Let the Chinese go back to their rice paddies.
On Mar 15, 9:59 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > It's not AIG that's the problem, not really. The fall of Bear and Merrill has > proven that other firms are more than willing to pick up the fallen assets at > fire sale prices, which incidentally, is what our TARP program should have > done to begin with. > > The real risk comes from the fact that AIG is a majority owned Chinese > corporation, and that the Treasury notes which are funding the bailout are > being purchased predominantly by Chinese interests. If we discontinue pouring > tax dollars into the fiscal black hole which is AIG, Chinese interests may > discontinue purchasing treasury bills. It's economic blackmail. > > > > [ Attached Message ]From:gruff <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\"" > <[email protected]>Date:Sun, 15 Mar 2009 11:02:40 -0700 > (PDT)Local:Sun, Mar 15 2009 1:02 pmSubject:[Mind's Eye] Re: Economic Stimulus > > Here's a very interesting NYTimes editorial on AIG. It seems they've > been doing some heavy gambling with the complicity of Congress which > specifically enacted law to ensure they could get away with it. > > Following the A.I.G. > Moneyhttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/opinion/15sun1.html?th&emc=th > > But the big question still remains. If AIG is allowed to go belly up > -- i.e., no more bailout money -- just how much of the economy will > come crashing down with it, and could our fragile economic condition > survive such a crash? The transparency called for in the editorial > is certainly necessary if for no other reason than to answer that > specific question. > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
