AIG now worths about $1 bil, and we put in $180 bil

[capeman]

I don’t see how you got that from my post. I said it is the government’s responsibility to cover depositors. That would be cash depositors of banks and not customers of companies like AIG unless I missed something and they became a bank holding company like GS.

If the government would have never bailed out AIG we would be much further through the imminent depression and deflationary credit collapse by now. The major pain has not been taken yet and when .gov can no longer prop up the system we will see much worse than we’ve seen so far in this declining economy.

[davelj]

[quote=capeman]I don’t see how you got that from my post. I said it is the government’s responsibility to cover depositors. That would be cash depositors of banks and not customers of companies like AIG unless I missed something and they became a bank holding company like GS.

If the government would have never bailed out AIG we would be much further through the imminent depression and deflationary credit collapse by now. The major pain has not been taken yet and when .gov can no longer prop up the system we will see much worse than we’ve seen so far in this declining economy.[/quote]

OK, I have no problem with this. But, just to be clear, you think it’s ok if virtually all of AIG’s claims are voided, or heavily discounted?

So, for example, some guy with $500K of life insurance through AIG dies. GS and the other banksters get nothing. But this guy’s family gets nothing as well. In other words, all AIG claimants are treated equally – and get nothing (or next to nothing) as the company’s insolvent and doesn’t have sufficient capital to pay out claims.

Just making sure I’m understanding you.

[davelj]

[quote=capeman]I don’t see how you got that from my post. I said it is the government’s responsibility to cover depositors. That would be cash depositors of banks and not customers of companies like AIG unless I missed something and they became a bank holding company like GS.

If the government would have never bailed out AIG we would be much further through the imminent depression and deflationary credit collapse by now. The major pain has not been taken yet and when .gov can no longer prop up the system we will see much worse than we’ve seen so far in this declining economy.[/quote]

OK, I have no problem with this. But, just to be clear, you think it’s ok if virtually all of AIG’s claims are voided, or heavily discounted?

So, for example, some guy with $500K of life insurance through AIG dies. GS and the other banksters get nothing. But this guy’s family gets nothing as well. In other words, all AIG claimants are treated equally – and get nothing (or next to nothing) as the company’s insolvent and doesn’t have sufficient capital to pay out claims.

Just making sure I’m understanding you.

[davelj]

[quote=capeman]I don’t see how you got that from my post. I said it is the government’s responsibility to cover depositors. That would be cash depositors of banks and not customers of companies like AIG unless I missed something and they became a bank holding company like GS.

If the government would have never bailed out AIG we would be much further through the imminent depression and deflationary credit collapse by now. The major pain has not been taken yet and when .gov can no longer prop up the system we will see much worse than we’ve seen so far in this declining economy.[/quote]

OK, I have no problem with this. But, just to be clear, you think it’s ok if virtually all of AIG’s claims are voided, or heavily discounted?

So, for example, some guy with $500K of life insurance through AIG dies. GS and the other banksters get nothing. But this guy’s family gets nothing as well. In other words, all AIG claimants are treated equally – and get nothing (or next to nothing) as the company’s insolvent and doesn’t have sufficient capital to pay out claims.

Just making sure I’m understanding you.

[davelj]

[quote=capeman]I don’t see how you got that from my post. I said it is the government’s responsibility to cover depositors. That would be cash depositors of banks and not customers of companies like AIG unless I missed something and they became a bank holding company like GS.

If the government would have never bailed out AIG we would be much further through the imminent depression and deflationary credit collapse by now. The major pain has not been taken yet and when .gov can no longer prop up the system we will see much worse than we’ve seen so far in this declining economy.[/quote]

OK, I have no problem with this. But, just to be clear, you think it’s ok if virtually all of AIG’s claims are voided, or heavily discounted?

So, for example, some guy with $500K of life insurance through AIG dies. GS and the other banksters get nothing. But this guy’s family gets nothing as well. In other words, all AIG claimants are treated equally – and get nothing (or next to nothing) as the company’s insolvent and doesn’t have sufficient capital to pay out claims.

Just making sure I’m understanding you.

[davelj]

[quote=capeman]I don’t see how you got that from my post. I said it is the government’s responsibility to cover depositors. That would be cash depositors of banks and not customers of companies like AIG unless I missed something and they became a bank holding company like GS.

If the government would have never bailed out AIG we would be much further through the imminent depression and deflationary credit collapse by now. The major pain has not been taken yet and when .gov can no longer prop up the system we will see much worse than we’ve seen so far in this declining economy.[/quote]

OK, I have no problem with this. But, just to be clear, you think it’s ok if virtually all of AIG’s claims are voided, or heavily discounted?

So, for example, some guy with $500K of life insurance through AIG dies. GS and the other banksters get nothing. But this guy’s family gets nothing as well. In other words, all AIG claimants are treated equally – and get nothing (or next to nothing) as the company’s insolvent and doesn’t have sufficient capital to pay out claims.

Just making sure I’m understanding you.

[capeman]

Exactly. It’s not the business of the government to be paying out private insurance except possibly in the case of natural disasters.

