What if bankers were paid in toxic assets?

Posted Sep 14th 2009 3:40PM by Connie Madon
Filed under: Management, Federal Reserve, Financial Crisis

There's a new day dawning out there. Some analysts are proposing that bankers should be paid in toxic assets. Among the chief proponents of this idea are Vince Farrell of Soleil Securities and Jim Rodgers of Rodgers Holdings.

Now this seems to be a fine idea. The bankers, with their greed and excess speculation, took down our financial system. The U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve had to pledge $12.2 trillion of your money to bail out these ... (you finish the sentence as you see fit). Can you imagine what $12.2 trillion is like? Do you have any idea what this money could have done for our country?

We could have paid off all our debts, had money to finance the wars In Iraq and Afghanistan, given health care to all Americans, saved our manufacturing jobs here in the U.S., and much more.

Instead we wasted this money bailing out all these greedy and foolhardy persons.

It's now time for them to account for what they have done. No one has yet dared to do this. Instead the Federal Reserve has made them "too big to fail." "Too big to fail" is just another excuse to bail them out whenever needed. Why heck, we broke up AT&T back in the 1970s. There is no such thing as too big to fail. We can break up these big banks if the government has the will to do it.

The bankers need a wake up call. Paying them in toxic assets would at least make them pay attention to what they are doing. They just might stop with all the excess speculation and take a common sense approach to their trading.

Do you think paying bankers in toxic assets is a good idea?

Tags: bailouts, bankers, Federal Reserve, toxic assets, ToxicAssets