AIG Bailout?

[Nords]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley I spent 5 years working for a boss that misused "exasperate" at least 3 times/week. If I had corrected him the first time I might have gotten away with it. But I had enough political sense to realize that making your boss look foolish wasn't a good decision. So I had to sit there and take it, over and over and over...

I had a shipmate who frequently needed to give briefs before evolutions. Unfortunately he'd decided to call them "pre-evolutionary briefs".

[cute fuzzy bunny]

I think I have a few pairs of those.

I also used to say and do things that I knew bugged my subordinates. It was sort of a mine canary. If everyone kept their mouths shut, they were reasonably happy and rational enough to understand that correcting me was fruitless. If someone blurted out a correction, I knew they'd crossed over the line of rationality.

[barbarus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladelfina where is Paulson's authority to do this?

It's rising from the flames of an immolating Constitution.

[youbet]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milton IMO, the FT is the best newspaper going.

Because it's pink?

[ladelfina]

Quote:

I also used to say and do things that I knew bugged my subordinates. It was sort of a mine canary. If everyone kept their mouths shut, they were reasonably happy and rational enough to understand that correcting me was fruitless. If someone blurted out a correction, I knew they'd crossed over the line of rationality.

That is truly sadistic. Reminds me of my old boss who would secretly program his own key commands into our machines and then hover over our shoulders saying "why don't you just hit Ctrl-Shift-F-tilde?". He was looking to get punched! We took our "line of rationality" right out the door, leaving him high and dry.

--
I should start a thread on funny/bad usages and neologisms. Just recently I've seen the classic "Marshall Law" more than once, and this new one: "X will be the deathnail of Z".

I thought that was quite inventive!

[Milton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley I spent 5 years working for a boss that misused "exasperate" at least 3 times/week. If I had corrected him the first time I might have gotten away with it. But I had enough political sense to realize that making your boss look foolish wasn't a good decision. So I had to sit there and take it, over and over and over.

I worked for an imbecile who repeatedly talked about how he "could (sic) care less."

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milton I worked for an imbecile who repeatedly talked about how he "could (sic) care less."

I know someone who says that - plus, instead of saying " well, I'll never forget such and such..." he says "Well, the only thing I remember is such and such..."

My wife thinks I'm being rude when I respond and say "What is your middle name?" <pause... confused looks> then I say "Oh, I see you can only remember one thing..."


Or "how much less could you care about xyz...".

Yeah, they love it when I do that

-ERD50

[ERD50]

Quote:

I also used to say and do things that I knew bugged my subordinates. It was sort of a mine canary. If everyone kept their mouths shut, they were reasonably happy and rational enough to understand that correcting me was fruitless. If someone blurted out a correction, I knew they'd crossed over the line of rationality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladelfina That is truly sadistic. ...

It sounds to me more like someone who wants to surround himself with 'Yes-Men (and woman)". Or can't admit to a mistake. Neither one sounds like particularly good leadership qualities to me.

Sure, there are times when you wouldn't want to do it front of others, but you just might be doing your boss a big favor by correcting them (in the right manner) so they don't make the same mistake in front of their boss and/or customer. It's a judgment call of course.

-ERD50

[Finance Dave]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art G AIG is so vast, they have got to be bailed out. They were, just last year, one of only 8 companies in the world that were rated AAA. Go figure.

Please note the below is not my opinion...but just what I've heard/read others saying (Henry Paulson was one of them.)

The reason AIG was bailed out and not Lehman is that AIG is a much different type of company. They are in a business that is so intertwined with corporate America and all the credit markets that to let them fail would be certain disaster.

Again, let me reiterate. The above statement is not my opinion and does not reflect my beliefs.

[free4now]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERD50 Sure, there are times when you wouldn't want to do it front of others, but you just might be doing your boss a big favor by correcting them (in the right manner) so they don't make the same mistake in front of their boss and/or customer. It's a judgment call of course.

Yeah, it would be sad if they became president of the USA and still didn't know how to pronounce 'nuclear'.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

I hate that. Supposedly there was a study group who determined that many americans pronounce it that way, so he decided to stick with it.

I wonder what all the fund companies like Vanguard who note Lehman indexes as comparators for their funds are going to do....

[Milton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finance Dave The above statement is not my opinion and does not reflect my beliefs.

If you have any personal opinions or beliefs on the subject, perhaps you'd like to share them.

[ladelfina]

Let's look at who might be behind the bailout expansion to include FOREIGN BANKS..

Quote:

The New York Times reports this evening that "foreign banks, which were initially excluded from the [Wall Street bailout] plan, lobbied successfully over the weekend to be able to sell the toxic American mortgage debt owned by their American units to the Treasury, getting the same treatment as United States banks." The Times further reports that two of the biggest foreign banks in need of such relief are Barclays and UBS. In fact, my understanding is that UBS is more on the line here than any other foreign bank. Let's add this up. John McCain's top economics advisor, who is widely believed to be his choice for Treasury Secretary, should he win in November, is former Sen. Phil Gramm. (Indeed, just last night his spokesman refused to say Gramm wouldn't be McCain's choice for Treasury Secretary.) Gramm is both vice chairman of UBS's US division and a lobbyist for UBS. If UBS successfully lobbied over the weekend to get in on the bailout, what was Gramm's role in the lobbying?

Talking Points Memo | The Big Question: 2+2=4?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/bu.../22global.html

[al_bundy]

most of this toxic junk is US mortgages so not that big a deal

[ladelfina]

al.. If a mortgage is sold outside the US, we are guaranteeing that foreign entity's profit. Why? Will we invite Toyota to line up for bailout money behind GM?

[al_bundy]

what if foreigners stopped buying US paper? does anyone want to go back to double digit mortgage rates?

back in 2003 when i bought my place, the person i bought it from bought it in the 1980's at 12% interest which was the prevailing rate at the time.