.
November 7, 2016 at 2:28 pm
Steve Sze says:
Like or Dislike:
1
3
Mr Greenberg’s age is of no concern; you’rer foolish to think that amassing filthy lucre for his own account is his only concern.
He is fighting for the rights of all of the other shareholders of Starr & AIG; fighting to ensure that the government cannot seize companies for some vague policy aims of theirs, especially without paying just cmpensation; fighting for the survival of AIG’s employees; fighting to ensure that AIG’s customers and other stake-holders get what is due to them.
Just as in the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac cases, the government has overstepped it’s boundaries; it’s actions must be reversed, and penalties must be paid; the govenment people who hatched these schemes must be brought to account, fined and jailed if necessary … else our country will lose the faith of all investors in every company. When the government can illegally seize or asset-strip any company, the engines of capitalism will freeze up, and the country will die.
Let’s not try to paint Greenberg as some kind of saint looking out for shareholders. He presided over many of the problems AIG has had for much of the last 20 years. Anyone remember the bid rigging scandal with Marsh years ago? They have been a nasty company for a long time and they deserved what they got.
Isn’t Mr. Greenberg over 90 years old? He can’t take it with him… should the gov’t have let AIG crater and possibly collapse the world economy along with it?
Mr Greenberg’s age is of no concern; you’re foolish to think that amassing filthy lucre for his own account is his only concern.
He is fighting for the rights of all of the other shareholders of Starr & AIG; fighting to ensure that the government cannot seize companies for some vague policy aims of theirs, especially without paying just cmpensation; fighting for the survival of AIG’s employees; fighting to ensure that AIG’s customers and other stake-holders get what is due to them.
Just as in the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac cases, the government has overstepped it’s boundaries; it’s actions must be reversed, and penalties must be paid; the govenment people who hatched these schemes must be brought to account, fined and jailed if necessary … else our country will lose the faith of all investors in every company. When the government can illegally seize or asset-strip any company, the engines of capitalism will freeze up, and the country will die.
Hey IJ, I think the amount was $182 Billion, not $85 Billion on the bailout. Is this revisionist history?
Whatever the amount was and whatever you feel about the bailout (I don’t think they should’ve been bailed out), can we at least agree that AIG paid back the bailout money and an additional $20+ million?
I just want to make sure we all agree that while AIG took the bailout money, at least they paid it back and then some.
We can all agree on that, right??
The interest was $20 BILLION.
The government was bailing out numerous other banks and insurers that it felt were prevalent to the economy. The other institutions did NOT provide the majority of the company shares as collateral NOR did they pay it back in several cases.
The govt treated AIG differently. Seems that AIG did well for 40+ years under Greenberg until Hooker boy – Governor of NY stepped in and did not like the response he got from Greenberg and pushed him out of the company.
So, Spitzer actually caused the whole problem!!! LOL
I hear you loud and clear AZ Ins Man. Call it profit, interest, tax break – call it what you will.
AIG got $180B from the gov’t, paid that bailout money back in full, and gave the gov’t an additional $20B.
We good with that phrasing? I’m just tired of half-truths and want to make sure full context is provided.
Yes, AIG took $180B from the gov’t, but they actually gave back more than they took. That’s all I’m trying to convey.
Mr Greenberg’s age is of no concern; you’rer foolish to think that amassing filthy lucre for his own account is his only concern.
He is fighting for the rights of all of the other shareholders of Starr & AIG; fighting to ensure that the government cannot seize companies for some vague policy aims of theirs, especially without paying just cmpensation; fighting for the survival of AIG’s employees; fighting to ensure that AIG’s customers and other stake-holders get what is due to them.
Just as in the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac cases, the government has overstepped it’s boundaries; it’s actions must be reversed, and penalties must be paid; the govenment people who hatched these schemes must be brought to account, fined and jailed if necessary … else our country will lose the faith of all investors in every company. When the government can illegally seize or asset-strip any company, the engines of capitalism will freeze up, and the country will die.
Let’s not try to paint Greenberg as some kind of saint looking out for shareholders. He presided over many of the problems AIG has had for much of the last 20 years. Anyone remember the bid rigging scandal with Marsh years ago? They have been a nasty company for a long time and they deserved what they got.