Only then what? They get a "capital buffer" just because they submitted to the audit, or because the audit says they're OK? If the former, the audit is a pure formality, if the latter, the walking-dead banks will still be walking dead.
In any case, are we to suppose that this audit will do what others have failed to do up to now, evaluate the toxic junk?
What exactly is the problem here? Someone has to pronounce the dead banks, dead. And banks with more than $100bn in assets don't get to opt out of the audit of their balance sheets so at least the Federal Government will know what's on those balance sheets. Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith
banks with more than $100bn in assets don't get to opt out of the audit of their balance sheets so at least the Federal Government will know what's on those balance sheets.
