Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
In effect, Mr Johnson wants the US Treasury to act as a lender of last resort, rather than being the rescuer of last resort. The banks will still own their toxic mortgages, but with the help of government loans, they can hopefully recapitalise themselves, and eventually earn enough money to write off the bad debt (and pay back the government loan, with interest).
|
...which, interestingly enough, is reminiscent of what the Japanese government did post-WWII, becoming the largest and most lenient bank out there because there's nobody else to become banks, or existing banks won't do their job and provide capital to people who need them.
Why, how ingenious! While there's no guarantee that throwing trillions at banks and financial intermediaries will really convince them to loan out again, the government itself becoming a lender bypasses that problem. Papa Sam doesn't -- or shouldn't, ideally -- care all that much about getting a profit off its loans, it cares a lot more about allowing businesses to receive capital for their operations; and in any case the position of a lender has far more leverage than the one-time beneficiary role will have, allowing for future, crucial, necessary adjustments to be made in the economy as needed. But of course, that's "socialism" and a big no-go, uh-huh.
Although I'm not sure it'll come out
that excellently in the long run. I can hardly call myself an expert or even an amateur of Japanese economic history, but I vaguely recall that the Japanese eventually had to change out of that model and not perfectly smoothly while at it.