Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Call To "Open Source" AIG Investigation

Posted by Soulskill on from the still-looking-for-somebody-to-crucify dept.

VValdo writes "As you may recall, the citizens of the US shelled out about $85 billion to bail out AIG and its creditors (Goldman Sachs in particular) last year. But as 80% owners of AIG, we still don't know what happened, exactly. That may change. In a new op-ed piece, former prosecutors (including former NY governor Eliot Spitzer) are calling for the US Treasury to force AIG to release its treasure-trove of emails to the public before allowing AIG to 'break free' of our control. As the prosecutors put it, 'By putting the evidence online, the government could establish a new form of "open source" investigation. Once the documents are available for everyone to inspect, a thousand journalistic flowers can bloom, as reporters, victims and angry citizens have a chance to piece together the story.' Good idea?"

6 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. Yes. by selven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We own 80% of AIG, so 80% of AIG is technically part of the federal government. That means we should have open access to everything just like we should have open access to the Congress, senate, court system, etc.

  2. No by cheesybagel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No, not a good idea. What is the point in having a Cultural Revolution? Better to just split these companies which are too big to fail into smaller chunks, kick out the top management making sure they never work in that capacity anymore, enforce layers of separation between businesses and let them free. Restore the Glass–Steagall Act and separate commercial banking from investment banking.

    1. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We need that and a 'Cultural Revolution' that fights back against the idea that the upper class knows what's best for the rest of us and that any attempt to eek out even 4% more of their wealth from them is not socialism at all.

    2. Re:No by causality · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I agree, the public is just going to crucify the company. We need to move forward, fix the problems, and make sure they don't happen again.

      On the other hand, this might be a great learning exercise for academia. It might be nice if accredited institutions could review a portion of the details in the interests of study cases; particularly a business ethics class (no that's not an oxymoron).

      Business ethics: if it's legal, do it for short-term profit with no regard for side-effects, long-term losses, or harm that it might cause to other people. If it's not legal, grease the right palms until it becomes legal.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  3. Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We know exactly what happened... a few *idiots* in AIG's derivatives trading department thought they could sell credit default swaps on mortgage backed securities without keeping *anything* in reserve. It's actually a great strategy... unless housing prices go down, in which case you will take huge, mind-boggling losses. Essentially a few people in one department of an otherwise well run institution took down the whole thing by drastically underestimating risk.

    Credit default swaps are an insurance product. If you sell them, then you had better keep proper reserves to cover claims AND you had better buy reinsurance in case there is a market downturn. AIG did neither and went kaput.

  4. Of COURSE it's a good idea by popo · · Score: 5, Informative

    As many accountants have said: Show me a company who does not get audited, and I will show you fraud.

    There are only two options here:

    Option1: We the People get ripped off.
    Option2: We the People are allowed to see exactly where OUR money went.

    All other options are Option 1 in disguise.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )