Ok, enough already. I’m sick of people talking about modern markets as if they are something wonderful. No, they aren’t. Obama is absolutely right, they completely fell down on their job, not just for the last 8 years, but for most of the last 28 —whenever Republicans were in charge, and a fair bit when Dems were in charge. Ordinary people haven’t had a raise in damn near 30 years. This is success?
I simply, completely, and utterly fail to see what is so wonderful about the process of securitization. Sure, it allows you to create more financial products. Sure, it reduces the cost of capital somewhat. But are we really better off because of securitization? Of course we aren’t. Without securitization this current market meltdown would have been a hell of a lot milder. What securitization does is take the risk and spread it from the people who might be able to understand it and control it (the people actually issuing the mortgages, for example) to a ton of people who could not possibly know the risk even if they wanted to.
Ratings agency reform is not the solution, they completely fell down on the job and even if incentives were changed they are still not in a position to know whether a mortgage from Mr. Smith is legitimate. Are they going to visit the property? Talk to Mr. Smith? Call his employer? Of course not, they can’t. The only people who can are the people who issued the original mortgage.
Nor should risk be transfered much if at all. Risk must stay with the people who issue the mortgage. If they know it’ll be off their books they won’t do proper due diligence, and no one else can do it. At most, risk should be transfered once and must be transfered in whole and understandable form, rather than taking 20 different incomes steams (or more), melding them together, chopping them into tranches and selling them to people who really have no idea what they’re buying, while you’ve booked your profit and washed your hand, so even if you sold them crap, hahahah, it’s their crap now (or so you think.) Risk must be assumed only by people who can understand it and manage it and who are exposed to the consequences of their decisions. (Ability to manage risk, but knowledge that if they don’t they will get hurt.)
Now let’s talk about this idea that the Fed should basically regulate everyone, with the SEC occasionally peeping over it’s shoulder to see whether market manipulation is ocurring. This is necessary because there are, as Obama points out, no longer clear cut differences between banks, insurance companies, investment banks, brokerages and so on. The repeal of Glass-Steagall put an end to those differences. Glass-Steagall, remember was put in place during the Great Depression to stop another Great Depression from occuring. One of the things that people who lived through the 20s believed caused the Great Depression was not having clear cut boundaries between the businesses, again so that risk was divided appropriately and so that fewer companies became "too large to fail".
But somehow we think we know better than the people who lived through the last Great Depression; the people who lived through the 20’s and the last great market crackup. So we’ve repealed most of Glass-Steagall and allowed everyone to be in everyone else’s pockets, huge financial conglomerates to mushroom into monstrosities, and allowed unregulated "innovative" financial "products" like collateralized debt obligation (CDOs) to grow into such monstrosites that financial markets were huge multiples of the entire real world economy.
Then it all comes crashing down and people claim to be surprised.
Enough, already. Yes, the world is not exactly the same as it was in the 20’s and 30’s, but we didn’t start having these disasters till after Glass-Steagall and other Depression era securities laws started getting repealed. First set in the 80’s, followed by most of the remainder in 99.
It’s time to break up the great financial conglomerates. Force them to cut themselves up and divide back into brokerage houses, investment banks, retail banks, insurance companies and so on. Put them all under the clear control of regulaters. Reinstitute Glass-Steagall, with very mild modernization, and get rid of most complex derivatives, excessive leverage, the carry trade and so on.
Obama’s right, the philosophy of the past 28 years has been a failure. Why don’t we treat it as so, and re-institute what worked, re-regulate, then slowly modify from there, with complete transparency and strong regulation.
Financial markets exist to serve ordinary Americans and non-financial American businesses. They haven’t been doing that properly. Time to make sure they do.
Related posts:





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

You mean like voting Republican (again and again) and expecting the economy to do well?
Amen Ian!
I am still flabbergasted that the Fed is letting them use depositors money now for their Ponzi schemes!
Good God, nothing is sacred to these people!
It is beyond me how the failure of Long Term Credit didn’t open some eyes. Any thoughts on why it didn’t Ian?
LTC just looked like bad judgement on the part of some players. “Oh, we’re all smarter than that”.
damn Ian, that title is a progressive love letter
and bringing back consumer bankruptcy protection, if the consumer is protected with bankruptcy lenders are not as likely to invent loans that can’t be paid
typo alert from the first paragraph
I am still flabbergasted that the Fed is letting them use depositors money…
but doesn’t that come with an ironclad guarantee?
“Trust us, you’re money’s gonna be fine – just fine.”
Gee and GWB promised ot keep us all safe.
Thanks Ian. digg
Wall Street failed themselves and America in failing to come out against Iraq and the rest of the pork projects. IMHO the privatize profits socialize losses crowd forgot that Iraq and the pork siphoned off the very cash that AIG and their counterparties are now begging for.
http://georgewashington2.blogs…..ng-on.html
like voting republican again and expecting a more secure nation
like voting republican and expecting laws upheld?
like voting republican again and expecting international respect?
like voting republican again and expecting our constitution upheld?
well, I could go ont
The Greed knoweth no bounds
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..newsletter
The SEC is an arm of the banksters.
Follow the money.
Arrest the bastards and take the money back.
Gee and GWB promised to keep us all safe.
well, *I* haven’t been attacked by any terrorists bombing me with excessive pay raises, dividends and cash……
Thanks, Ian. You are right about Glass-Steagall. That’s why I’m so upset that the “rescue” of Merrill Lynch is to put it inside Bank of America.
Worst. Possible. Move.
Ian, This is ot but what do you think about what’s going on in Bolivia. Wouldn’t it be disingenuous of the Republican administration to issue a strong warning on Morales after they encouraged Georgia to attack SO. Ossetia? I have not heard any statements yet but figure that they will come.
Bank of America is buying up junk so they to can fall under the mythical to big to fail rule.
On Monday, Sarah Palin hosted a major fundraiser on behalf of John McCain in Canton, Ohio. The event, which raised $1 million, was organized by W.J. “Tim” Timken Jr., a major Republican figure in the state.
Timken’s company, additionally, is a toxic figure within Ohio’s working class community. Only four years ago, Timken Co — one of the largest manufacturers of tapered roller and needle bearings in the country — was responsible for job losses in one of the hardest economically hit areas in the United States: Stark County, Ohio.
“He is the stereotypical Republican,” said Johnnie Maier, chairman of the Stark County Democrats. “In John McCain’s book, Tim Timken makes more than $5 million so he is not middle class… They made $1 million in a [fundraiser] in a county where the private sector and the public sector are laying off people everywhere because people are broke.”
not only that, now we need two incomes, I remember growing up, a mother working was unnecessary and unheard of, I know women want to work but that income should really be bonus, not necessary.
most people do not have enough to retire, they are going to struggle just to put their kids in college and at the rate the republicans are ruining our education system, they are going to struggle to even put their kids through grade school
This is just a pet peeve of mine, but no matter how many times people say it, it is not true that insanity is doing the same things and expecting different results. I know what you mean, but there are lots and lots of cases where doing the same thing repeatedly not only DOES yield different results, but is necessary to achieve different results.
Example:
How many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie pop? Let’s see. One. Two…
Stop! Are you insane????? You already tried licking it!!!
On a more serious note, look at how many times in the last 30 years the Republicans have tried and failed to push through a policy they like until they eventually get what they want. This has happened so often that there is an air of inevitability around just about everything the Republicans want, and the Democrats now just “pragmatically” figure out a way to give them what they want while pretending they fought the good fight, or won important compromises.
Sometimes, pounding away until you win is the only way.
did obama say anything substantive on market regulation or was it more of the kind of platitudes i’ve learned to expect from him: nice sounding words lacking in specificity? i read the link, and didn’t see anything.
the reason i’m suspicious is because of who obama has chosen to advise him about economics. i just left these links on jane’s morning post, deep in epu-land:
that would be the same rubin mentioned here:
let’s not forget that the deregulation we’re righting condemning – happened during the clinton administration. we’ve got a bipartisan problem and continuing to blame it all on the republicans does not help us understand what has and is happening.
Face it, were all screwed!
If you have any money stuff it in your mattress ,the shits gonna hit the fan!
relax
AIG is an insurance company Texas beach homes during an election year will get checks to rebuild quick..or Texas will be turning blue this year. Is anyone in the “market” factoring in those losses yet?
That’s right, Trotsky for president!
(whistle sound of bomb dropping. …. Kablooie!!!)
Headlines
Heckava job there, Republicans
From your keyboard to God’s monitor, Ian.
