On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 10:01 AM, Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In the case of B.S., the shareholders of a bankrupt bank got paid > > Initially $2, now it's looking like $10, when the stock was $60 just > a few weeks ago. That's admittedly greater than $0, but the > shareholders are still taking a big hit.
There is the assumption here that as long as the common-stock holders take a big hit, then it is all fair and square. Yes the stockholders do deserve to take a big hit but what about the real robbers? You know the ones who took home billions in bonuses between 2003-2007 on profits that later turned out to be bogus and had to be written down? > The gov has guaranteed something like GBP110b in NR's assets - and > apparently some of the bank's best assets were sheltered in some > offshore vehicle, leaving the government with the crap. That's a lot > bigger than what the Fed is guaranteeing JPM over BS. The bigger story both in the UK and the US is the implicit bailout of every band and investment bank. Does anyone think that the government is going to allow Lehman Brothers to fail? Is this not a gift to Lehman stockholders? The amount the Fed explicitly pledged to JPM is peanuts in comparison with this larger gift. The whole thing really stinks. But then are there any good options here? -raghu. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
