3 ms·
If the banks were going to default without taxpayer help, why didn't we just nationalize them and let the share holders take the loss they themselves have set t
by robinei 11y ago
If the banks were going to default without taxpayer help, why didn't we just nationalize them and let the share holders take the loss they themselves have set themselves up for? Then we could shoulder the cost of getting the banks afloat again, and then subsequently regain some of the cost at least by selling them (instead of just giving taxpayer money to the risk-taking share holders like we do now)
- dan00 11y ago> If the banks were going to default without taxpayer help, why didn't we just nationalize them and let the share holders take the loss they themselves have set themselves up for? That sounds a bit like only risk-taking share holders would have been harmed and that wouldn't be much harm for the society at all. I really don't think that the harm would be that focused, because banks aren't only about risk-taking share holders and because of the interconnection of banks at the end someone might be harmed you've never thought about. I really don't envy any politician having to make a decision in such a case.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]