Re: [Pen-l] new bail-out proposal

[raghu <mraghu01@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 8:26 AM, michael perelman
<michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Also, it allows Obama to avoid being labeled as a socialist.  Other than
> that, it sounds stupid.



I disagree. On its own terms, the plan makes a lot of sense. We should
soon find out if the banks have a mere liquidity crisis (which this
plan should resolve) or a deeper insolvency crisis which should lead
to nationalization.

Treasury has clearly learned from the failure of Paulson's TARP:
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/mar2009/db20090322_447222.htm

"This approach is superior to the alternatives of either hoping for
banks to gradually work these assets off their books or of the
government purchasing the assets directly," Treasury said in a
briefing paper. "Simply hoping for banks to work legacy assets off
over time risks prolonging a financial crisis, as in the case of the
Japanese experience. But if the government acts alone in directly
purchasing legacy assets, taxpayers will take on all the risk of such
purchases—along with the additional risk that taxpayers will overpay
if government employees are setting the price for those assets."



-raghu.

--
Plankton lobbyist: "NUKE THE WHALES!"
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l