Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Absurd is the word



March 02, 2009 – Comments (12)

On a day when one company posts a $61B quarterly loss, the largest in American history, that company sees its shares rise double digit percentage points while the overall market, upon this news, falls 2-3%

If anyone still believes that government intervention in the economy distorts the market, please go to the back of the classroom. Is it any surprise that AIG is no longer sure that it can repay taxpayers in the required two year time frame? Is it any surprise that, even though their credit rating is now worse for having defaulted on the original government loan, they are getting more credit? What would happen if you tried to pull the same stunt?


There is an answer for all this madness. It is the complete separation of State and Economics. It is the original Liberal ideal. These policies, which consist of sound money, free trade with other nations, freedom from government taxation, and enforcement of voluntary contracts, produced the greatest advancement in civilized history. Since then, those policies have been steadily eroded.

In their place, the Socialists erected a society of wealth confiscation built on paper money. Why don't you support auditing The Federal Reserve? What are you afraid to find out? What do you have to lose now? You've lost over half of your savings. You've lost more to taxation, inflation, and lost opportunities due to economic management and war.

What do you have to lose?

If not now, when?

David in Qatar


12 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On March 02, 2009 at 11:50 AM, outoffocus (23.03) wrote:

I would love to be one of those auditors.

Report this comment
#2) On March 02, 2009 at 12:13 PM, whereaminow (< 20) wrote:


Wouldn't that be great? I'm reminded of the YouTube video where Rep. Paulson, D-Fla. grilled the Fed's wormy Vice Chairman over the $1.2T slush fund.

I'm still waiting, and have yet to hear, one sensible argument for allowing a group of private bankers (The Fed is a private organization) to have complete control of global monetary policy with zero oversight.

The Central Bankers stole the world's gold, and in its place created the Welfare State. The dimwitted American and European anti-Capitalists went along for the ride based on some vague goal of social justice and equality for the common good. The Republicans and Democrats were all too happy to play the game while the public remained coddled in their paper money paradise. The jig is up.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#3) On March 02, 2009 at 12:57 PM, rofgile (99.09) wrote:

What is happening with AIG is a travesty.  The US government should at this point completely take over AIG by force - then break up and sell off its assets.

AIG should die, this is terrible - AIG alone is halfway to the total bailout from the S&L crisis...


Report this comment
#4) On March 02, 2009 at 1:23 PM, whereaminow (< 20) wrote:


It certainly is a travesty, but the government doesn't need to use any force to break up AIG. If they would just get out of the fucking way AIG would file for bankruptcy, it's remaining assets would be liquidated, new insurance companies run by competent individuals would take their place, and America could start the road to recovery.

I know that. You know that. Everyone here knows that.

So why do you think the government does not want that to happen?

The answer could be that the government prefers to inflict force upon those with the weakest voice, i.e. you and I. Through force, the government taxes us and then gives the money to politically connected friends, friends who happen to run companies like AIG.

There is no regulation that can prevent this type of fraud, if government is the regulator. It's time to ditch the modern liberal/conservative notion that government works in the interest of the common man, which common man dependent upon which party is seemingly in control. The government works in its own interest - and that interest is to expand its power.

Bailing out AIG over and over again serves the purpose of government, not the people.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#5) On March 02, 2009 at 2:34 PM, outoffocus (23.03) wrote:

"It certainly is a travesty, but the government doesn't need to use any force to break up AIG. If they would just get out of the f..."

So how do you really feel? But I understand your anger.  I am quite angry myself. More angry that our incompetent masses are allowing this to happen all in hopes of that the gov will them out of the house they could never afford.  Common sense left this country a long time ago.  Now we're left with common insanity.

Report this comment
#6) On March 02, 2009 at 2:42 PM, carcassgrinder (34.76) wrote:


just curious....aside from taking up arms and threatening gov. offices, exactly what power do the masses have at this point? 

Report this comment
#7) On March 02, 2009 at 2:55 PM, outoffocus (23.03) wrote:

They don't have any power. I know I dont have any power. If people were willing to take responsibility for their dumb decisions and take their bitter medicine then we would have all the power needed to take these corrupt fools down.  We would have impeached our former president and we wouldnt be heading down the path we are now.  People are quick to blame the political leaders for these outrageous socialist plans, but understand that the majority of this country put these leaders in office based on said plans. Once they realize that, the would also realize that it would not have mattered which party we put in office.  The outcome would still be the same. 

