Nesikep
Well-known member
What about the HUGE cost outside of direct bailouts? like infrastructure building just for the sake of creating jobs, what about the losses all the people went through? That money went into shareholder profits when times were good and the public got the debtHDRider":2q1p8k6f said:The banks all paid it back, with interest. Some banks were forced to take the money so no one could differentiate the winners from the losers.Bestoutwest":2q1p8k6f said:TexasBred":2q1p8k6f said:So we let them fail, then what??? The losses would have been many times larger than what the bailout cost and felt from the bank board room to your living room in real time real dollars and would have affected much more than your 401-k.
But isn't that the point of capitalism? To let the businesses that make bad decisions fail and those that make good decisions prosper? I have always been taught, and read a lot on here, that capitalism is a Darwinian enterprise: it's sink or swim. I have always wondered how bad off we'd have been if the banks had failed or if it was just a really good PR job done by their lobbyists?
Bail Out = $622.5B
Paid Back = $708.3B
https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/