3 ms·
This is a canard for a lot of reasons, first and foremost because the government has not charged one penny for the enormous subsidy it provides in the form of a
by AndrewBissell 7y ago
This is a canard for a lot of reasons, first and foremost because the government has not charged one penny for the enormous subsidy it provides in the form of a now-explicit backstop which allows these companies to borrow at much lower interest rates. Those lower interest rates translate directly into less income for pension funds and savers.
Every large investment bank owes its continued existence to the government. Would you say the taxpayers have been sufficiently reimbursed for that? https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/11/aig-bailout-trial-revelation-morgan-stanley-told-geithner-file-bankruptcy-weekend-became-bank.html https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/11/aig-bailout-trial-re...
- ComputerGuru 7y agoBut it never was about making a return on profit. The solvency and economic growth enabled by these overnight loans (assuming it doesn’t cause bigger problems down the line) is absolutely worth it.
- AndrewBissell 7y agoThat's a completely different and opposite point to "the government made money on the bailouts, actually." > (assuming it doesn't cause bigger problems down the line) We're dealing with those bigger problems now, today. The moral hazard created by the 2008/2009 bailouts is a big part of why executives could leverage their companies to buy back stock throughout the 2010s with confidence they would pay no personal price if it ended in tears.
- ComputerGuru 7y agoThat’s “it made money on top of everything else, even though that wasn’t even the point,” meaning any money made is a bonus.