Main question is would governments benefit from having a large stake in the financial sector? How profitabale was the sector before the Credit Crunch? I am asking because I don't deal with FA. Basically, if the sector was indeed a profitable one, then is it worth a consideration that governments did in fact envisage the Credit Crunch, that it would lead to a near collapse of a profitable sector & when the price is right to move in with public funds, with an intention to save the world economies, to simply buy into a profitable business? That way they have a win win scenario, where they buy in with public funds & the public pays it back somehow via taxes. Thoughts please
It's a big ask of " Joe Sixpack " to bail out the fat cats in finance. Especially as it was their fault partly AND they happily go on drawing massive salaries for not much.
Not to mention what happens when we are past the current crisis. Why should the TBTF banks avoid taking huge risks in the future? If it pays off, they make money hand over fist. If it fails, they fly commericial coach to DC to ask for more money.
Its a really clever scam because they know if they all wobble at the same time, the government cant let them all fail and will bail them out. Legalised robbery is not a bad way of looking at it.