Comments on: When bankers are more dangerous than warlords http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: CPie http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/comment-page-1/#comment-18071 Tue, 07 Sep 2010 04:28:54 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=5193#comment-18071 I think that the government will believe that it would be a good idea, but won’t do it, simply because of political suicide. What politician would bail out yet another bank that doesn’t take part in the US economy?

The main problem is that even if we were to bail them out the Afghans probably wouldn’t be that grateful anyway. Taxpayers would be furious, thinking that their money was ‘wasted’ on something that had seemingly no effect on the effort and their trust.

Yet if we don’t we will inevitably get blamed for its loss, like TaxLawyer said. I’m guessing a loss in Afghanistan might be inevitable if more lose-lose situations like this keep cropping up.

]]>
By: TaxLawyer http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/comment-page-1/#comment-18036 Sun, 05 Sep 2010 05:24:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=5193#comment-18036 This is a really crappy situation, but there is literally no choice but to bail them out. Just as there was literally no choice but to help the Pakistani flood refuges.

We need all the goodwill we can get in a war zone. Whether we will be thanked for it is a different situation. But whether we will be blamed for its failure is a foregone conclusion.

Unlike our bailout of U.S. banks, this one is really necessary–and cheaper than military spending.

And as to bailing out another country’s banks, look no farther than AIG and bailing out European banks by honoring worthless derivatives.

]]>
By: KenInIL http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/comment-page-1/#comment-17950 Thu, 02 Sep 2010 22:59:43 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=5193#comment-17950 I don’t see any great problem here. Palette up a few billion dollars, ship it over to Afghanistan, and turn it over to… someone, without getting a receipt. It worked fine in Iraq, didn’t it?

]]>
By: walt9316 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/comment-page-1/#comment-17938 Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:19:57 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=5193#comment-17938 Could it be that the US will finally be undone by its bankers and awol president?

]]>
By: MarkWolfinger http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/comment-page-1/#comment-17937 Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:16:33 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=5193#comment-17937 It it possible that we would pay to bail out this Afghan bank?

Tim Geithner is an idiot, with no real world awareness, but surely even he would not allow this.

Obama’s presidency has been ruined by the single decision to employ Geithner and Summers. What a shame.

]]>