Rock Sexton
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2008
- Messages
- 295
Apparently there was a Bloomberg article not to long ago detailing that the $9.7 trillion that has been swindled (at that time) could've paid off 90% of the mortgages here in the U.S .......... wouldn't this in itself be a bigger solution to creating consumer spending than giving the money to the banks? Not that I'm in agreement with either choice............
Now let me think logically here. If there was no other choice, but that of moral hazard for them - they decided to give the money to the banks. This logically leads to the fact that they don't want people out of debt. If those mortgages had been cleared, they could've drastically reduced the exposure to toxic derivatives.
Isn't the number now around $12-$14 trillion? I'd imagine that would cover all mortgages and a good portion of CC debt and student loans.
Now let me think logically here. If there was no other choice, but that of moral hazard for them - they decided to give the money to the banks. This logically leads to the fact that they don't want people out of debt. If those mortgages had been cleared, they could've drastically reduced the exposure to toxic derivatives.
Isn't the number now around $12-$14 trillion? I'd imagine that would cover all mortgages and a good portion of CC debt and student loans.