var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
Xerloq
August 7, 2009 4:31 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

So my check is in the mail, I take it?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
XTC46
August 8, 2009 1:06 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Xerloq: No, you didnt loan them anything. Sure, money you paid in taxes, which are paid for the benefit of the country in all forms, was used. This greatly benefited the country.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
teke367
August 7, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Just wait until they have to account for catastrophe losses, like the fires in California and any hurricanes that may happen this year. They had to drastically cut rates to keep most of their business and may be ill prepared for any event that could cause many payouts.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
zacox
August 7, 2009 6:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@teke367: Hurricanes, especially. Last time the Atlantic hurricane season started so late was 1992, when a not-so-menacing tropical wave moved off the coast of Africa on August 14. It was later named Andrew, and cost insurers $30 billion.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
East_Coast_Midwesterner
August 7, 2009 6:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@teke367: No Link needed. Just go ask an underwriter that works for Liberty Mutual, Farmers, Travelers, MetLife, Chubb, GenRe and so on.....

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
TheBursar
August 7, 2009 4:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I smell some BONUSES coming. This time the spin will be that we should be grateful that this government owned entity is willing to employ such great talent. They're making us money. They deserve it!!

Reply
7 replies
\"user-pic\"
Traveshamockery
August 7, 2009 5:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TheBursar: What's the problem with paying bonuses at a profitable company?

The US government made its share of the profit this quarter is making money too...why shouldn't a now-profitable company bonus their employees?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jamar0303
August 8, 2009 3:56 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Traveshamockery: How about we get the bailout money back first?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Biokinetica
August 8, 2009 2:18 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Traveshamockery: Because they're the same people who got the company into this mess in the first place.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TheBursar
August 7, 2009 5:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Traveshamockery: \"Now-profitable\" includes the government bailouts, the government overpaying for the equity it received in the company and the government lending them money at a ridiculous rate. All of these financial companies suddenly showing profits are all government backed profits. Without the government a lot of them would be gone an other would be knocked down a notch. Since none of this happened, and they know the government has their backs, its business as usual.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
From the cubicle of PGibbons
August 7, 2009 8:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TheBursar: Yeah, if they're so damn profitable let's have back all the billions we gave them. Funding the switchover to Single Payer healthcare can be accomplished that same day, along with free funding of higher education, too. WTF are our priorities, people?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
DarrenFreemont
August 7, 2009 5:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Traveshamockery: Because they used their entire bonus budget when they posted a $5.8 billion loss?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
40-40-5
August 7, 2009 5:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Traveshamockery: Because they shouldn't even exist? They all received their extra bonus of taxpayer money and survival. No more cash bonuses until they live outside of borrowed time!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
The Cheat
August 7, 2009 5:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TheBursar: You beat me to it... they deserve a big bonus for turning the company around in such a short time! Three Cheers for the executives at AIG!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Hoss
August 7, 2009 4:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"The federal government's share of the profit was $1.5 billion, since the government became the company's biggest shareholder...\"


That's an interesting spin. The government is a shareholder right? They (we) dont get anything until they pull away. Or do I have this wrong?

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
BWoodle
August 7, 2009 4:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Hoss: Its no different from anyone else owning stock in a company. When your shared increase in price you don't actually get the cash unless you sell your stake or a dividend is paid.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
zonk7ate9
August 7, 2009 5:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BWoodle: We have preferred stock, not common stock. We trade our voting rights for a ridiculous dividend payout, which is probably what the $1.5 billion was.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
humphrmi
August 7, 2009 5:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BWoodle: The $1.5b is probably a dividend.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jayphat
August 7, 2009 9:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@humphrmi: Does the government get taxed on that dividend like a regular citizen does?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
crashfrog
August 7, 2009 11:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jayphat: Who would tax them? No, the government doesn't \"pay tax\" on its capital gains. Public entities are tax-exempt.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
humphrmi
August 8, 2009 5:36 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@crashfrog: Probably a good thing too, what with the non-American-born socialist Obama in charge now...

