Fact 1: Of course, this is a remedy.
Fact 2: Any president of any political party would have done the same.
You may be frustrated by the government’s bailout of two recently bankrupt lenders, Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank. Agencies including the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) covered all deposits at the two bankrupt banks, but FDIC insurance only covers the first $250,000 of the accounts.
Some businesses and 1% of individuals far exceeded their banked insurance limits. In theory, you should have endured the pain of bankruptcy by standing in line to collect the rest of your money along with all your other creditors. By perfecting capitalism, the government avoided the risk of failure that is its central feature. The risk of failure should make people cautious about how they spend their money.
But American capitalism mostly exists within an opportunistic political system that prioritizes convenience over wisdom. Republicans are yelling at President Biden’s claims that taxpayers won’t fund the bailout, but a Republican president would have saved depositors as well.In fact, Republican President George W. Bush said he was just did it. It was an imminent crisis, even more serious than the financial crisis that had otherwise unfolded.
The huge 2008 bailout was very unpopular, but economists widely agree it prevented a recession that might have continued to this day. Given that regulators have indicated plans to back all deposits, Biden’s bailout appears to have had a similar effect, albeit much smaller.
The Biden campaign now has an opportunity to apply some of the lessons learned from 2008. A major component of these remedies was the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). This involved injecting cash directly into hundreds of banks to maintain their solvency. TARP needed taxpayer money, so Congress had to pass legislation authorizing spending of up to $700 billion. Only about half of that money was needed to stabilize the financial system.
Governments charged interest on the money they gave out, and many banks paid back more than they received. According to the Treasury Department, TARP has a lifetime cost of just $32 billion, spread over many years. ProPublica tracks all relief from the financial crisis and says the government has so far earned a net profit of $109 from TARP, as well as separate relief for mortgage agents Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. says. The biggest loss for taxpayers came not from bank bailouts, but from General Motors, which declared bankruptcy despite receiving $51 billion in government aid, leaving $11.3 billion owed.
[Drop Rick Newman a note, follow him on Twitter, or sign up for his newsletter.]
Still, the government made some mistakes. It generally did not impose sufficient limits on the banks that received the relief money. It was outraged that bailed out banks paid big bonuses to executives in the midst of a deep recession. Among them were the executives who had led the company to the abyss and were believed to be the first to blame for the crisis. There have also been “backdoor bailouts” where embattled companies such as insurance giant AIG allow trading partners such as Goldman Sachs to repay 100% of him.
The Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department and other agencies involved in the bailout have drawn criticism for opaque reports that cast doubt on exactly who receives the bailout money. Finally, after the 2008 crash, there were very few prosecutions for fraud or other criminal activity. It wasn’t directly related to the bailout, but overall it left the impression that Washington was too comfortable on Wall Street at the expense of the public.
Biden is now battling the impression that the 2023 bank bailout is a scaled-down version of the 2008 bailout. By any plausible definition, they are definitely remedies, no matter what Biden says. Governments choose, although not obligated, to intervene in private sector business and prevent losses. bail out.
But the Biden campaign is very likely to implement the 2023 bailout in a more acceptable way than the 2008 bailout. For now, Biden is right about taxpayer money not going to bailouts. Funds covering depositors over $250,000 come from a bank-covering insurance pool that is funded by the bank by paying insurance premiums. Costs could trickle down to bank customers through higher fees, as Republicans argue. But it may not be enough to make a difference.
It also affects bankers who have pushed their businesses to the brink. Silicon Valley and signature management are out. They do not receive news bonuses. Stock is worthless and will not come back. The bank executive who held the stock is one of his biggest losers. In 2008, by contrast, most bailed-out banks survived and recovered their plummeting stock prices.
Some Silicon Valley executives sold stocks shortly before the collapse that may have had undisclosed information about the bank’s precarious position. So does the management of First Republic Bank. The company hasn’t gone bankrupt, but it’s been under stress since its stock price plummeted since Silicon Valley went bankrupt. Prosecutors, if they have evidence, will relish the chance to pursue insider trading charges and correct a maddening lack of accountability from 2008.
Federal prosecutors are also looking into whether there was any wrongdoing at any of the failed banks. Shareholders are also suing the banks. And if the crisis remains contained, regulators can have the luxury of focusing on a handful of rebellious individuals rather than trying to save the entire financial system at once. There’s never a better time to get involved in bankruptcy, but the worst might be after the last group of bad guys escaped it.
Rick Newman Yahoo FinanceFollow him on Twitter. @rickjnewman
Click here for political news related to business and money
Read the latest financial and business news from Yahoo Finance