[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I would add though, that if the lawsuit goes on to prove the CEO correct, I wouldn’t be surprised. [/quote]
I heard this 2 days ago. So I will be watching this.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
AIG would still need a bailout, and so would have most of the banks that needed one anyway.
[/quote]
The old CEO of AIG is bringing a Class Action Lawsuit against the US Government. I saw this on either CNBC or Fox Business. He is claiming the US Government over ran AIG to pay off the other banks. He is claiming that AIG had the assets to cover the losses, but the US Government needed to move quickly to bail every other bank out, and in the process stole AIG from him. This will be a lawsuit to watch.[/quote]
I gotta say that is NOT what the narrative at the time said, and I followed NPR for a lot of the coverage of the meltdown. I was glued to it.
I do believe based on what I have been told, that Paulson (or the government at large) forced AIG to pay out 100 cents on the dollar. You never, ever see that when a company is going under, and in a typical bancruptcy I believe that would more likely than not be seen as a preferential payment. [/quote]
I used to work for BB&T when this was all going down. When TARP came out BB&T did not want the money or need the money. The CEO told all employees, “the US Government put all the CEOs of the banks that took the TARP in a room, and told them you will take the money. You do not have a choice.” The US wanted to protect the banks that needed the money, and made it look like they all needed it. The CEO of BB&T was pissed. That is why BB&T paid the money back immediately when they were allowed to. They hated the US Government in their business.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
AIG would still need a bailout, and so would have most of the banks that needed one anyway.
[/quote]
The old CEO of AIG is bringing a Class Action Lawsuit against the US Government. I saw this on either CNBC or Fox Business. He is claiming the US Government over ran AIG to pay off the other banks. He is claiming that AIG had the assets to cover the losses, but the US Government needed to move quickly to bail every other bank out, and in the process stole AIG from him. This will be a lawsuit to watch.[/quote]
I gotta say that is NOT what the narrative at the time said, and I followed NPR for a lot of the coverage of the meltdown. I was glued to it.
I do believe based on what I have been told, that Paulson (or the government at large) forced AIG to pay out 100 cents on the dollar. You never, ever see that when a company is going under, and in a typical bancruptcy I believe that would more likely than not be seen as a preferential payment. [/quote]
I used to work for BB&T when this was all going down. When TARP came out BB&T did not want the money or need the money. The CEO told all employees, “the US Government put all the CEOs of the banks that took the TARP in a room, and told them you will take the money. You do not have a choice.” The US wanted to protect the banks that needed the money, and made it look like they all needed it. The CEO of BB&T was pissed. That is why BB&T paid the money back immediately when they were allowed to. They hated the US Government in their business.[/quote]
This was what I was told as well.
I get what they were doing and why, but good lord is that shitty.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I used to work for BB&T when this was all going down. When TARP came out BB&T did not want the money or need the money. The CEO told all employees, “the US Government put all the CEOs of the banks that took the TARP in a room, and told them you will take the money. You do not have a choice.” The US wanted to protect the banks that needed the money, and made it look like they all needed it. The CEO of BB&T was pissed. That is why BB&T paid the money back immediately when they were allowed to. They hated the US Government in their business.[/quote]
This was what I was told as well.
I get what they were doing and why, but good lord is that shitty. [/quote]
I guess they proved they were too Big to Fail. I wish they would have let them all go under.