AIG employee offers perspective on FED bailout
Posted on September 16th, 2008 by laur Tags: AIG, assets, bailout, bankruptcy, bridge loan, credit default swaps, denial, FED, Federal Reserve System, Financial Services, financial services arm, insolvent, insurance, insurance part, investment bank, investment banks, investments, Lehman Brothers, liquidity, money, profitable insurance, solvent, tax payerWithin minutes of the FED announcing the rescue of the crumbling insurer, I had the luck of being able to chat with an AIG employee about the Government’s repsonse and AIG’s current financial situation:
AIG employee looks like the Fed will be bailing us out. take THAT, taxpayers!
xyz ugh. this is really sickening.
AIG employee bwahahahaha!!
xyz you do realize that youre part of that “tax payer” category, right?
AIG employee yeah but the money this will bring me personally is probably more than Ipaid in taxes in the past year or so. finally the government does something right for a change. yay Fed!
xyz i disagree
AIG employee No, if AIG bit the dust then I just would’ve been canned with everyone else. Now we’ll be offered buyouts. That’s a lot of money for me.
xyz you should have been canned, just like lehman brothers. AIG was bankrupt and deserved to fail
AIG employee No, AIG is solvent and I did not deserve to be canned. There is a liquidity due to the Financial Services arm of the company. liquidity *issue*. Anyway, the insurance part of the company (where I work) is healthy and we have $1 trn in assets worldwide.
xyz an $85 billion rescue plan is solvent?
AIG employee You’re talking about something you don’t know anything about. it’s a bridge loan. AIG has more than enough assets to cover its credit default swaps, but not enough to to capitalize them. enough *time* to capitalize them
xyz right. so therefore they are not solvent
AIG employee management should have raised more capital earlier in the year by selling off some of our assets, but lacked the foresight
xyz right. therefore they deserve to fail.
AIG employee you are confused about this. when investment banks run out of liquidity, they are insolvent because investments are all they have. they don’t have any other assets, except maybe office equipment and the buildings they work in. with AIG it’s totally different. as for management failing…yes they deserve to be thrown out and they will, since the Fed is now taking over and replacing the board.
xyz its not different because they are insolvent. they dont have the liquidity they need to cover themselves. the FED is taking over, therefore its not just a bridge. this isnt a pissing contest. youre wrong. deal with it.
AIG employee why can’t you understand this? it is different b/c we are not an investment bank. there are massive, PROFITABLE sections of the company that have nothing to do with credit default swaps. the FED is essentially raiding us on cut-throat terms
xyz it doesnt matter what the business does. if you are insolvent, you are insolvent
AIG employee “you’re wrong deal with it.” that’s a great argument. I should use that all the time, because that automatically makes you win right? I’ve already explained to you three times why we’re not insolvent. I’m obviously wasting my time.xyz well, you are wrong. so you should deal with that. maybe pick up an economics book. insolvent: 1. Unable to meet debts or discharge liabilities; bankrupt. 2. Insufficient to meet all debts, as an estate or fund.
AIG employee Or maybe I’ll go back to work tomorrow at my company and continue the brisk, profitable insurance business that we’ve been running. and you can go back to your retail job and continue to explain to me from a position of total ignorance the financials of my own company.
xyz and have fun with your $2.60 stock price (down +80% in one month)
AIG employee the stock price has everything to do with wild speculation and short sales, and nothing to do with the actual health of the company.
xyz AIG GOT TAKEN OVER BY THE FED. AIG WAS INSOLVENT. THE FED MAY TAKE AN 80% STAKE. THATS NOT “HEALTHY”. ITS THE OPPOSITE
AIG employee I’m not going to explain to you for a fourth time why a liquidity issue for AIG is not the same thing as insolvency. I’m going to end this conversation because you’re not listening to me, and at this point you’re just trolling and trying to piss me off. and actually succeeding, which tells me it’s time to go
xyz if you cant pay your bills, you are insolvent
AIG employee so go ahead and get the last word in. AIG CAN PAY ITS BILLS WE HAVE $1 TRILLION DOLLARS IN ASSETS WORLDWIDE WHAT THE FUCK ohkay i’m done. you’re a Nazi
High-fives if you made it this far.
6 Responses to “AIG employee offers perspective on FED bailout”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.





September 17th, 2008 at 6:27 am
That didn’t take long.
September 17th, 2008 at 8:46 am
She’s not a Nazi, she’s a fascist communist.
September 17th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
LOL, do I know this AIG employee personally?
September 17th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
@beetlbumjl
its a good thing I dont judge people (much) by the company they keep.
October 9th, 2008 at 6:51 am
[...] problem is liquidity as opposed to solvency? Sounds familiar. Sorry gentlemen but not having the liquidity to pay for one’s debts is insolvency: A business [...]
October 24th, 2008 at 7:13 am
[...] Obviously, AIG is perfectly stable. [...]