AIG

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Redux

The bill seems like is a good amendment to me to deal with the remaining TARP Funds under the Bush bailout that have yet to be allocated.

A second bailout may be a harder sell, but would certainly include more transparency and oversight than Bush signed into law.

Is this the Bush bailout that "couldn't wait" till Obama took office? If so, thats a pretty shitty thing to be blaming on him. If not, then you are not saying anything at all. There are already provisions in the last bailout, or so said Dodd and Frank. Then again, I guess you are right. We better do something they cannot be taken on their word any more than any other politician.

Originally Posted by Redux

So what do you suggest? Firing Geitner?

How many times are you going to ask that same question which I've repeatedly answered?
I have NEVER suggested that. Why do YOU keep bringing up firing Geithner? IS that what you want?

Punishing the responsible parties would send a serious message of accountability to everyone immediately. It will prevent said parties from doing it again, being proactive and preventing a problem instead of dealing with it after the fact. Doesn't that sound like a logical solution? It would also further Obama's message of change and, to me, earn him a lot more respect. Taking action is what needs to be done here.

As far as this selective bill to return the contractually obligated money... water after the damn. The amount of money being discussed here is negligible, relatively speaking. Again, its 1/1000th of what we gave to AIG. Selectively taxing these people is borderline unconstitution and not the most viable solution to me.

Originally Posted by classicman

How many times are you going to ask that same question which I've repeatedly answered?
I have NEVER suggested that. Why do YOU keep bringing up firing Geithner? IS that what you want?

The latest was directed more to Merc.

Punishing the responsible parties would send a serious message of accountability to everyone immediately. It will prevent said parties from doing it again, being proactive and preventing a problem instead of dealing with it after the fact. Doesn't that sound like a logical solution? It would also further Obama's message of change and, to me, earn him a lot more respect. Taking action is what needs to be done here.

And I said, the only action that could realistically be taken against Geitner, short of firing, is symbolic.

And the bill to prevent such abuses with the expenditure of the remaining TARP funds is more than symbolic and will, IMO, accomplish more than a "slap on the wrist"

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Redux

And I said, the only action that could realistically be taken against Geitner, short of firing, is symbolic.

And the bill to prevent such abuses with the expenditure of the remaining TARP funds is more than symbolic and will, IMO, accomplish more than a "slap on the wrist"

So you think Geithner should be fired? What about Dodd?
What should the penalty be for a public official who is blatantly caught lying? Especially about an issue like this. Since Dodd was AIG's largest donor recipient, shouldn't he have to forfeit that money at least? C'mon. This is such a load of crap. He is in charge of oversight, they donate a lot of money to him and then he is involved in modifying policy to their benefit.
How is that not blatantly corrupt?
That is then the only logical course if we are going to have any accountability.

Originally Posted by classicman

So you think Geithner should be fired? What should the penalty be for a public official who is blatantly caught lying? Especially about an issue like this. Since Dodd was AIG's largest donor recipient, shouldn't he have to forfeit that money at least? C'mon. This is such a load of crap. He is in charge of oversight, they donate a lot of money to him and then he is involved in modifying policy to their benefit. How is that not blatantly corrupt?
That is then the only logical course if we are going to have any accountability.

If it doesnt blow over soon, I think Geitner should probably resign, because his credibility will be in doubt.

As to Dodd receiving campaign contributions from AIG (every member of the committee received contributions)...by the standards of the Senate, there is no ethical issue here and the voters of CT will decide his fate in 2010.