- What is actually the problem with letting an investment bank like Lehman Brothers collapse? I can see why commercial banks would cause problems if they went bust because the savers could lose money (although in practice their is deposit insurance), but surely if an investment bank goes under it just means that the assets get sold off to other banks at a more realistic value and the shareholders lose their investment but that's it.
- Why have Democrat politicians in the USA been blaming the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act for the collapses when as far as I can see this act allows banks to have both commercial and investment functions. The banks that have collapsed weren't taking advantage of this law though and were purely investment banks. In fact it is only because of this act some of them have been rescued by being taken over by commercial banks like Bank of America and Barclays. Spreading the risk by operating in both markets seems sensible.
- Isn't it sweet how the far left are convinced that this demonstrates that capitalism is doomed, just like they did when a dozen other crises hit the financial sector?
- Am I being complacent when I assume that this will all blow over with a few collapses then whoever governs Britain or America for the next few years will claim credit for the recovery?
Samizdata quote of the day
6 hours ago