I kid!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Skankingmike
August 7, 2009 4:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

is that due to the new way the can write off bad debt?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
G.O.B.: Come on!
August 7, 2009 5:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Did they factor in the gain in assets from the gilded turd they so deservedly received from Consumerist?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Traveshamockery
August 7, 2009 5:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@G.O.B.: Come on!: Interestingly, the Consumerist Golden Turd is valued at exactly $1.5 billion.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
ilovemom
August 7, 2009 5:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm surprised they have any customers at all. Who's been sending the most hated company in America a check every month?

Reply
1 replies
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
DadCooks
August 7, 2009 6:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is all false profits created by manipulation fo the books by the company's accountants.

Don't believe the rosy financial picture. It is all manipulation.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
From the cubicle of PGibbons
August 7, 2009 8:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wow - if the Feds would just drop a million or two on ME I'll also \"stop hemorrhaging money\" too.

Maybe it's just ignorance for not being blessed with a college education, but the logic with these assclowns, Goldman Sachs, and the rest of the criminals doesn't pass the sniff test.

Big Bizco has cried and cried for years that \"socialism\" was very bad and evil as they stole our children's healthcare and future away. But as soon as their free market ponzi scheme met its inevitable result they ran running to daddy government for trillions of taxpayer money that is now being further stolen from us and our children.

How many BillionS has this 1.5 billion \"profit\" cost us up to now? Totally not impressed.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Subliminal0182
August 7, 2009 10:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@undefined: AIG sets aside $249million for retention bonuses:
[www.bloomberg.com]

with $93m for Financial Products (the division that sold Credit Default Swaps that may have crippled the company), and $249m for the remaining quarters of this year.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Grrrrrrr, now with two buns made of bacon.
August 7, 2009 11:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If I received $1 billion from the Feds, I could make a profit by doing absolutely nothing at all. In that respect, this doesn't seem like much of an accomplishment.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
runswithscissors
August 8, 2009 12:42 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

AIG makes profit of 1.8 billion.

In an unrelated story, AIG executives set aside 1.8 billion dollars to pay themselves bonuses.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
mac-phisto
August 8, 2009 3:28 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

ok, i'm going to stray a little bit from the story here, but i'm flaming mad at this shit right now & it's b/c this same crap is going on elsewhere in the financial sector. investors & bondholders are being wiped out as part of the process of recovery, with no promise that their money will be returned to them if the company recovers & is profitable in the future.

yes, i understand uncle sam ponied up a lot of money & wants it back, but let's think a little farther ahead. let's assume we make all our money back - then what? AIG is now a highly profitable company without any liabilities to their previous investors. there's no handback here - that money is gone. accounting standards dictate that once the liability is erased, there can be no giveback at a later date.

now i know most of us probably think, \"who cares? that's not me. that's people that are already rich. they can afford it.\", but that's crap. many of these investors were us, indirectly thru mutual funds, retirement accounts & pension funds.

what we're creating here is not a good thing. if (& when) these companies recover, i think we'll find the money (& the power that lies behind it), even more consolidated than it was before. think about it - companies awash in profits with no bondholders or investors to pay. where do you think that money will end up?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
humphrmi
August 8, 2009 5:54 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mac-phisto: I agree that investors and bondholders are getting screwed here, but at the same time - what would have happened if they declared bankruptcy? Even Chapter 11 would have wiped out the investors and bondholders.

As far as where the post-apocalypse profits will end up, there are always investors. The government will sell their stake to new shareholders (401k's, retirements funds, mutual funds, etc.), who will in turn grow their investments and receive dividends.

No doubt, It's not good for the folks who were invested before the meltdown. But we accepted that risk, one way or the other, that the company could fail. One of those risks is that rather than failing outright, the company wipes out its balance sheet and brings in new investors to rebuild it, and those investments dilute the existing investors.

It sucks, but that's life.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
TessTalks
August 8, 2009 2:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So when do I get my dividend check?

Reply
");