Biting the hand that bailed you out?
L.A. Times
2013/01/08 17:26:41
|
|
|||||
|
1,692 votes
|
|
85% | |||
|
291 votes
|
|
15% | |||
At the same time American International Group Inc. has been running high-profile ads thanking America for the bailout that saved the company, the insurance giant reportedly is considering joining a shareholder suit against the U.S. government for the rescue.
The AIG board will meet Wednesday and could decide to join a $25-billion suit led by former chief executive Maurice "Hank" Greenberg, the New York Times reported.
The suit by Greenberg's Starr International Co. alleges that the 2008 bailout of AIG by the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve Bank of New York in which the government received an 80% ownership stake in the company violated the rights of shareholders. The ownership stake later climbed to 92%.

The AIG board will meet Wednesday and could decide to join a $25-billion suit led by former chief executive Maurice "Hank" Greenberg, the New York Times reported.
The suit by Greenberg's Starr International Co. alleges that the 2008 bailout of AIG by the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve Bank of New York in which the government received an 80% ownership stake in the company violated the rights of shareholders. The ownership stake later climbed to 92%.

Read More: http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-aig...
Top Opinion
-
The Elitist Libtard SodaJerk 2013/01/09 02:54:11Yes



















This is why they live in high towers so they dont have to see the poor and destitute
Unless there is a trial, we may never know what backroom decisions were made in violation of the Fifth Amendment and US bankruptcy law.
There is no Due Process or clever way of dealing with such arrogance. FORCE MAJEURE is the only way to deal with such rogue corporations!
lmao greed!
Remember what happened the GM stock an bond holders? The normal pecking order of who gets paid first got set aside and the UAW took priority.
AIG may be suing on the behalf of the shareholders who got screwed in a similar manner. I'm holding out judgement just yet. Uncle Government was doing things in an unorthodox manner 'due to extraordinary circumstances' they claimed, but if they broke the law, then it would mean not only did 'fat cat' investors get hurt, but remember such stocks are also held by pension funds and John and Mary Q Public IRAs, College 529 plans, etc.
It may be greed, but not quite sure I'm crying foul on AIG's part just yet.
AIG insured many of the conventional mortgages for instance. Not all of them were held by the big box lenders that were bailed out, either. Smaller, regional banks were also going to be gravely affected.
People who had their homeowner's insurance would have been out that money and without a carrier.
Car insurance, life insurance for folks who couldn't qualify at the same rate or even at all due to changing circumstances would have been negatively affected.
The dominoes that were set to fall if AIG got what they deserved would have been absolutely hellish. It sucked to have to bail them out. I wholeheartedly agree, but remember at the time we were all hearing we had no choice. I have to wonder how much of that is true in retrospect, but I still believe it would have likely been devastating on a phenomenal level.