You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A way to tweak Geithner's Toxic Asset Plan from Harvard Law Prof Bebchuk... What do you think? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Aloha Spirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-02-09 03:19 PM
Original message
Poll question: A way to tweak Geithner's Toxic Asset Plan from Harvard Law Prof Bebchuk... What do you think?
Advertisements [?]
Prof. Bebchuk has been pushing for a government-sponsored sale of toxic assets to private funds, but he proposes the following as a way of making the risk/payoff more fair for taxpayers:

Basically, let the market decide the ratio of private investment to private share in the upside. (Geithner's plan allows the FDIC to determine this to some degree, where they have analysts set a debt to equity ratio up to 6:1.) Lebchuk proposes that the potential buyers should indicate what percent of the auction price they're willing to pay for what share of the upside later. Then auction the asset pool.

Here's the article on his Harvard blog, from March 31st.
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/2009/03/31/a-fix-for-geithner/

"....Treasury officials believe that because private parties have not thus far established funds dedicated to buying troubled assets, favorable terms are needed to induce their participation. This logic is reasonable, but it is important to keep the government subsidy at a minimum. Without any market check, the terms set by the government could substantially overshoot what is necessary to induce private participation and end up imposing large and unnecessary costs on taxpayers.

A program of public-private funds should be designed to minimize costs to taxpayers. To attain this objective, the government should base the terms of participation on a process in which private managers compete to be in the program...."



There are more links in the article if you're interested.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC