SMRs and AMRs

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Where the Bailout Went Wrong

By NEIL M. BAROFSKY
NYT

Washington

TWO and a half years ago, Congress passed the legislation that bailed out the country’s banks. The government has declared its mission accomplished, calling the program remarkably effective “by any objective measure.” On my last day as the special inspector general of the bailout program, I regret to say that I strongly disagree. The bank bailout, more formally called the Troubled Asset Relief Program, failed to meet some of its most important goals.

From the perspective of the largest financial institutions, the glowing assessment is warranted: billions of dollars in taxpayer money allowed institutions that were on the brink of collapse not only to survive but even to flourish. These banks now enjoy record profits and the seemingly permanent competitive advantage that accompanies being deemed “too big to fail.”

Though there is no question that the country benefited by avoiding a meltdown of the financial system, this cannot be the only yardstick by which TARP’s legacy is measured. The legislation that created TARP, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, had far broader goals, including protecting home values and preserving homeownership.

(More here.)

1 Comments:

Blogger Patrick Dempsey said...

Wait a minute. Two or three days ago Vox Verax published a RealClearPolitics article that said TARP worked. Now today, they publish an article that says TARP went wrong?

So, which is it? A federal bailout program can't both be a policy of success AND a policy of failure....

7:32 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home