1 Comment

“Instead of allowing the bank’s executives to twist in the wind and forcing their biggest venture capitalist clients to take a haircut loss after wasting far more of other people’s money, they all got a bailout.” Are you sure?

I was under the impression from the administration’s phrasing and the analyst reactions that only depositors / account holders were being fully refunded, and that the government was basically ensuring those who held money there got everything back AT THE EXPENSE of shareholders and executives-- or at least that was what Janet Yellen said would happen. (Though that may not count the bonuses executives paid themselves just before the crash, no clue if anything will be done about that.) There could be a shortfall covered by that federal bank collapse fund, but my understanding was that INVESTORS (and executives) were being forced to take the haircut in deposit-holders’ place.

Am I wrong about that? Because I might be -- I keep hearing mixed messages on the issue in the media, and that has me befuddled. Would appreciate if someone more knowledgeable could verify or correct me?

Expand full comment