| mrstickball said: But here's a question: What exactly would we have lost if the banks went under? It's not like every single bank participated in the atrocious behavior, and sold so much toxic assets. Many were left unscathed. Furthermore, the toxic mortgages would not have been forfeited and the houses would have been given to the bad purchasers for free. The debts would of been outstanding, still. Other banks would have come in and bought the toxic assets at discounts (as they always have done) and banks would have actually learned a lesson. |
Worst case scenario? Complete loss of faith in the financial system leading to massive cash withdrawls and a collapse of the money supply, the lack of liquidity and general uncertainty grinding economic activity to a halt.
Even though I think the scale of failure was too huge to stand idly by, I agree that the banks still need to be taught a lesson. Pull a Standard Oil and dice them up into more managable chunks while keeping a closer eye on huge system-wide problems that will develop from time to time. Too big to fail is too big to exist as a whole.
"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event." — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.
