|
||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
![]() |
| Not a blog but a "q-and-a" (pronounced "quanda"), this page is about the basics of economics. Its premise: there are no stupid q's. And if some a's seem dim, take heart: I can brighten them up in response to objections, corrections, refinements. Comments on posts feature yours, and my responses. Enough of you now frequent and query the quanda that I post most every day. Haven't seen your q yet? Send it again. All a's should be taken with a shaker of sodium chloride, if not a Lot's-wife's-worth. And speaking of salt, the mustache and "hair" in the photo has a lot less of that condiment, and rather more pepper, than can be seen on TV. Think of it as time travel. |
« Previous Entry | Main | Next Entry » Did Hank Paulson Just Want to Save Goldman Sachs? Name:
John-Erik Nilsson
Question: [In the Bernanke on the Record forum hosted by the NewsHour,] Chairman Bernanke did not mention the bailout of Goldman Sachs -- the first bank to receive such funds. Was it more critical to the survival of the banking system than Lehman Bros? I have heard allusions that Sec. Paulson was only interested in saving Goldman Sachs, nothing else. Is there any substance to that? Paul Solman: Who knows what evil lurks in the minds of men? The Shadow, perhaps, but not me. Maybe not even the shadow formerly known as the Secretary of the Treasury, who presided during crunch time. It is increasingly clear that the subconscious runs much of the internal show in us humans, so maybe Hank Paulson was dedicated to saving Goldman at all costs (to us taxpayers), and will never consciously know it. On the other hand, this Sunday's NYT reports Paulson contacts with his former firm, during the heat of the crisis, that are at the very least eyebrow-hiking; at worst, flatly incriminating. Goldman now disputes that they were in danger at all. In this time's-arrow universe of ours, moving ever forward, it seems we'll never know. (Or not in my lifetime, anyway.) But, to take Paulson's side for a moment, if YOU were Treasury Secretary, which firm would you have saved: Lehman Brothers -- reportedly holding $600-700 billion in total assets (loans and the like) -- or Goldman Sachs at more than a trillion? And if they had to do it over again, a lot of people imagine Secretary Paulson would have saved Lehman too. Look what happened when the government didn't. -- Posted August 11, 2009 | Comments ( ) | Permalink
TrackBacksListed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Did Hank Paulson Just Want to Save Goldman Sachs?. TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/mt4/mt-tb.cgi/1551 Comments |
||
![]() |
![]() |
| |||||
|
|||||
| |||||
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | |||||