Display:
European Tribune - Green shoots: you'd better be grateful!
Taxpayers have poured trillions of dollars into institutions that most never knew they were guaranteeing. In return, economies look as if they have been spared a collapse in payment systems and credit flows that would probably have caused a depression.
That is a load of selfmaster-serving shit from The Economist. This is nothing that a number of well-timed bank interventions by the FDIC or equivalent banking regulators/deposit insurance schemes in other countries couldn't have solved.

What has been rescued here is (in this order):

  • Bank CEOs
  • Bank shareholders
  • Bank creditors (who happen to be other banks)

It there had at any point been a risk to the payment systems, something else would have been done. And the credit flows did collapse.

The brainless should not be in banking. — Willem Buitler
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon May 18th, 2009 at 05:39:50 AM EST
I'd partly change the order. The main beneficiaries are:

  1. bank creditors
  2. bank senior management (but probably not the CEOs themselves)
  3. bank shareholders

The protection of bank creditors (other banks, and bond holders) is the most scandalous subsidy, as it goes to (i) parties that should have known better and are not so protected when bankruptcy hits another industry (cf carmakers) and (ii) very wealthy parties (who owns bonds?)

Of course, people will say that pension funds own bonds, but saving pension systems did not require saving market-based mechanisms that had obviously failed, as JakeS regularly underlines.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Mon May 18th, 2009 at 05:45:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Indeee. CEOs are being fired, not rescued - although most are leaving with the usual generous terms.

A lot of the creditors are hedge fiends. So this has been a direct transfer of cash from government to speculators - with little or no return for the taxpayers.

It doesn't even need to be said that after thirty years of being told that there's no government money for public services, it's something of a surprise to discover that trillions are available as a free gift to the money markets.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon May 18th, 2009 at 05:52:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
This being said their argument (the Obamists) has been that they had to rescue AIG (not a bank), or investment banks (not banks), or bank holding companies (which are not banks either). So they could not use FDIC (an insurance among banks, strictly banks).

To avoid nationalizations the US gov long used preferred shares. Now they have started to convert some to common shares,a Trojan Horse which I wellcome, because it is a backdoor to nationalization, long term.

Patrice Ayme Patriceayme.com Patriceayme.wordpress.com http://tyranosopher.blogspot.com/

by Patrice Ayme on Mon May 18th, 2009 at 06:17:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But they certainly did not have to rescue bank holding companies if the bank holding companies were not holding banks that were in trouble?

If a bank holding company is going down and that is threatening a healthy bank that they own, the solution is to take the healthy bank holding company into receivership to shelter it from the collapse.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Mon May 18th, 2009 at 10:14:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
all the problem is from bank holding companies, which have been milking the banks with the hedge fiends. The Obamists have been deliberately confusing banks and bank holding companies. To protect rest of plutocracy. Basically as I have it in my incoming essay, they used the money making machine of banks to send all money to themselves and friends.
Exactly what the BANKINGA CT of 1933 wanted to terminate.
PA

Patrice Ayme Patriceayme.com Patriceayme.wordpress.com http://tyranosopher.blogspot.com/
by Patrice Ayme on Mon May 18th, 2009 at 02:23:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And this is a big part of why the "kill the bank, protect the banking operations" is nowhere near as complicated in most cases as it is made out to be ... go through the banks owned by the bank holding company, ensure that if dubious assets have been burrowed into their books, assets are shifted around so that they are solvent operations, and they can continue to operate under administration, with the balance of the junk assets and non-depository liabilities left with the bank holding company.

With the bank holding company disentangled from the payments system, it can simply go through bankruptcy like any other firm.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Mon May 18th, 2009 at 03:36:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
the gov has surrendered most of its civilian power to a few non elected individuals. Such is the mystery of the USA, explained.
(my main thesis in a few words)

Patrice Ayme Patriceayme.com Patriceayme.wordpress.com http://tyranosopher.blogspot.com/
by Patrice Ayme on Mon May 18th, 2009 at 06:21:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yeah, but a funny thing is that hedge funds have gotten out of this a lot better than banks, because they've often had much less leverage. Often because banks have refused to give them too much leverage as they considered lots of leverage far too risky. Oh the irony...

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid (arvid.hallen at gmail.com) on Mon May 18th, 2009 at 09:16:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series