It only takes a few moments to share an article, but the person on the other end who reads it might have his life changed forever.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

What should have happened four years ago:

The economists' alternative to bailouts, Garett Jones | EconLog | Library of Economics and Liberty

I'm still shocked at the speed with which bipartisan elites coalesced around TARP. 

A key reason: The proffered alternatives were incredibly painful. No bailouts would have meant bankruptcies much bigger and more complicated than Lehman--and that bankruptcy ostensibly threatened short run cash flows around the world.

Voters don't want pain. Yes, some voters want to see virtue rewarded and wickedness punished--they may even claim that the pain is good for you--but the rest of us want our medicine to taste good. 

This stark choice between 100% bailouts and a cluster of possibly 1907-panic-inducing megabankruptcies was totally unnecessary.  Did the big banks need equity injections?  Well, there were plenty of potential shareholders available for Citi, BofA, and all of the other TARP recipients.  And they had a name: "bondholders."   

No comments:

Post a Comment