Comment on ‘Zombie Offices’ Spell Trouble for Some Banks - The New York Times
archomrade@midwest.social 8 months agobut in the specific situation no one really did anything wrong
Banks invested in over-leveraged positions and lost liquidity, loosing their client’s savings. If they want the benefit of privatized banking and reap the profits, they should be prepared to accept the losses. I don’t think that’s a controversial opinion.
phillaholic@lemm.ee 8 months ago
There could be individual banks over-leveraged in commercial real estate, but those aren’t important. At this scale it’s large enough to cause a a major recession or crash. We’ve seen smaller banks fail recently.
archomrade@midwest.social 8 months ago
No, I’m making a generalized statement about privatized banking. If we are constantly socializing the losses when private banking makes a critical error, then we should be socializing the profit, too.
If they end up causing a crash, I think it’s time we socialize the assets left over rather than ‘bailing them out’ for continued private operation. You suggested that nationalizing the assets would be too controversial in this environment, but I actually think intervening on behalf of private financial institutions and commercial real estate landlords would be more so.
phillaholic@lemm.ee 8 months ago
It really depends on what you mean. TARP, from the end of the Bush Administration and early Obama Administrations turned a profit for the Government. nytimes.com/…/us-signals-end-of-bailouts-of-autom…