Sunday, January 22, 2012

In Today's Paper, part 3

They let the banks fail and started anew. We bailed folks out at a cost of way more than buying every bad and questionable mortgage out there and giving the homes to the residents. And then the bankers took bonuses for saving their failed investments.

Which makes more sense? Keep in mind the bank bail out costs do not take into account the indirect costs of social services and unemployment and emergency room costs for the displaced. Those we bore as taxpayers.

Hindsight is great, but I do know that if I were in the position of handing out bailouts, there would have been strings attached, such as no bonuses, no golden parachutes and criminal fraud charges for those who bundled good and bad mortgages and then bet against them making it. Also, I would have made sure by passing laws this could not have happened again.

The problem is that politicians cannot do that because they need bank money to stay in power. Maybe the first step is to limit the amount of money that can be spent to get elected. and overturn Citizen's United.


No comments: