Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;medoraman, post: 1251171, member: 26302&quot;]First, you are assuming these banks only do business in the US. They don&#039;t. Second, if US assets are 50 trillion, then 1.5 trillion is only 3% of US assets, (and remember these banks are in 100 countries or more). These two banks in particular can easily pay that money back.</p><p><br /></p><p>Second, like Cloud said, I don&#039;t think you understand how large BoA or Citi is. They have massive assets all over the world. The money lent was to improve short term liquidity. Let the crisis pass, and values of the loans come back to normal, and these loans are almost trivial to them.</p><p><br /></p><p>I will publicly predict that every penny loaned to those two entities will be paid back, with interest, and at a profit to the taxpayers. The loans to AIG will probably be made good as well. The loans to GM and Chrysler had more to do with the UAW than it did for economics, and those two loans will be losses to taxpayers. Talk to me in three years and see if I am right. Almost all bailouts to financial companies have resulted in profits to taxpyers over the years, something little talked about. I am not talking about failing banks, but these liquidity crisis loans. </p><p><br /></p><p>I disagree with even making loans to banks, but because we have in the past the expectatino is there. Personally I would prefer the US flatly refuses to ever do it again in the future, and take away US backing of Fannie and Freddie, that action would instill financial discipline. That is a pipe dream now I am afraid.</p><p><br /></p><p>Chris[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in