AIG. Conspiracy Theories of the World Unite

Originally posted by mybigunit

Ill make it very simple to you. You are now paying your mortgage payments to the government. You are now paying your insurance payment to the government. Sounds almost like the Soviet Union of old doesnt it?

Thank you for the reply and thank you for confirming what I was afraid it meant. I have one more favor to ask: hold me.

reply to post by grimreaper797


Thank you for the explaination. It does settle some of my fears.

The gov doesn't own anything as the Fed is a private bank. It's more of the other way around and the Fed owns the gov. In fact the Federal Reserve is above the government.

reply to post by Alora


Isn't that 85 billion of our tax payers money....so we the people own 80% of the company. Shouldn't we get insurance for free then. Just a thought.

Reply to grimreaper797:

Thank you for the lengthy and clear explanation. Sorry I missed it the first time, but I do appreciate it.

Originally posted by slouden
reply to post by Alora

 

Isn't that 85 billion of our tax payers money....so we the people own 80% of the company. Shouldn't we get insurance for free then. Just a thought.

In a (more) perfect world, friend. And only then....

Originally posted by mybigunit

Ill make it very simple to you. You are now paying your mortgage payments to the government.

I spoke about this in a thread over a year ago:

Bush's plan for the Federal Government to take over ownership of all the houses in America?

People were skeptical at the time. I wonder how they feel now.

reply to post by dbates


One of the best if not THE BEST threads I have read on here. Amazing info, and thanks.

I see a few trying to defend the "claim". Saying that the Government doesn't own AIG. Well...until they pay the Government back, who's owned by a private company...they are owned by the Government.

You can sugar coat as much as you'd like. From my knowledge, a few big cats own the FED, these same cats own several Central Banks in other countries.

It is suspected that these people cause the huge Crash in America some years ago, for their own profit. History seems to be repeating itself. If this is the case, I think they are fully capable of seeing to it that AIG never repays them. Fact is...from what I know, the FED never loans without interest...it's a bank...there's always interest. So, does this 85 bill include interest, or is the interest even talked about at all?

Well, as of right now...the FED owns AIG. When you borrow money from someone, and you purchase anything at all with that money, and you have not paid that money back, the person who lent you that money owns everything you touch with that money. End of story. So, until AIG pays the FED back...the FED owns them. And I seriously doubt they'll be paying them back in the time required. In fact, I'm certain AIG will remain owned by the FED some way or another.

Great thread, I am particularly interested in this whole situation because AIG sponsors Manchester United, the football club I support. I think there is only a year left but I am thankful for you Americans helping my club out, your money will be well spent.

On a more serious note, I am quite worried about the financial future of this country over the next 2 years. The FED and government have entered seriously dangerous waters and recently crossed the line that should never be crossed. Hyperinflation never works and always ends with the Government changing to a new currency, :cough: Amero :cough:.

Time to dig deeper and see where the paper trail ends. Hopefully this is not the catastrophe people have been talking about that will be used to force the citizens to accept a new currency, trash the constitution and accept the North American Union. I can just imagine what the new constitution will be like, these are scary times.

My suspicion is that this is all ultimately controlled by the world bank who is manipulating this 'crisis' to gain control, initially of the fed and later other western banks. Very similar to how the fed came into being by saying that under its control there would be no 'boom and bust'.
This may be a huge speculation on my part but perhaps someone with more of an insight and understanding of finance can perhaps shed more light.
One more question; What happens if AIG doesnt survive....how do the taxpayer get his money back?

Great posts.

Speaking about insurance and war ... in a round about way - one of the most gluttonous insurance collections in history came via Larry Silverstein's collections form the World Trade Centers, insured just months before the attacks.

Originally posted by slouden
Isn't that 85 billion of our tax payers money....so we the people own 80% of the company. Shouldn't we get insurance for free then. Just a thought.

No, because we don't own the 79.9% yet, we just have warrants that we could act upon at any time. THEN we would hold 79.9% of the stock. 85 billions tax payer money, more than 1 trillion in assets at AIG....I think that they shouldn't have much of an issue raising the 85 billion captial plus 8.5% interest.

reply to post by sdrawkcabII


So you are saying, for the next two years, AIG won't be able to sell 85 billion dollars of assets (plus 8.5% interest) even though they have over 1 trillion dollars in assets? Unless it is because the market is still so bad nobody will buy their assets, that won't happen. I seriously doubt that for 2 years the market is going to be that bad as to where people won't look to acquire some valuable assets from AIG for a deal.

(edit for a spelling error)

[edit on 19-9-2008 by grimreaper797]

Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to post by grimreaper797

 

Question if the government makes money on these deals are they going to send the taxpayer a check for putting their money up to bailout AIG or any of these other conglomerates? The idea of the government assuming more liabilities from mismanaged financial outfits, whether secured or not, is not a comforting thought and yes it does put the FED in control of a private company.

[edit on 18-9-2008 by mybigunit]

The answer. No. Because they are technically required to first pay off OUR national debt. So, if they do make money on this they will (cough, likely story) pay down that debt first. By then AIG will probably have paid off their debt (hopefully). So in the end, we will see nothing but a paydown on the mismanaged debt that this administration has sent into the stratasphere.

I REALLY SHOULD JOIN THIS BOARD!

ok after reading through everything i did some digging

the board of directors for AIG inlcude the following

(phx.corporate-ir.net...)

Stephen F. Bollenbach - worked for disney and trump
Former Co-Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Hilton Hotels Corporation


Martin S. Feldstein - From 1982 to 1984, he chaired the Council of Economic Advisers and was President Reagan's chief economic adviser. AND HAS WORKED FOR THE CFR!!!!!!!!!!
Professor of Economics
Harvard University

President Emeritus
National Bureau of Economic Research



FINALLY, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY
James F. Orr III
Chairman of the Board of Trustees
The Rockefeller Foundation ------- HE WORKS FOR THE ROCKEFELLERS!

people like this dont make mistakes, all the connections, the history

infact im going to invest in AIG shares very soon!

i thought i would put that to u all. and thanx for the great info on here!

This is a question out of ignorance....but what would it take for the world bank to take control of the fed?

reply to post by basejumper


As I understand, the World Bank’s primary function is reducing poverty and improving people's living standards. I do not see what business they would have producing America’s currency.

To Answer your question, According to the Federal Reserve's website www.federalreserve.gov... The President appoints the board members who will be in charge and then is confirmed by the senate. After being appointed the members serve a fourteen year term. So therefore, I assume that the President would have to let them take control. As I started earlier, I don’t see why they would want to.

According to the site:

The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.

If the world bank did take over and received profit they probably just help out some third world country.

I am not completely sure of this so feel free to correct me if im wrong . I got all my information from the link above and www.usatoday.com...


[edit on 19-9-2008 by eric89] would'nt let me paste the link at the bottom so i had to write "the link above"


[edit on 19-9-2008 by eric89]

If the BANKERS stay in power...the POLICE will follow their orders and these things will happen frequently:

www.alternet.org...

It is TIME for the FED to be restructered...period.

When the FED was set up the problem was that the US Treasury was CHARGED interest on the money printed for use as charged by Congress which Constitutionally is the ONLY branch who has power of the purse.

It SHOULD have been set up that the treasury printed money and LENT it to the Fed at a .5% interest rate for government budget items and another amount printed at 1% interest to be used in the private sector.

THUS…when printing money and operating the government we would EARN money as a society as the GDP grew. Insted our national debt has RISEN since Reagan vis-a-vis the GDP. Clinton lowered it but…King Gorgie Jr has expotentially rised it to the point of this collapse we are seeing and the loss of our precious treasure of human lives in needless wars.

I think the Declaration of Independance needs to be looked at seriously again:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. ”

Robert H. Williams
www.commonsensecentral.net...
www.mycommonsensepolitics.com...

Originally posted by grimreaper797
reply to post by sdrawkcabII

 

So you are saying, for the next two years, AIG won't be able to sell 85 billion dollars of assets (plus 8.5% interest) even though they have over 1 trillion dollars in assets? Unless it is because the market is still so bad nobody will buy their assets, that won't happen. I seriously doubt that for 2 years the market is going to be that bad as to where people won't look to acquire some valuable assets from AIG for a deal.

(edit for a spelling error)

[edit on 19-9-2008 by grimreaper797]

LOL...you're missing something. That's 87 Billion, plus interest. What the interest is? We don't know. The FED NEVER loans money without interest.

Then, we have to take into account that, for 2 years...or maybe 1 year, the FED own AIG. What can happen in that amount of time you ask? Use your imagination. All the higher ups need is to run the place, whether it be for a day or 2 years...I am certain they won't be losing hold of AIG any time soon...if ever.