Insuring toxic bank assets, not a good idea

The provocative, but always interesting Willem Buiter explains why, in his view, insuring toxic bank assets is throwing good taxpayer money after bad private money.

We have yet to face this problem in NZ, though perhaps Mascot may be our trial run.

As usual Buiter’s piece is well worth a look.

Buiter notes:-

Like its American and Dutch counterparts, this toxic asset insurance scheme is without redeeming social value: it is inefficient, unfair and expensive to the tax payer. Apart from that it is great. There also are superior alternatives available: full nationalisation and, best of breed, the ‘good bank’ solution.

Not one for stinting in his comments.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine


One response to “Insuring toxic bank assets, not a good idea

  1. let the system collapse … it is corrupt, and founded on ill principles. Build a new money system.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s