<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for McConnell's Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mcconnellls.wordpress.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mcconnellls.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress.com weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 18:52:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Good news on the economic front by David</title>
		<link>http://mcconnellls.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/good-news-on-the-economic-front/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 18:52:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcconnellls.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/good-news-on-the-economic-front/#comment-4</guid>
		<description>Wow brent, shockingly serious for a second post, i love it. 
I agree on the whole concept of letting some companies fizzle out from a hypothetical standpoint, but the more i look at it, the more complex it really becomes.
I mean look at AIG, there Financial division is a mess, to the point where when everyone thinks of AIG the seem to assume that that single division makes up the majority of the company. But as bad as they have been, one of the only reasons AIG has held on was their stellar insurance business, which is still a model in accountability and NOT sucking. So how do you let a business die in which only the greed and recklessness of part of a company, which used the reputation built by more accountable parts of the organization to legitimize their transactions (I think the finance arm has only been active about 20 years) ruin the livelyhoods of a ton of hard working insurance guys and put significant holdings in limbo that were insured by AIG? Just food for thought...

Two other quick points: If i can find the link, there is a really interesting article about temporary nationalization, burning off the weak parts of companies, and then bidding away the fixed and refined after products. Apparently its a method the U.S. recommends to second and third world countries all the time (granted youd have to trust our govt but still)... either ways its interesting, i will see if i can find it.

Finally, for the sake of disclosure, my uncle JUST got a job in The insurance branch of AIG 2 weeks before all these problems started becoming public. Its funny, Since 9/11 he has pretty much lived off his savings, taking jobs only to see companies (usually midsized and specialized insurance companies, which is his speciality) collapse within six months of employing him. So he decided to take this job with AIG, not because he was passionate about the area hed work in, but because &quot;Its AIG, atleast i will finally have some job security&quot; (his son has autism and now seizures, so he really needs the stability and insurace). Two weeks later, AIG damn near collapses. 
I told him, im definetly never taking insurance from a company hes working at, his first company gets hit my a plane, and everyone after goes under... hes the black death of employees

cheers</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow brent, shockingly serious for a second post, i love it.<br />
I agree on the whole concept of letting some companies fizzle out from a hypothetical standpoint, but the more i look at it, the more complex it really becomes.<br />
I mean look at AIG, there Financial division is a mess, to the point where when everyone thinks of AIG the seem to assume that that single division makes up the majority of the company. But as bad as they have been, one of the only reasons AIG has held on was their stellar insurance business, which is still a model in accountability and NOT sucking. So how do you let a business die in which only the greed and recklessness of part of a company, which used the reputation built by more accountable parts of the organization to legitimize their transactions (I think the finance arm has only been active about 20 years) ruin the livelyhoods of a ton of hard working insurance guys and put significant holdings in limbo that were insured by AIG? Just food for thought&#8230;</p>
<p>Two other quick points: If i can find the link, there is a really interesting article about temporary nationalization, burning off the weak parts of companies, and then bidding away the fixed and refined after products. Apparently its a method the U.S. recommends to second and third world countries all the time (granted youd have to trust our govt but still)&#8230; either ways its interesting, i will see if i can find it.</p>
<p>Finally, for the sake of disclosure, my uncle JUST got a job in The insurance branch of AIG 2 weeks before all these problems started becoming public. Its funny, Since 9/11 he has pretty much lived off his savings, taking jobs only to see companies (usually midsized and specialized insurance companies, which is his speciality) collapse within six months of employing him. So he decided to take this job with AIG, not because he was passionate about the area hed work in, but because &#8220;Its AIG, atleast i will finally have some job security&#8221; (his son has autism and now seizures, so he really needs the stability and insurace). Two weeks later, AIG damn near collapses.<br />
I told him, im definetly never taking insurance from a company hes working at, his first company gets hit my a plane, and everyone after goes under&#8230; hes the black death of employees</p>
<p>cheers</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The College Guide to Frugal Living by David</title>
		<link>http://mcconnellls.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/3/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 18:41:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mcconnellls.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-3</guid>
		<description>Food lion is barely worth it even with the MVP card, but its still not bad. The worst trend in grocery markets are the new, ultra expensive but really really nice places, like wegmans and harris teeter... You pay 10 dollars for a six pack of soda, but im pretty sure you could eat off the floor with no ill affects, so i guess theyre a toss up</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Food lion is barely worth it even with the MVP card, but its still not bad. The worst trend in grocery markets are the new, ultra expensive but really really nice places, like wegmans and harris teeter&#8230; You pay 10 dollars for a six pack of soda, but im pretty sure you could eat off the floor with no ill affects, so i guess theyre a toss up</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
