Feb
6
Instead of giving rewards to AIG and others at taxpayers expense, to the tune of 10s of thousands, ?
Filed Under Law & Ethics
who’s sane asked:
Since American taxpayers are going to pay for the bailout, wouldn’t it be better to just letAIG fail and give each person legal in the US that will “pay” instead the money directly? The reason to given for the bailout it is so consumers can get loans,use credit etc? Why not let them just have access instead? Would it be cheaper? Isn’t it really just to protect stock holders? What Sayeth you?
JAMES
Since American taxpayers are going to pay for the bailout, wouldn’t it be better to just letAIG fail and give each person legal in the US that will “pay” instead the money directly? The reason to given for the bailout it is so consumers can get loans,use credit etc? Why not let them just have access instead? Would it be cheaper? Isn’t it really just to protect stock holders? What Sayeth you?
JAMES
Comments
3 Responses to “Instead of giving rewards to AIG and others at taxpayers expense, to the tune of 10s of thousands, ?”
Leave a Reply
RUSS
No because that’s what they did during the stock market crash of 1929 …let major banks collapse and look how that turned out….if you don’t bail them out then it will send shockwaves through the system…and we will go from recession to depression.
BRYCE
Probably wouldn’t work, but I like the way you think.
Let the company fail. Send the bailout funds to the investors.
Here’s one for you.
DENVER
Actually AIG didn’t get that great a deal, the 85 billion was a loan at 11.9% — about 4 times the rate they’d be able to borrow at if they were still in good shape. I think it’s kind of a poetic justice to see someone besides the middle and lower classes get ***** on interest rates. I only wish they loaned it to them at credit card rates.