Do you think the Government should be bailing out AIG

[cali]

[Hubert Flottz]

1. Tax and spend GOPers

Bailing like hell and the ship of state is on the rocks and sinking faster every day...McCain will "Stay Bush's Course!" "To The Gates Of Hell!"

[Magleetis]

2. They made thier bed

Now let them lie in it.

[cali]

4. problem is that millions and millions of people who didn't make

that bed, would be forced to lie in it too. AIG's collapse would spell disaster for millions. no doubt about it.

[Virginia Dare]

16. From my understanding of what I read yesterday..

they said they would only give the bail out to try and prevent a complete and total implosion of the stock market, which of course would effect the whole world disastrously. This was a lesser of two evils strategy.

My guess is this is still just another temporary fix.

They're just trying to get us to November, then all bets are off.

[KillCapitalism]

3. No.

They made very poor business decisions and should have to live with the consequences just like any other business.

[cali]

5. don't know very much- make that anything- about this, do you?

[KillCapitalism]

21. More than you think.

Is adding on more national debt what we need?

[Xipe Totec]

6. No - let the invisible hand of the free market up-skirt these companies. n/t

[iamahaingttta]

7. I would like to see a third option...

Bailout the company and nationalize it. If it makes a profit in the future, the taxpayers get a dividend.

[adamuu]

8. we literally had no choice. Regulation opponents finally cornered us into this position.

so i vote, yes... since there was no alternative.

[tazkcmo]

9. Always an alternative

Even if you don't like it.

[Uncle Joe]

18. I hate to say it but I agree.

Had AIG failed that would have created a negative ripple effect for virtually every bank in America as it insures their loans to one another.

I do believe this should be the final nail in the coffin of the failed philosophy of Reaganomics.

If anything there should be more government regulation and oversight of the mega-corporations, they can't police them selves.

Maybe the government should shift precious resources from the bullshit, Orwellian, Alice in Wonderland, "War Against Drugs" AKA: war against the people and go after mega-corporate corruption with the same zeal.

When people like Abramov receive only four years and even that may not stand, the ultimate result is implicit societal approval of conflict of interest which gives birth to this nonsense.

[Marrah_G]

10. We really didn't have much choice

People fail to realize the vast implications this would have on the country.

[MrsBrady]

11. the middle class gets screwed either way, so what's it matter nt/

[HamdenRice]

12. Your question have way to many false premises

First of all, once again as with Fannie and Freddie, it doesn't appear to be a bail out. It's a nationalization.

[cali]

15. it's a loan with the gov't holding 80% of the company as collateral

how is that nationalization? AIG has over a trillion in assets. We'll see what happens.

[HamdenRice]

20. A bailout is designed to save equity positions

Once again, as with F&F, equity is wiped out. To me the holding of equity of all the holding companies as collateral is thinly disguised ownership. Ordinarily if you hold equity as collateral, you don't get to vote the shares and control the company. The government is saying it will control the company and dismiss management. That's a thinly disguised nationalization.

[WeDidIt]

13. End of the day, there's no choice.

If AIG went under the ripples across the sector would bring the entire house of cards down.

Sadly, though, there are other AIGs out there that won't be bailed out and the addition of all of those will sitll bring the house of cards down.

[natrat]

14. this way they slay the beast and bring us to feudalism right quick

[cosmik debris]

17. We're over a barrel

Just like in Blazing Saddles.

[shadowknows69]

19. Other: Just shoot me.