Are they still doing it? Is JPMorgan Chase’s 2 billion plus loss from playing Las Vegas
games with derivatives a warning that the big banks could come to the taxpayers
again looking for a bailout? Granted
JPM’s loss, even combined with the 16 or 17 billion stock decline in the first
few days, is not large in terms of their capitalization; nevertheless it is
disturbing to see the reckless investing carefully hidden from
stockholders. Wasn’t that what caused
the financial meltdown in 2008?
In 2008 when the banks were taking the economy into
the sewer with their foolish gambling, we were told that they were “too big to
fail” and therefore the taxpayers must bail them out. That was welfare—what else could we call it? Well, maybe socialism. And isn’t it ironic that when welfare reform
was enacted in the 90’s, it didn’t apply to corporations—just individuals?
Since 2008, the banks, particularly JPM, have
grown. If they were too big to fail
then, surely they still are. It’s too
bad that when they came to us for a bailout, we couldn’t have forced a breakup
into smaller entities, not so internationally intertwined. Then the free market would be doing the
policing—if the banks did dumb things, they could face bankruptcy, not welfare.
I would like to learn more about money, economics, personal finance, the whole nine. I admire that you are informed and empowered when it comes to managing your own money, and that you know a lot about economics on a national/international scale as well. My financial literacy basically consists of my having read Rich Dad, Poor Dad for fun last summer. The author of that book makes a case FOR high-risk investments. Of course, he's talking about gambling with your own money, not thousands of other people's money. Why do you think the banks do it? Are they just trying to make more bucks faster?
ReplyDelete