The dearth of policy options in the Bank of America insolvency is entirely a matter of choice. The liberal capitalist prescription (notional, but whatever) is a forced bankruptcy, wiped out shareholders, haircuts for bondholders, dismissal of the management, forced disgorgement of their ill-gotten gains, reorganization and re-privatization. Now of course that's not going to happen, and it wouldn't fix what's wrong with the system even if it did. But that is a policy option and it's one that would have plenty of popular support.
Warren Buffett as "lender of last resort" is a joke. The banksters received $1.2 trillion from the Fed, on top of the toxic asset creditor bonanza and their fully subsidized looting spree; all at public expense. Buffett is making a huge, immediate profit at no risk. He's not lending. He's cashing in. No wonder he doesn't mind paying a bit more tax. It's a great investment.
Comments (4)
"Buffett is making a huge, immediate profit at no risk. He's not lending. He's cashing in. No wonder he doesn't mind paying a bit more tax."
my ex boss warren's plutonic antipode
harvey Golub
"Gifts to charities are deductible
but gifts to grandchildren are not"
the diff ?
a dime's worth
the system rolls on the same
no matter if we have
ten thousand Golubs or ten thousand Buffets
why ?
because each generation of plutonics restart the policy cycle
right now the majority just completed
about 35 years of open pillage
the next ???
well maybe the people might rise up
and chasten them ala the 30's-40's
that
even if their recent systemic
hi fi implosion hasn't done the trick
Posted by op | August 25, 2011 2:19 PM
Posted on August 25, 2011 14:19
And, even more, Warren's little dabble in the most generous light is a tiny fraction of the capitalization BofA needs. Arguably, from the way it's structured, it's not even capitalization, just a sleight of hand with a payoff.
I, too, can't see a dime's worth of difference between Golubs and Buffetts. Buffett is a better perception manager for liberal tastes; Golub, for conservatives.
Posted by Al Schumann | August 25, 2011 2:31 PM
Posted on August 25, 2011 14:31
"I, too, can't see a dime's worth of difference between Golubs and Buffetts"
I dream of a day when being excessively wealthy is viewed the same way we view pedophilia.
Hey, I can dream can't I?
Seriously though, people who gather that much wealth about themselves are sick in the head. It's a huge power trip disease. We need a clinical definition for it.
Posted by Drunk Pundit | August 26, 2011 12:59 AM
Posted on August 26, 2011 00:59
Sickness is right. After a point, the acquisition of wealth is active malice.
Posted by Al Schumann | August 26, 2011 8:23 AM
Posted on August 26, 2011 08:23