I just recently bought a sizable term life policy from a company that has been around for a long time and is very well capitalized. If they somehow go down then I need to find a new insurance company. There’s no reason outside of Soc. Security that my family should be getting paid out because I bought insurance from a defunct company.

[capeman]

Exactly. It’s not the business of the government to be paying out private insurance except possibly in the case of natural disasters.

I just recently bought a sizable term life policy from a company that has been around for a long time and is very well capitalized. If they somehow go down then I need to find a new insurance company. There’s no reason outside of Soc. Security that my family should be getting paid out because I bought insurance from a defunct company.

[capeman]

Exactly. It’s not the business of the government to be paying out private insurance except possibly in the case of natural disasters.

I just recently bought a sizable term life policy from a company that has been around for a long time and is very well capitalized. If they somehow go down then I need to find a new insurance company. There’s no reason outside of Soc. Security that my family should be getting paid out because I bought insurance from a defunct company.

[capeman]

Exactly. It’s not the business of the government to be paying out private insurance except possibly in the case of natural disasters.

I just recently bought a sizable term life policy from a company that has been around for a long time and is very well capitalized. If they somehow go down then I need to find a new insurance company. There’s no reason outside of Soc. Security that my family should be getting paid out because I bought insurance from a defunct company.

[capeman]

Exactly. It’s not the business of the government to be paying out private insurance except possibly in the case of natural disasters.

I just recently bought a sizable term life policy from a company that has been around for a long time and is very well capitalized. If they somehow go down then I need to find a new insurance company. There’s no reason outside of Soc. Security that my family should be getting paid out because I bought insurance from a defunct company.

[davelj]

[quote=capeman]Exactly. It’s not the business of the government to be paying out private insurance except possibly in the case of natural disasters.

I just recently bought a sizable term life policy from a company that has been around for a long time and is very well capitalized. If they somehow go down then I need to find a new insurance company. There’s no reason outside of Soc. Security that my family should be getting paid out because I bought insurance from a defunct company.[/quote]

OK, your position in consistent. I can’t disagree on a micro level. On a macro level, I would have preferred some level of AIG “bailout” where ALL claimants took (big) haircuts. Just not big enough to bring down the entire system. But what’s done is done.

You might feel differently if you were the beneficiary of an AIG policy and discovered you were getting zippo. It’s one thing to have your insurance company blow up when it doesn’t owe you anything. You just move to another insurer. It’s quite another to have it blow up with an outstanding claim. As I like to say, where you stand on an issue generally depends on where you sit.

[davelj]

[quote=capeman]Exactly. It’s not the business of the government to be paying out private insurance except possibly in the case of natural disasters.

I just recently bought a sizable term life policy from a company that has been around for a long time and is very well capitalized. If they somehow go down then I need to find a new insurance company. There’s no reason outside of Soc. Security that my family should be getting paid out because I bought insurance from a defunct company.[/quote]

OK, your position in consistent. I can’t disagree on a micro level. On a macro level, I would have preferred some level of AIG “bailout” where ALL claimants took (big) haircuts. Just not big enough to bring down the entire system. But what’s done is done.

You might feel differently if you were the beneficiary of an AIG policy and discovered you were getting zippo. It’s one thing to have your insurance company blow up when it doesn’t owe you anything. You just move to another insurer. It’s quite another to have it blow up with an outstanding claim. As I like to say, where you stand on an issue generally depends on where you sit.

[davelj]

[quote=capeman]Exactly. It’s not the business of the government to be paying out private insurance except possibly in the case of natural disasters.

I just recently bought a sizable term life policy from a company that has been around for a long time and is very well capitalized. If they somehow go down then I need to find a new insurance company. There’s no reason outside of Soc. Security that my family should be getting paid out because I bought insurance from a defunct company.[/quote]

OK, your position in consistent. I can’t disagree on a micro level. On a macro level, I would have preferred some level of AIG “bailout” where ALL claimants took (big) haircuts. Just not big enough to bring down the entire system. But what’s done is done.

You might feel differently if you were the beneficiary of an AIG policy and discovered you were getting zippo. It’s one thing to have your insurance company blow up when it doesn’t owe you anything. You just move to another insurer. It’s quite another to have it blow up with an outstanding claim. As I like to say, where you stand on an issue generally depends on where you sit.

[davelj]

[quote=capeman]Exactly. It’s not the business of the government to be paying out private insurance except possibly in the case of natural disasters.

I just recently bought a sizable term life policy from a company that has been around for a long time and is very well capitalized. If they somehow go down then I need to find a new insurance company. There’s no reason outside of Soc. Security that my family should be getting paid out because I bought insurance from a defunct company.[/quote]

OK, your position in consistent. I can’t disagree on a micro level. On a macro level, I would have preferred some level of AIG “bailout” where ALL claimants took (big) haircuts. Just not big enough to bring down the entire system. But what’s done is done.

You might feel differently if you were the beneficiary of an AIG policy and discovered you were getting zippo. It’s one thing to have your insurance company blow up when it doesn’t owe you anything. You just move to another insurer. It’s quite another to have it blow up with an outstanding claim. As I like to say, where you stand on an issue generally depends on where you sit.

[Author]

Posts