Money Beat

From Your Wallet to Wall Street: The Money News That Matters to You From the ABC News Business Team

« Previous | Main | Next »

AIG: The Mother of All Bailouts

March 02, 2009 11:05 AM

Stark ABC News’ Betsy Stark reports: Before this is over, AIG may earn the dubious distinction of being the mother of all bailouts.

The U.S. taxpayer was on the hook for $150 billion before today's $30 billion lifeline from the Troubled Assets Relief Program’s round four of government efforts to save AIG. What taxpayers have gotten in exchange is an 80 percent stake in a monstrous global insurance company now trading on the open market as a penny stock, i.e., worth well less than a dollar a share.

AIG has lots of good businesses that still make money but not nearly enough money to cover the cost of AIG's disastrous bets on "credit default swaps." In the simplest terms, AIG sold insurance policies on the trillions of dollars of mortgage-backed securities that made financial firms a fortune as housing prices went up. And for a time it made AIG a fortune, too.

Nm_aig_090302_mn But now that the tide has gone out, to borrow Warren Buffett's metaphor, we see that while AIG insured approximately $450 billion of these securities, incredibly, it failed to set aside any funds to cover potential losses. Why? Credit default swaps were not considered a traditional insurance product, so they were not regulated. So AIG was not required to set aside money for potential losses. And here's the kicker (as explained so well by Joe Nocera in his Feb. 28 column this weekend in the New York Times): The customers who bought these products all felt safe  because these securities carried the coveted AAA rating, conferred because AIG was, once upon a time, so well run that its default swaps deserved a AAA rating.

OK, but why does the federal government -- i.e., American taxpayers with plenty of problems of their own -- continue to bail out this company that behaved so irresponsibly? Isn't this is a classic example of the government throwing good money after bad?

Today the Treasury Department conceded this $30 billion bailout may not be the last. "This will take time and possibly further government support if markets do not stabilize and improve," Treasury warned in a press release. But it went on to explain its belief that AIG's long tentacles have the government in a choke hold: "Given the systemic risk AIG continues to pose and the fragility of markets today, the potential cost to the economy and the taxpayer of government inaction would be extremely high. AIG provides insurance protection to more than 100,000 entities, including small businesses, municipalities, 401(k) plans and Fortune 500 companies that together employ over 100 million Americans. AIG has over 30 million policyholders in the U.S. and is a major source of retirement insurance for, among others, teachers and nonprofit organizations. The company is also a significant counterparty to a number of major financial institutions."

In other words, the government believes it faces a terrible choice: Bail out AIG or risk bailing out all the businesses, cities, retirement funds and individual Americans AIG still insures.

March 2, 2009 | Permalink | User Comments (30)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

With all this money, why not print all Americans a cool million bucks. Then we will all be rich, rich I tell ya! What does Ron Paul have to say about this? He has been right on all fronts in my opinion, so what he has to say is of extreme interest to me.

Posted by: Huh | Mar 2, 2009 11:21:13 AM

"OK, but why does the federal government ... continue to bail out this company that behaved so irresponsibly?"

That's the right question to ask, but I'm disappointed that after so clearly outlining the situation you failed to clearly answer it. The answer is that we're not bailing out AIG - we're bailing out the 100,000 entities who would go under if AIG abruptly defaulted on their commitments. While it would be satisfying to give AIG the death penalty, we'd be creating many more problems that were even larger. I'm all for criminal prosecution of those who profiteered off this, but letting AIG go bankrupt would be enormously expensive. Nationalize it (wiping out all stockholders and firing the entire exec board in the process) first.

Posted by: jhw539 | Mar 2, 2009 11:21:56 AM

Huh:" What does Ron Paul have to say about this?"

And people accuse Obama of having a cult like following...

Posted by: jhw539 | Mar 2, 2009 11:22:55 AM

Once again, we see the extreme dangers presented to our economic well-being by unregulated business schemes. Yet, from before the "Great Depression" (and the cause of it) through today, we hear nothing but calls for deregulation from the G.O.P. Also, we now know beyond doubt that the G.O.P.'s only remedy for every problem our country faces (all of which were created by it) is "tax cuts". Thus, the G.O.P. has proved itself to be a threat to the very existence of our country on more than one occasion and in more than one area, when it possesses the power of the government. There is only one remedy to this problem and that is to destroy the G.O.P. as a viable political party. 2010 will present the chance to do this, when five Republican Senators are retiring. The replacement of just two of them with Democrats would effectively destroy the G.O.P. I say we go for it.

Posted by: caliguy55 | Mar 2, 2009 11:35:13 AM

jhw539 - Your not kidding. Apparently on this website, Ron Paul is a cult of one...me, but since he has been right on pretty much everything, I have to through some love his way. thanks for noticing!

Posted by: Huh | Mar 2, 2009 11:39:42 AM

Oops I meant throw.

Posted by: Huh | Mar 2, 2009 11:40:13 AM

The ABC report lists all the insurance policies and retirement accounts that are at risk if AIG fails. I thought those were all in state regulated insurance companies that were considered to be adequately capitalized when "we the people" made our first big investment.

If they were right when they told us that, then lets break AIG into its component parts. Those parts that can stand, should ... and if we need to lend them some cash to fund short term start-up as a stand-along, that is fine.

But ... those parts that cannot stand on their own ... should be allow to fall and owners and counterparties should be prepared to take the medicine. AND ... if AIG knowingly entered arrangements they KNEW they could not honor, then string 'em up. If they acted fraudulently, then claw backs are not enough ... 20 years at hard labor is a good start.

We need to stop throwing good money after bad.

