<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: When bankers are more dangerous than warlords</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/</link>
	<description>A slice of lime in the soda</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 23:53:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: CPie</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/comment-page-1/#comment-18071</link>
		<dc:creator>CPie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 04:28:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=5193#comment-18071</guid>
		<description>I think that the government will believe that it would be a good idea, but won&#039;t do it, simply because of political suicide. What politician would bail out yet another bank that doesn&#039;t take part in the US economy? 

The main problem is that even if we were to bail them out the Afghans probably wouldn&#039;t be that grateful anyway. Taxpayers would be furious, thinking that their money was &#039;wasted&#039; on something that had seemingly no effect on the effort and their trust.

Yet if we don&#039;t we will inevitably get blamed for its loss, like TaxLawyer said. I&#039;m guessing a loss in Afghanistan might be inevitable if more lose-lose situations like this keep cropping up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that the government will believe that it would be a good idea, but won&#8217;t do it, simply because of political suicide. What politician would bail out yet another bank that doesn&#8217;t take part in the US economy? </p>
<p>The main problem is that even if we were to bail them out the Afghans probably wouldn&#8217;t be that grateful anyway. Taxpayers would be furious, thinking that their money was &#8216;wasted&#8217; on something that had seemingly no effect on the effort and their trust.</p>
<p>Yet if we don&#8217;t we will inevitably get blamed for its loss, like TaxLawyer said. I&#8217;m guessing a loss in Afghanistan might be inevitable if more lose-lose situations like this keep cropping up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TaxLawyer</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/comment-page-1/#comment-18036</link>
		<dc:creator>TaxLawyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 05:24:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=5193#comment-18036</guid>
		<description>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&#039;s banks, look no farther than AIG and bailing out European banks by honoring worthless derivatives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>Unlike our bailout of U.S. banks, this one is really necessary&#8211;and cheaper than military  spending.</p>
<p>And as to bailing out another country&#8217;s banks, look no farther than AIG and bailing out European banks by honoring worthless derivatives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KenInIL</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/comment-page-1/#comment-17950</link>
		<dc:creator>KenInIL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 22:59:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=5193#comment-17950</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;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&#039;t it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t see any great problem here.  Palette up a few billion dollars, ship it over to Afghanistan, and turn it over to&#8230; someone, without getting a receipt.  It worked fine in Iraq, didn&#8217;t it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: walt9316</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/comment-page-1/#comment-17938</link>
		<dc:creator>walt9316</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:19:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=5193#comment-17938</guid>
		<description>Could it be that the US will finally be undone by its bankers and awol president?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Could it be that the US will finally be undone by its bankers and awol president?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MarkWolfinger</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/09/02/when-bankers-are-more-dangerous-than-warlords/comment-page-1/#comment-17937</link>
		<dc:creator>MarkWolfinger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:16:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=5193#comment-17937</guid>
		<description>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&#039;s presidency has been ruined by the single decision to employ Geithner and Summers.  What a shame.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It it possible that we would pay to bail out this Afghan bank?</p>
<p>Tim Geithner is an idiot, with no real world awareness, but surely even he would not allow this.</p>
<p>Obama&#8217;s presidency has been ruined by the single decision to employ Geithner and Summers.  What a shame.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
