Comments on: Why we were right not to nationalize the banks A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 By: traducator daneza Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:07:07 +0000 stylish, restrained and easy

By: rcwhalen Tue, 25 May 2010 02:07:53 +0000 Felix: Don’t feel bad, we did nationalize the banks. Silly boy. Best, Chris

By: Mark Wolfinger Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:52:49 +0000 It wouldn’t have to be better in all respects.

If the insolvent banks had been allowed (forced) into bankruptcy, there is one thing that is certain. The same despicable people who brought us to the brink would not be doing it again, and would not be taking billions from the taxpayers.

That difference would boost American morale. That is reason enough for me.

These people are selfish bloodsuckers.

By: Mike Morin Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:15:51 +0000 Concerning the Restructuring of the Global Financial/Economic System and Recent Discussion of Nationalizing “Banking” Interests

With regards to “nationalizing” Banks and other “investor owned” Institutions, we must be realistic concerning the inter-national composition of the investing institutions, corporations, and individuals.

Writing from a libertarian socialist point of view, I think it is necessary to clarify the objectives of any comprehensive program to re-dedicate private resources to a quasi-public mission and to consolidate equity and assets for the purposes of sharing the former and writing off the economically paralytic inflationary cost aspects of the latter.

In lieu of an economic system based on credit and equity trading, whose motivation is the underwriting of speculative ventures, we need to transform our fundamentally inflationary financial/economic system to one that is based on equity sharing and meeting the needs of people in the form of community betterment.

Such a financial system would be the right hand, the resource allocation facilitating function and services of an ambidextrous ecological, democratic, economic “plan and implement” economy that would respect and favor the sovereignty of villages/neighborhoods, educate-foster-facilitate-inculcate inter-community and inter-regional equality, unity and cooperation based on the basic principles of inclusion, equity, humanity, mutualism, altruism, quality of life (in lieu of standard of living), environmental/public health and wellness, sustainability, and peace.

Such a system would seek to establish a more just balance between competitive advantage and comparative advantage with the concerns of those indigenous to a community being paramount.

Such an economic system would recognize the necessity to embrace and implement conservation ethics for shorter term programs and projects of ecological economic redevelopment dedicated to survival pursuits and skills and its concomitant ubiquitous environmental improvement activities, and to the longer term programs and policies related to the legacy of the human race and its dominion (i.e. the recognition and respect of the resource limits imposed by a finite planet).

I call such a proposal an equity union and believe it to be a prudent and practical alternative to the extant economic/financial system. I believe such an economic rearrangement based on the fundamental mission of world unity and cooperation is the best hope for the purpose of entering an unprecedented era of peace and human progress and success.

Mike Morin
Eugene, OR, USA
(541) 343-3808

By: carping demon Tue, 06 Oct 2009 03:20:08 +0000 What happened to all the bank’s toxic assets? How much have they moved back onto their books? What makes you think they are actually solvent? I mean, really?

By: krishnamurthi ramachandran Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:14:37 +0000 Dear Mr.Felix Salmon,
Well and wish to hear the same from you.
I am a regular writer by comments on various subjects to this websites.
Many comments were published.
I have no time to take all my published comments from this website,and more occasions, it was disappeared or oops words found or gone into this website!s old storage.
If these things happens always, my freedom of expressions by hour long writings may not be known or written or seen to its users, its new members, my relatives, my students and my friends in India and in abroad.
Back to your writings, i have already written that,Why In America, particularly many banks, financial institutions were in very bad shapes and were closed.
The above questions are still not answered by this world famous news provider either by eminent writings or eminent debates either to me by e-mail or any invitation to me on any circumstances.
i have studied economics, taking tuition classes for high school students on economics, civics,history,geography and English.
I think that , the successful Nationalization of many banks, merger of small banks to nationalized banks, some private insurance companies to nationalized insurance companies etc, by previous Indian governments.
Are they not producing remarkable results in terms of nation building, deposit mobilization, giving credits by many loan, attractive,affordable rates of interests to higher college education,self-help groups,small scale business enterprises,to state government agencies and to large scale industries from time to time.
Results are always quite encouraging and expanding these nationalized banks operations to every nook and corner of India.
In America, peoples mindset is quite different.
They are allergic to public enterprise and public participation concepts.
Because, Capitalism is deep rooted on their mind and on their day today set up.
What happened last three years banks were fallen like pack of cards.
How many Americans were lost their savings, retired peoples hard earned benefits from ex employers and these miseries are still shocking and created a severe panic and some mental agonies and all like bad happenings.
As per media reports, and from TV coverages, some well known, some executives ,some directors, and some investors are literally thrown out from their day today life.
To avoid for further damages, Nationalization of Banks, putting their savings in government controlled or supervised bodies are very safe and will have peaceful sleep for further few more years.
There are merits and demerits on any economic theory and its implementations.
Of course lending will give good opening and it will give good profits to banks and to financial institutions.
Since How Long?
All patch up work, policy exercises will be only temporary respite.Like taking rainy coats for rainy days.
It is like, in the mid night, if any body suffers sudden headache or fever or minor acidity problems, then we will giving some readily available ,prescribed tablets for purely ,temporary healing to that patients.
If Americans on entire majority thinking, nationalization of banks are not very good or not a permanent solution for past and present banks closes are left to find their own alternatives.
No existing economic theories or existing economic actions will erase it from bad to worse.

By: Uncle Billy, Cunctator Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:24:57 +0000 To clarify, the previous lack of decorum was directed at 3:25. Larry, is that you?

By: The Real Deal Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:54:07 +0000 The banks should not be nationalized.

1) Banks are backed up by the Fed, which has unlimited liquidity powers. No other industry has such backup. The Fed did issue trillions in liquidity to bailout the banks.

2) Let them fail when they can’t make it. You have Fed, and you have FDIC to clean things up. That’s the way it should work. Moral hazard must end.

3) Major American banks are different from just about any other foreign banks. Over the decades they have become grotesque all-consuming greed machines, a bunch of financial Enrons. No government with any sanity would want to take them over. These banks cannot manage themselves, lest managed by the government. Fixing the mess their bankruptcy left behind is easier than nationalize them. Even when nationalized, one has to liquidate them immediately.

By: Phillip Huggan Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:52:52 +0000 Felix that sounds like dangerous independant thinking. Just like USA’s foreign policy in decades past was to obliterate Cuba and Vietnam among many others to prevent a potentially superior socialist model of development from emerging, banks didn’t even allow a single Nationalization as a test because they knew it would end their useless trading.
But you are using independant arguments that aren’t towing the finance industry line. When the purges come you better move to Boston or Seattle and the Bay Area or somewhere commie.

By: maynardGkeynes Mon, 05 Oct 2009 16:43:52 +0000 If you are making the limited point that nationalization would have been worse than what was actually done, I would agree with you. If you are saying that nationalization was better than allowing for an orderly liquidation of the banks’ assets, converting the debt to equity, and putting the bank’s assets in the hands of people who know what they are doing, you are quite wrong. Because the free market dare not be trusted when the all important welfare of corporate America was threatened, you and future generations of Americans (and Brits) will be much worse off in the years to come.