Posted by: OneObservation | Mar 2, 2009 11:47:48 AM

The government is getting right at the source. They view AIG as having wide reaching effects if it fails so better to throw as much green at it to make sure that it stays afloat.

I don't spend too much time analyzing how the government appropriates its(my) money. This takes away from the time where I figure out how to earn and appropriate my own :)

Ryan

Posted by: Ryan | Mar 2, 2009 11:53:01 AM

OneObservation - good points.

Posted by: Huh | Mar 2, 2009 11:53:52 AM

Hope all you Obama voters who have, or had money in the stock market, are enjoying the "Obama Crash of 2009".

Posted by: Ron | Mar 2, 2009 12:01:57 PM

Ryan - Better hope your appropriated money holds its value in light of the massive increase in the adjusted monetary base.

Posted by: Huh | Mar 2, 2009 12:09:51 PM

Hey! its amazing and excellent.

Posted by: securitysystem | Mar 2, 2009 12:31:26 PM

I don’t get how letting the banks fail will hurt people that have their money in them. What’s the FDIC insurance for?

By pumping money into them all we’re doing is pumping up the derivatives bubble which is leaking big time. Which is borrowed money gambled on a sinking ship.

The Dow today is looking like a deadly ski slope and I can’t help but keep an eye on things like gold and silver. Which right now looking at the exactprice widget ( http://www.learcapital.com/exactprice ) shows gold, though up and down today, holding in the $940’s. Silver in the $13 range and ounce. Which blows me away because typically they are opposite the dollar but right now they’re all tracking pretty close together. That surprises me because I would think with all the money the government is dumping in banks like AIG I’m thinking hyper inflation coming. Put maybe because the rest of the world is doing so bad we are looking good by comparison only.

And that face scares me because what will be the result of economies failing around the world? It could get pretty dire.

Posted by: Hal | Mar 2, 2009 12:37:26 PM

"Hope all you Obama voters who have, or had money in the stock market, are enjoying the "Obama Crash of 2009."

...

I heard Obama invented cancer as well.

Posted by: reason | Mar 2, 2009 1:53:54 PM

If AIG is going bankrupt because they're paying off the banks for their bad loans how can the banks be going bankrupt too? If AIG doesn't have the money to pay its claims, wouldn't it be better to use the bailout money to pay the claims rather than keep pouring it into AIG?

Posted by: Bill | Mar 3, 2009 1:03:35 PM

Do you think the reason the government is continuing to bail out AIG is because Congress's own retirement is invested with them?

Posted by: Fran | Mar 3, 2009 3:46:14 PM

Fran - Ron Paul turned down the congressional pension. Thus he can tell us the truth and the proper path forward.

Posted by: Huh | Mar 4, 2009 4:53:13 PM

This is like any other insurance, legalized gambeling. They, the insurance companies, believe you will pay in more than they pay you. But I would like to know how many of the casios in Las Vegas are asking taxpayers to pay if there is is a run on the house? If, an insurance company must be bailed out just because it's effects would be so catastrophic to the public, that if it goes under the whole public is hurt, doesn't that send a red flag about the very nature of the business.

Posted by: Dan | Mar 5, 2009 8:46:30 AM

If AIG insures banks why are we "bailing" banks out? If AIG does not have the funds to bail the banks out why are we bailing AIG out?
There are over 250 insurance companies in the US. Why would these Insurance companies not be able to insure the companies that AIG has been insuring since we are handling the banks?
This looks like typical Government double dipping. What am I missing that warrants bailing both AIG and the banks out?

Posted by: Joe Scheible | Mar 5, 2009 12:49:43 PM

Today's testimony confirms what those of us cynics have thought all along: AIG is a money funnel to the investment banks and bankers. How ELSE could it lose $180 billion in a few months? Did they buy too many paperclips?

No, they are shifting our tax money to the usual Wall Street and Connecticut suspects.

Note that the Fed official refused to name who is getting our money. We aren't asking for State secrets here.
Anyone with an ounce of fairness and common sense knows this is 110% wrong.

I smell a really, really rotten deal here.


Posted by: The Fed is Corrupt | Mar 5, 2009 6:33:18 PM

We need to stop the waste, stop the bailouts that are going to make a few at the top of these companies very rich. We need to instead do a TRICKLE UP plan. Inject the money into the pockets of people making $100,00 (families $150,000) or less and let them decide which banks, stores, goods and services shall be rewarded for their efforts. Let the money TRICKLE UP - Bush's trickle down was a disaster and Obama is only continuing i

Posted by: Rick_VT | Mar 7, 2009 8:39:56 AM

Hope all you Obama voters who have, or had money in the stock market, are enjoying the "Obama Crash of 2009".
Posted by: Ron
*********************************
Sorry, took it out in 2008, when it actually
started.

Posted by: spacerook1 | Mar 7, 2009 8:06:47 PM

Do you think the reason the government is continuing to bail out AIG is because Congress's own retirement is invested with them?
Posted by: Fran
****************************************
Interesting thought. Does anyone know this as a fact?
The $hit flows down, but the smell rises.

Posted by: spacerook1 | Mar 7, 2009 8:12:57 PM

This financial dilemma is not the fault of President Obama, George W. Bush and his evil cohorts caused this mess. This bush idiot is such an idiot, for 8 years he was CLUELESS????????? GOD in heaven if any genes of a bush family ever runs for anything in power. Give the bush family power over the public commode.
Pres Obama inherited what 8 years has caused. He scares all the people making a 6 figure income, so be it, get scared it is about time.

Posted by: Jim | Mar 7, 2009 8:57:54 PM

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke it all his fault. Hang em.

Posted by: mercury57 | Mar 8, 2009 5:10:14 PM

Post a comment