3 ms·
That quote appears nowhere in the linked MIT Sloan article or the paper it summarizes, so please don't post such misleading quotes. As I already mentioned and
by bmitc 4y ago
That quote appears nowhere in the linked MIT Sloan article or the paper it summarizes, so please don't post such misleading quotes.
As I already mentioned and from the paper's abstract:
> Those conclusions stand in sharp contrast to popular accounts that claim there was no cost because the money was repaid, and with claims of costs in the multiple trillions of dollars.
So to be clear, the paper claims there was still a cost of $500 billion even though money was paid back.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- postexitus 4y agoI highly recommend you to check the original source referred in that article to understand the methodology used and what they were referring to. https://gcfp.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/BailoutsARFEConferencePresentation.pdf https://gcfp.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/BailoutsARFE...