Comments on: Should the US government create a “bad bank” to buy up toxic assets from US financial institutions? All posts and comments are copyrighted.

By: Ashley Rocca

Ashley Rocca — Tue, 05 May 2009 01:58:08 +0000

I don’t like the idea of the government creating “bad bank” to buy up toxic assets-it’s capitalist. If banks make a bad decision in loaning money to people who they wouldn’t normally loan to, there needs to be consequences for their behavior…what the banks did was unacceptable and there needs to be consequences.

By: John Shaw

John Shaw — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:04:16 +0000

Heres a quick response. Let all the banks and the homes burn. Dont sell out to foreign countries to fix our problems our we will be taken over. Oh wait, too late.

By: Stephen Ikalainen

Stephen Ikalainen — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:44:44 +0000

I really dont think creating “bad banks” will do anything to help our economy. It may help in short term because all of the toxic assets will be bought up but after sometime more banks will give out loans and create more toxic assets and the long term consequences will create a government bank that could be taking money instead of just buying up all toxic assets. this is not the way to help our economy because the more banks that are created the more loans and debt will stack up creating a worse situation than before.

By: Lauren Pohle

Lauren Pohle — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 04:28:10 +0000

I do not think that the US government creating a “bad bank” to buy up toxic assets from US financial institutions is a bad idea, but i dont think that it will work. The government is taking a huge risk by doing this but at the same time you cannot solve a financial crisis without the government assuming risk. One of the biggest difficulties in getting this bad bank program working was how to price the assests. If the government paid to little the banks would take a huge hit, but if the governemnt overpaid, then the taxpayers would take an even bigger hit. I think that if they let the banks hold on to these assests on their books then that would create an even bigger crisis. So, if the government bought all the bad assests, then taxpayers would take on all of the risk. By investing with private firms under the plan, the expectation is that taxpayers would share the risk along with any potential returns.

By: Andrea Rovedo

Andrea Rovedo — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 23:55:19 +0000

i don’t think a “bad bank” would be a good idea. Look wat happened when the government tried to help, they got screwed and their money was given out for raises. Are they serious? I don’t think the government should get involved at all. Let those banks suffer, they should have done a better job tracking where there money was headed. The government can’t afford to hand over money left and right for things that should have never gotten this bad in the first place.

By: Jenny Frost

Jenny Frost — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 13:49:50 +0000

the government comign up with the idea to create a bad bank is stupid. where is all our money gonna go when the economy takes a turn for the worse? whats gonna happen if we all lost our jobs and we even lost the ability to go to college if we cant afford it? I do agree with Charles that the government shouldnt interfere with the economy. Things are better left untouched in the economy and let it run its course.

By: Charles Legendre

Charles Legendre — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 22:22:59 +0000

The idea of a “bad bank” to buy up all toxic assets from US Financial Institutions is unconstitutional. We all should have an equal opportunity in this country to SUCCEED!! or fail… and therefore, BAILOUTS ARE TYRRANY. Us taxpayers do not deserve any more debt. We are already sunject to pay back trillions of dollars as it is. And if we do bail these intitutions out, who is to say that they will allocate the funds appropriately? From experience, I have seen in the past that companies who are given bail out money do not always use the money for the correct reasons. I have always been a fan of laissez faire economics presented by Adam Smith in his “Wealth of NAtions.” The government should not interfere with the economy. It will be guided by “an invisible hand” and will function properly on its own. Before we create anymore debt, let’s just try to think about it for once!!

By: Chris Marino

Chris Marino — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 05:38:04 +0000

I dont think the government should create a bad bank. I Feel that it will be a waste of time because the end result will be the people paying for it in the end. I think the government let these bankers and buyers suffer so that they do not make the same mistakes again because of corporate greed and maybe next time they will think before they buy and lend.

By: Lauren LaCommare

Lauren LaCommare — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 21:44:03 +0000

I dont believe that the US government should create a “bad bank” to buy up toxic assets from US financial institutions. In doing so they are relying on the taxpayers to deal with the situation. What the government is doing is rewarding bad behavior. They are rewarding the banks by bailing them out and they are rewarding the people who took out the loans because there not losing anything, and there not being punished for taking out loans in which they couldnt afford.

By: Mr. Ramos

Mr. Ramos — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 20:00:14 +0000

I really do not have any other strategy, but In my understandings I think it is a bad idea for the government to create a Bad Bank due to the fact that people already are in debt and half of that population can not pay that debt on time.