My biggest fear is that by the time the masses get angry enough to do anything, the people responsible will be long gone and we will simply be attacking each other.  We probably will end up putting some tyrant in power and it will be Nazi Germany all over again.  I'll keep saying this until people start to get it: Those who dont know their history are doomed to repeat it.

Report this comment
#8) On March 02, 2009 at 3:04 PM, SteveTheInvestor (< 20) wrote:


Hate to tell you this but those responsible are mostly gone already, and they took their (our) money with them.  


by the time the masses get angry enough to do anything, the people responsible will be long gone and we will simply be attacking each other.



Report this comment
#9) On March 02, 2009 at 7:41 PM, RogerAGrimes (84.45) wrote:

What a bunch of cry babies! 

The people have all the power.  They always have. First, they can vote. If you don't like the current policies, then every 2-4 years you can express your strong opinion in the voting booth.  Every day you can express your opinion with dollar votes. And if things every really, really got bad, it would be a revolution. It already happened here, and not so long ago. 

But thank your lucky stars for the fantastic govt this country has because you enjoy one of the best standards of living, healthcare, and qualities of life in the world.  Nice fast Internet connection you have, or are you connecting via your 2G/3G iPhone, or using USB in your luxury car?

 Anyone posting on this board isn't as poor as 95% of the world.

The reason why our government...why the world's govt's are doing this "insane" bailing out is that the consequences of not doing anything are well is an utter collapse of the world's financial system.  What is going bad as it not a collapse. The market 50% down and 8% unemployment is not a real collapse. It's a gentle landing. Without the gov't intervention which you all so seem to hate, the market would be gone. Every cent you thought you had would evaporate.  You wouldn't be able to withdrawl you safe money protected by FDIC (because that's a sham, too) or from your brokeage firm.  It would be riots in the street, 30-50% unemployment for years.  Inflation in the tens of thousands of percent.  The long-time weak countries would pray on the newly weaker countries.

 Be careful what you ask for because you just may get it.

Now go back to your mocha mocha lattes and DVR, watching yet another HBO free movie.

Report this comment
#10) On March 02, 2009 at 10:42 PM, fritzz0ezz (< 20) wrote:

AIG mother company has the problem, not any of the other portions of AIG.  AIG Insurance could pay off the debt and have extra money; however, state regulations will not allow it.  What has been discussed is breaking AIG into 4 companies leaving the mother company to die with the debt.  The other three might pay off a small portion owed to USA.  US Government put up more cash to prevent it.

Report this comment
#11) On March 07, 2009 at 3:37 PM, SideShowMel0329 (32.10) wrote:

The free market is the cause of AIG's problems in the first place. Copmlete deregulation has allowed them to get a chokehold on society, to the point where they're so embedded that a failure of their own would leave millions insurance-less (and stuck with medical bills that AIG couldn't cover).

If we had the government slowing down (or stopping) this massive monopoly, we wouldn't have seen such a big crash.

Classical Liberalism is just appealing from the outside. People read the works of Mises and say "YAY! NO TAXES! NO GOVERNMENT! AWESOME!" but they never pay heed to the consequences it brings.

And then Ron Paul summons his paultard minions and well, I'm getting off-track.

Report this comment
#12) On March 11, 2009 at 1:35 PM, nzsvz9 (< 20) wrote:

The free market is not the problem.

Government regulation and intervention in the free market is the problem. If you think that insurance is not regulated, then go to and look at all the fat people there just tracking insruance regulation (from the inside) where written by the states (by lobbyists from the insruance companies).

The fall of many of these insurers (like AIG) is tied to credit default swaps, which has the appearance of insurance, but without the parties having any material interest in the underlying insured item (i.e. the loan basis for the CDS). The house of cards was built upon "mortality tables" for mortgages, but it's a false premise, as people die at separate probabalistic times, but when the housing bubble burst - it happened in a short time, cascading to the bundled loans into default and then the CDSs needing to be covered.

In a regulated system, this would not be allowed (it is a bet since the insurer has no material interest). Where were our regulators? Asleep.

In a free market system the company that makes these bets would fail.

Should we now place our faith and fortune in the hands of the same government to save what they could not regulate? Only the market can regulate. Since these insurance companies walk the halls of the legislators, and sit with them at lunch, they are "too big to fail" and so we get more intervention to prop up what is not tenable.

I only wish we had a free market -- we do not.

Known by my son's soccer team as nzsvz9

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners