3 ms·
We didn't give them money, we invested in businesses that were in desperate need of investments. Those investments later paid back very good returns. You can a
by delecti 11y ago
We didn't give them money, we invested in businesses that were in desperate need of investments. Those investments later paid back very good returns.
You can argue that we shouldn't have interfered in the free market like that, and in fact I agree in principle, but the "rawr, my tax money" argument doesn't hold water.
- merpnderp 11y agoIt does hold up. "rawr, my tax money was used to prop up a failed business distorting the market, damaging more successful players, and decreasing market efficiency, along with increasing real and perceived corruption of the government." It's not like those banks were protected with no external consequences. What would have been an industry wide boon to mid and small cap banks instead turned into the ugliest type of market intervention conceivable. The only reason those tax dollars were paid back with interest is because no one can compete with the 800 pound gorilla who when he falls out of the tree because he got drunk on his own power, the government picks him back up and places him back on top.
- ktRolster 11y ago>Those investments later paid back very good returns. Paid back with money printed by the federal reserve. Oh great, that makes me feel so much better. The whole thing was FUBAR.