And if we use Republican math, that makes this yet another Obama victory.

Socialist.

I love how the middle of the article features a lot of Barofsky proclaiming that the government is misleading us and that we're going to lose money on AIG -- even though he's wrong -- but then ends with this:

Toward the end of my phone call, Mr. Barofsky said it himself: "The government had no choice but to bail out A.I.G." Then he added that Treasury's sale of A.I.G. stock "is unambiguously good news for the country."

impaler: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Yes the government made a profit, but who knows what could have grown if we let AIG fail.

The 2nd great depression comes to mind. I have a hard time imagining how having the credit markets even more constricted would have benefited anyone.

Most people have already forgotten how bad it was.

gameshowhost: Yet we didn't trustbust, after the necessary liquidity injection. That's a failin'.

It's almost as if the laissez-fail notion of letting individuals own as much as possible in any one industry runs counter to an underlying tenet of efficient free markets.

This.

Yea! Let's talk about Bush, shall we? He has been strangely absent considering he was their most recent beloved leader of over 8 years.

More like suck it TeaTards?

Maybe we can use that money to fund some farking prosecutions.

So does this mean Republicans like government bailouts now? Since both the AIG and auto industry bailouts worked we can all agree they are a good thing right?

Mentat: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Still doesn't mean that I believe that it's a good thing for the US government to start picking winner and losers in the market place. Yes the government made a profit, but who knows what could have grown if we let AIG fail. Yes one in a hundred works, it would be statistically impossible for everyone of them to be a loser.

It wasn't about picking winners and losers. It was about diffusing a financial dirty bomb before it exploded.

Lol! The banks are in the exact same situation as they were 4 years ago.

If Spain defaults and leaves the Euro, we will be bailing out AIG again.

impaler: FishyFred: Most people have already forgotten how bad it was.

Indeed. Who wants to go back to 4 years ago?

List of business failures:
[growlersoftware.com image 808x1255]

How is that list defined? That blurb is not very clear. It has a ton of non-American companies on it, as well as companies that did not go bankrupt but were bought (e.g. Wachovia).

And we're basing that it "worked" on what?

The government's accounting, or that of a company that handled its business so poorly it collapsed?

/ let
// them
/// FAIL

gameshowhost: Yet we didn't trustbust, after the necessary liquidity injection. That's a failin'.

It's almost as if the laissez-fail notion of letting individuals own as much as possible in any one industry runs counter to an underlying tenet of efficient free markets.

Yep. Remember the term "Too Big To Fail?" All we have now are fewer players in the financial market, who are much, much bigger. Seems like we haven't learned anything from our most recent failings.

Wait, what is it the repubs like to say? "Bush hasn't been POTUS for X-years, time to stop blaming him!!!11!!"

/time to stop crediting then too
//right?

The My Little Pony Killer: And if we use Republican math, that makes this yet another Obama victory.

nononono, you don't get it.

Bailouts that worked were done by Bush. Bailouts that didn't work or can be made to look like they didn't work were done by Obama.

Fast forward to this week. The Treasury Department announced it planned to sell $18 billion of its A.I.G. stake, putting it on a path to actually turn a profit. It was a remarkable feat and one that nobody - including Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner - anticipated four years ago at the peak of the crisis during the $180 billion bailout of the company.

Got a ways to go

mcreadyblue: Mentat: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Still doesn't mean that I believe that it's a good thing for the US government to start picking winner and losers in the market place. Yes the government made a profit, but who knows what could have grown if we let AIG fail. Yes one in a hundred works, it would be statistically impossible for everyone of them to be a loser.

It wasn't about picking winners and losers. It was about diffusing a financial dirty bomb before it exploded.

Lol! The banks are in the exact same situation as they were 4 years ago.

If Spain defaults and leaves the Euro, we will be bailing out AIG again.

Of course they are. The Republicans blocked any attempt to make sure bailouts weren't necessary in the future.

I made some money on it. Thanks Bushie!

Who is still dumb enough to read the New York Times and believe it?

thomps: gittlebass: Fast forward to this week. The Treasury Department announced it planned to sell $18 billion of its A.I.G. stake, putting it on a path to actually turn a profit. It was a remarkable feat and one that nobody - including Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner - anticipated four years ago at the peak of the crisis during the $180 billion bailout of the company.

Got a ways to go

well yeah, you can't exactly float 90% of a company's stock onto the market at once and expect the price to be maintained. it's going to take a while.

AIG already agreed to repurchase $5B of it so the impact is mitigated to some degree

palladiate: The Stealth Hippopotamus: but who knows what could have grown if we let AIG fail

In the same way we'll never know what will grow in the irradiated wastelands after a full-scale nuclear war. Hey it might be awesome, but we'll probably never know.

You're denying Thundarr cosplayers their dream.

Socialism, if its good enough for wall street it good enough for me!

The Stealth Hippopotamus: It was a remarkable feat and one that nobody - including Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner - anticipated four years ago at the peak of the crisis during the $180 billion bailout of the company.

Well if Geither didn't like it you knew it was as good as gold.

Still doesn't mean that I believe that it's a good thing for the US government to start picking winner and losers in the market place. Yes the government made a profit, but who knows what could have grown if we let AIG fail. Yes one in a hundred works, it would be statistically impossible for everyone of them to be a loser.

For starters, unemployment, food kitchen lines, foreclosures, medicaid dependency, and poverty.

CSB:

My employer had the 401(k) with AIG/Valic at the time of the bailout and "AIG" was quickly removed from all correspondence. However, in order to change the IT systems to remove "AIG" and transfer everything to "Valic" one quarterly report would show all 401(k) accounts having a balance of 0, even though all the assets were still in place.

HR sent some emails out, and even a letter to everyone, but the epic panic of everyone seeing those balances at 0 was something to behold. I actually felt bad for HR for a little while, until they F'd up my benefits plan again...

Mentat: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Still doesn't mean that I believe that it's a good thing for the US government to start picking winner and losers in the market place. Yes the government made a profit, but who knows what could have grown if we let AIG fail. Yes one in a hundred works, it would be statistically impossible for everyone of them to be a loser.

It wasn't about picking winners and losers. It was about diffusing a financial dirty bomb before it exploded.

To save the bomb factories.

impaler: FishyFred: Most people have already forgotten how bad it was.

Indeed. Who wants to go back to 4 years ago?

List of business failures:
[growlersoftware.com image 808x1255]

I wonder how many of those are Bain victims. I can see at least one.......KB Toys.