Well, from the sound of things, right now there’s an awful lot consolidated under B of A. Good luck to them! They will probably get carved up every way to Sunday! In fact, they’ll probably need it.
I’m quite sure that the US has been aiding the opposition. If I were the Bolivian government, I’d have kicked the American ambassador out too.
You may be right. What I have heard is that Merrill actually wrote down some of their bad debt and was more transparent than Lehmann and AIG. My guess is that this was a signal from Buffett that he thought Merrill was the pick of the litter.
BoA was trading around 34 before they bought Merrill. Now they’re below 27. Street appears to agree with you that they overpaid.
i’m not making an argument wrt the presidential elections. i’m trying to understand what has been happening – you know, reality based community and all that?
rotsa ruck
What are the prospects of reverse shock therapy here? If things continue to get even worse over the next two months, would a President Obama actually be able to achieve a meaningful level of re-regulation? Of course, first he has to have a plan ready and selise’s observation at 23 doesn’t make that look terribly likely…
Just in Barklays, the third largest bank in UK, to buy part of Lehman
I wish I could but I don’t see things getting better any time soon,election or no election
I do hope Obama gets the nod but change wont be spontaneous
Is impeaching Chris Cox (SEC Chair) on the table? My guess is that there’s plenty of Congressional testimony from that has now been revealed for the crap it was.
And getting all freaked out will get you what? buggy? :)
Romney’s fund: Bain Capital was eyeing certain assets as well
IMHO, Wall Street could earn points with liberals by coming out strongly in support of withdrawal from Iraq.
The FED keeps given out those bucks
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/…..=worldwide
I think its very possible because Bush will keep on ignoring this problem like has everything else until it gets to big to ignore.
That would give Obama a chance to put in a reverse shock but will he mess it up and let the centerist members of the party take control.
Hitler and Stalin Right and Left are what happens when shock doctrines goes bad FDR is who we need.
Already there!!!
Those would all make great bumper stickers and a great ad.
Bain Capital isn’t broke yet? Home Depot and Rush Limbaugh’s radio station Clear Channel have not been doing well.
You are so right. Together, they’d make a great 527 ad.
Ian,
Thanks for this!
But you might wanna clean up that lead sentence,
Is that an extraneous “they”, or a typo, or what?
Anyway, I am still thinking that the present crisis is not being properly named. This is a problem with the Financial Services Sector of the economy, which has been unregulated, misregulated, and deregulated perhaps for 28 years, as you suggest, but especially during the past 7+ years. There are a couple of indexes that track this fund sector, which includes all of the big companies in crisis that we have been hearing about for the past year, since Bear Stearns at least, and maybe since Enron’s collapse (remember that?), culminating in 2004. (The WaPo has an interesting timeline on that.)
You told me that you think this is much worse than the hi-tech bubble of the late Clinton years, but I still think there are interesting parallels. The important point now is that this is happening in a market sector which has been a market leader. It is also a textbook case, IMHO, of how the Bush Administration’s laissez-faire attitude towards regulation, under the banner of “freeing” the market from “red tape” has backfired. Another illustration of the consequences of “Privatizing the profits, and socializing the risks.” I think this is the point that Obama should be making.
Bob in HI
Lets put FDR in there
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpse
Look, folks. Obama is a centrist. Always has been, always will be. I think (but don’t know) he’s more progressive than DLC’ers like the Clintons.
He’s a centrist. Any and all progressive reforms will have to be brought up from Congress. He’s not going to submit them himself.
That’s just how it is.
BC
There it is.
Ian, don’t you agree with Sterling that the reason these financial institutions have been allowed to grow so large is to make it more difficult for foreign capital to purchase them? Seems to me the alternative is to allow the Saudis and Chinese to own all our banks, and I’m not sure they have our best interests at heart . . . though I might say the same of the American elites.
wasn’t fdr a centrist before he took office?
You’re right, Ian, financial risk should remain with the first to accept or once removed with complete disclosure and no distortion such as bundling instruments into others. I think, too, that the same should be done with mortal/biological risks. If you need human guinea pigs for testing, your family and friends should be the first to be exposed. If you’re going to war with no moral reason your family and friends should be in the first group of boots on the ground, better yet, perhaps, you should be required to drop your family and friends on the targets in the first wave of bombings. The latter would also have the advantage of reducing the corruption caused by nepotism and other forms of crony capitalism.
The alternative is to just put on ownership controls, actually. But yes, that’s part of what happened, I do agree with Stirling on that.
*sigh* I wish it wasn’t so.
Wait, you mean the answer is not to appoint a commission to study it, as McCain says? (Where’d he get that answer, anyway? Must have pulled that one out of his ***. I don’t think that’s the answer Carly Fiorina would come up with.)
McCain campaign must have known a year ago that Palin would be the pick, because they licensed use of “Barracuda” by Heart a year ago. Sorry for the trivia. Seemed interesting, since it looked like an off-the-cuff, last minute pick. Back to regular programming.
Obama is running as a centrist in order to get elected..that doesn’t mean he won’t be more progressive in office or more conservative for that matter.
Well gee, the Saudis and Chinese already own a large chunk of our Treasury notes, why shouldn’t they own the Commercial banks as well? /sw
Doesn’t really soothe my nerves !!
Congress hasn’t done much of anything lately,just the usual partisan bickering!
I hope you’re right, LS.
But I don’t think he is a progressive a la Russ Feingold or Dennis Kucinich. Not even close.
BC
Exactly. It is important, however, that Obama wins and not McCain.
Of course.
link please
It wasn’t intended to soothe frayed nerves. Just calling them as I see them.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t vote for Obama — we should. We have to, McCain’s an alternative too awful to consider. But we shouldn’t delude ourselves that Obama is some sort of fire-breathing progressive. If he is, he’s managed to hide it deep in his biography.
BC
I am not getting your reply
OT If you have a chance tune into the Senate Bernie Sanders is on right now…. I love that man
Obama may be a centrist,but he is still more progressive than the alternative
Works for me
Hard to say. I think closer to Feingold, but in all honesty he wouldn’t have a chance if he took a super progressive position on anything. He needs centrist votes to offset the racist factor. That is why they keep attacking him by saying that he is the most progressive Senator, which is, of course, crap. They say that because he is a centrist, and they are threatened by that.
Now that’s something that really irritates me. Why is it that D’s must run to the center when the Pugs always play to their base? Who keeps winning? It ain’t us!!
Well, I’m hoping they are a lot closer to right on with regard to what they paid because I think that means that they will contribute toward setting a floor on the real estate market and help to bring the current crisis closer to an end.
Tweety did a story on it (it will play again later this evening) that the songs that the groups protested about were all licensed by the campaign in 2007. There were four songs and Barracuda was one of them.
Oh goody. Now we are going to outsource our financial institutions overseas.
Tweety also saying that Carly Fiorlla or whatever her name is will be out by midnight tonight, because she made a statement today that McCain could not run a company like HP. She must be really pissed that they picked Palin…Heh.
Oh yeah, and Begala noted that she couldn’t either!
i think we’re fighting against a “free market” ideology that comes with blinders. obama hasn’t show much sign of not being under the sway of that ideology (as far as i can tell). that’s one reason i think it’s so important that we not let ourselves get fooled by what an obama presidency means – it means we don’t have to have a mccain presidency, but it doesn’t mean a solution to any of our other current problems. we’re going to have to push for that.
That’s true. Look how far DK’s presidential campaign got this year — approximately nowhere.
But I don’t much in Obama’s record to suggest that he’s a progressive. I hope I’m wrong.
BC
I believe this is a deep-seated belief, so deeply conditioned in that it is almost subconscious, created by the Reagan Revolution of 1980, the election of GHWB in ‘88, the Republican wave of 1992, and the repeat victories of GWB. It will take a person of incredible charisma, intelligence, and oratory to push the Overton Window back to the left-although I think a lot of conservative people would be deeply shocked by how much they agreed with a truly liberal agenda, if the shield of propaganda could be shattered…
What’s she talking about?
All Fiorina could do with HP was run it into the ground.
McCain runs planes into the ground. Sounds like a match made in hell to me.
Cool thanks.
Gosh, I hate to say this, but I think that’s the way it should be. Legislatures should do the legislating; executives execute. Fortunately for us, I don’t think, once the wars have been fought in Congress, I don’t think Obama will be nearly so anxious to veto good progressive legislation that helps people and makes good sense. You know McShames mindset would veto every single progressive bill brought to him. He is the anti-FDR.
All I’m trying to say is how many things can go wrong before our economy comes screeching to a halt
the housing market crisis,extremely high cost of gas and home heating oil, 6.1% unemployment, bank failures
the financial market failures and of course the vanishing US job
i wonder if the presence of a real progressive movement – not one that had been captured and domesticated by the democratic party (wilson but debs in prison for crying out loud) – might not have played a role is the progressive policies fdr was able to put in place?
The first company I worked for had personal investments by H and P and we had Barney Oliver on our board and scientific advisory board. Probably the smartest person I’ve ever been around…
Sarah and Carly fall far short of that standard.
I wrote a post a while ago praising regulation. I feel like a profit. I mean prophet.
Regulation. Good for Business. Good for Americans.
Btw, I would enjoy seeing an Emotional meltdown from one of the jerks who set this up and is going to 1) Lose his money. 2) Go to jail.
Maybe that is mean, but it might be nice to see for a change instead of the smug “the free market will fix it all” jerks on cable.
Ah, but given what has actually happened to those ‘too big to fail’, might we wonder as to whose ‘interest’ was served?
Would one be incorrect to postulate that ’twas NOT the ‘interests’ of the American public, as a whole, or even the nation’s economic health which determined what was done?
Perhaps ’twas the ‘interests’ of the American ‘elites’ (as AKASamuri implies) that were cynically and far less than honestly OR openly catered to, a true bi-partisan effort, one suspects, of long standing importance to the political class (none of whom, one imagines, shall be feeling much, if any, real pain as things go very badly for the rest of us).
To your certain knowledge, Ian, was ever any honest attempt made to pursue the ‘ownership’ controls alternative?
his history suggests, i think, his natural inclination is to be far, far more conservative than the campaign he is running.
unless we find a way to put pressure on him and make it in his best interest to pay attention to us.
I don’t either. At this point, though, to me, electing someone who’s not a reactionary conservative radical is still a vast improvement, and a step in the right direction.
Ultimately, victory will be a process, not a moment in time.
and that’s if he wanted to. haven’t seen any sign of that yet.
A President Obama will first stabilize the economy by creating jobs. There is no money for grand ideas. The FED nationalizing AIG will cause long term problems and all the while the repubs will scream about the deficit. A President McCain will dig the hold deeper with a shovel made in China and appoint a Supreme Court of right wing whackos. My choice of who to vote for is easy this year and the repubs will say deficits don’t matter.
the problem is that with our congress, there won’t be many. we have a lot more legislators who pretend to be progressive than who actually are.
I didn’t see it but I believe someone mentioned this AM that Larry Kudlow was whining and acting almost like a socialist on CNBC this earlier today.
This from one of the staunch “free market rules everything” id10ts (one who has decried unemployment compensation as a trick to give folks “free vacations”).
I do think that his history shows that he has been concerned about lower and middle class people and the rights of workers…the Republicans..not at all.
Exactly. As far as core values, we win. The logical conclusion, then, would be to play to the values of the majority of voters–progressive values.
That’s essentially the route Europeans took. The US took a different route. To be fair, the “WTF do the arabs do with all that money” question needed to be answered.
Of course, they should have been made to use it to build their own countries up.
Vote for him, and get him elected. After that happens is the time to get him to pay attention to “us.” By the way, there are a lot of us with a lot of varying opinions as to what is best for this country.
McCain/Palin as an alternative is a sure way to make sure “us” are not heard.
Preview should be my friend..
A President Obama will first stabilize the economy by creating jobs. There is no money for grand ideas. The FED nationalizing AIG will cause long term problems and all the while the repubs will scream about the deficit. A President McCain will dig the hole deeper with a shovel made in China and appoint a Supreme Court of right wing whackos and the repubs wlll say deficits don’t matter. My choice of who to vote for is easy this year.
bom dia pups
great article Ian. Now off to read the insightful comments
Isaiah Poole upstairs
It always is a process rather than a moment.
Obama is the start of the process, not the end.
And when they say that, why am I not hearing the MSM saying, “Really? More liberal than Bernie Sanders? More than Russ Feingold? More than Ted Kennedy? I don’t think so!”
They work for corporations that are run by Republicans.
Which is why it is important to build a strong progressive House and strong progressive Senate.
linky please? to some real action and not just words? thanks.
he doesn’t need us after he’s elected. before he’s elected is when we have leverage.
I don’t think that’s it. I think it’s the same reason that she probably got bounced from HP; she lets her mouth overload her ass!
Well for starters, as a community organizer in Chicago where he was working with people suffering the effects of losing their jobs in the steel industry. I can’t imagine a Repub doing that. I haven’t examined his Illinois legislative record though.
lol
but didn’t he quit because he didn’t like it?
Bernie did a great job . . . followed by Dorgan–who obviously DID learn something from history. Loved Dorgan’s ending story . . . about Adams writing to Abigail, asking where the leaders of the emerging country were going to come from!
Obama’s campaign is pushing the word regulation hard and slamming McCain hard for opposing it. I like hearing that sort of messaging.
“wasn’t fdr a centrist before he took office?
i wonder if the presence of a real progressive movement – not one that had been captured and domesticated by the democratic party (wilson but debs in prison for crying out loud) – might not have played a role is the progressive policies fdr was able to put in place?”
FDR was absolutely non-ideological. He was a thorough Pragmatist. He looked at programs only in terms of “what worked” and he had no hesitation throwing things out if they didn’t work.
As for comparisons between now and then in terms of Progressive Movements, lordy, the 30’s was full of them. I don’t see anything on the horizon that even looks like what led up to the CIO movement, which took off in about 1935, and there certainly is no Norman Thomas running as a third party Candidate with a platform that looks a good deal like what FDR did in the Second New Deal. (1934-36). Essentially FDR borrowed most of his programatic ideas, did a bit of re-fashioning, but his success was his ability to do the politics, and get things put in place. Part of that was dealing with Congress — part of it was his ability to unify the nation and get them to work with him, and push Congress.
Bernanke must think it’s essential to save AIG and that this is the only effective way to do it. He’s done his job well so far and I have no reason to believe he would do this frivolously.
But, if things are this bad, then we need to cross our fingers and pray it works.
She changed churches even further back. I wonder how long ago KKKarl Rove found her and brought her into “the system”.
Was “It’s fun to be a Mormon!” one of the other 3?
Jim,
Please use your knowledge and expert writing skills to address the subject of Phill Gramm’s involvement in the repeal of Glass-Steagall:
1) He was co-sponsor 1999 ot the law that allowed commercial banks to get into investment banking, and
2) his influence (as Chairman of Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee 106th Congress, 2000 cycle: Overview) in promoting the 2000 bill that kept regulators hands off.
Link: http://www.opensecrets.org/cmt…..congho=106
To get that I Googled: McCain, Phill Gramm
That site also gives a menu to select the contributors to the members of that Senate Banking Committee. It is an eye opener! Gramm was one of the 3 top hogs at the trough. Contributors were the very financial communities that committee were supposed to “oversee”.
There is also a good article at Mother Jones entitled, FORECLOSURE PHILL, by David Corn in the July/August 2008 issue.
Link: http://www.motherjones.com/new…..-phil.html
John McCain calls Phill Gramm “one of the smartest people in the world on economics”. He also refers to Gramm as “my economics guru”. Seems to me now is the time for Obama to talk loudly about Gramm’s part in the current financial meltdown and Gramm’s being McCain’s campaign economic advisor.
I notice that a few days ago Gramm considered the middle class as a bunch of whiners. Now McCain calls them fine, working people of America (since those taxpayers will pay the bill). Seems McCain is also trying to distance himself from Gramm.
I think, frankly, that Gramm and his wife should both be in jail.
“I am still flabbergasted that the Fed is letting them use depositors money now for their Ponzi schemes!
Bernanke must think it’s essential to save AIG and that this is the only effective way to do it. He’s done his job well so far and I have no reason to believe he would do this frivolously.
But, if things are this bad, then we need to cross our fingers and pray it works.”
We need to understand what AIG represents. It is the largest insurer of Municipal, County and State Pension Plans going — police, fire, teachers, public health workers, garbage collectors — you name it. Many of these pension plans have been invested in derrivatives with the likes of Lehman and the like, sub prime debt and all — and they are being sharply written down. AIG is what stands between that and the legal obligations Cities and States have to their retirees, and for which they would have to either raise taxes or sell assets to meet. Otherwise they declare bankruptcy and leave the elderly civil servants (and everyone who needs their garbage collected,) out in the cold.