NPR Misrepresents Bank "Nationalization" Yet Again
NPR presented an expert asserting that the taxpayers would be liable for all bank debt when it takes over bankrupt banks. This is not true. The government has no legal liability for the bad debt of bankrupt banks. It has generally honored not only the deposits but also the bonds of banks that were taken over by the FDIC, but it has no obligation to do so. If the current crisis leaves such a large volume of bad bank debt, it would be under no legal obligation to repay all of this debt at 100 cents on the dollar (presumably it would make owners of subordinated debt take the first hit).
--Dean Baker
Feeds: 


COMMENTS (20)
And Obama's new housing bailout is a back door bailout of the bond holders.
We should nationalize the banks and with insolvent banks pay off bond and share holders with the QSPEs and level 3 assets at book value.
Posted by: mmckinl | February 18, 2009 1:22 PM
No, there is no liability, but do we really want to increase deflationary pressures?
Posted by: Lord | February 18, 2009 2:33 PM
Thank you for clarifying. I was incredulous when I heard that expert's statement this morning and my gut said that expert was wrong. I'm glad you're correcting their wrongs. I hope NPR lets you on to set things straight.
Posted by: dfb | February 18, 2009 3:04 PM
Maybe what we need is a better way to express this to make it more palatable to people. Let's consider the economy as a prize fight right now, and both fighters are barely able to stand on their feet. The government is the referee. The ref should call the fight and see about getting these fighters ready for another fight, another day.
Well, it's not perfect, but nobody thinks the ref is going to fight for the fighters down the road. Same here. Nationalization is calling the fight (which is nothing but a death spiral right now) and seeing what you can salvage.
Posted by: Joseph Nobles | February 18, 2009 4:02 PM
Perhaps we could nationalize NPR.
Posted by: WillF | February 18, 2009 4:42 PM
It should be noted for the record that NPR really, really sucks. It seems like every time I turn to it they are getting an "expert" opinion on the economy from someone at Cato or AEI.
Posted by: bobbo | February 18, 2009 4:54 PM
NPR has stank the place up since they forced their most senior man (Bob Edwards) out the door at the behest of a certain administration.
Good thing PRI has come up to fill in the gaps. There is a difference between the two.
Posted by: mdh | February 18, 2009 5:32 PM
It's just occurred to me that I hardly listen to NPR at all any more for news or political discussion. I might listen to weekend edition for a few minutes, but since 2006, I'm just not interested in what NPR has become. There are some good local shows on NPR (here in Chicago, they make This American Life, for example), but their national news has been weakened by their efforts to mollify the Right.
It's so easy for me to download a half-dozen podcasts and listen to them in the car or on the mp3 player when I want opinion.
I have a feeling that Right-wing talk is going through the same thing now. A lot of the people I know who used to listen to Rush or Hannity don't bother anymore. They just don't have time for all the huffing and puffing and calling each other "Great Americans".
I have heard that the ad prices for those shows have gone down, too, but I don't know for sure that they're losing listeners. I bet they are, though.
Posted by: Pope Ratzo | February 18, 2009 5:33 PM
Actually, This American Life is PRI, not NPR.
Posted by: redactor | February 18, 2009 5:47 PM
Hasn't the taxpayer bought a fair load of that subordinated debt aka pfd shares?
Posted by: cavjam | February 18, 2009 11:02 PM
Megan McArdle kicked your ass today.
Posted by: Anonymous | February 18, 2009 11:46 PM
I'll defend Rajan -- the man definitely knows about financial regulation and I'm sure that he knows that the U.S. does not guarantee bank debt. I think that a more generous interpretation would be that he was interpreting "nationalization" as guaranteeing all bank liabilities (as I believe the Swedes did in their lauded nationalization plan). If the gov't only guaranteed insured deposits then that wouldn't be nationalization, that would be a normal bank failure. I know that people often conflate the two but we need to be careful about the difference
Posted by: Andy | February 18, 2009 11:57 PM
There are things NPR does well. Covering politics - especially economics - is not one of them.
I've heard NPR described as "radio for intelligent 13 year olds". That's about right.
Posted by: Whispers | February 19, 2009 12:09 AM
Von Raivo Pommer
Der Dax ist am Donnerstag etwas höher in den Handel gestartet. Der Leitindex notierte wenige Minuten nach der Eröffnung 0,4 Prozent im Plus bei 4222 Zählern. Vor allem Finanztitel lagen in der Anlegergunst vorn. Deutsche Bank, Commerzbank und Allianz tendierten knapp 2 Prozent fester.
In Reaktion auf die Vorlage von Geschäftszahlen für 2008 zogen MAN-Titel um 0,8 Prozent auf 33,15 Euro an. Der Lkw- und Maschinenbauer hat mit seinem operativen Gewinn die Analystenerwartungen weitestgehend erreicht. Der Ausblick für 2009 erscheine allerdings etwas zu optimistisch, schrieb DZ-Bank-Analyst Michael Punzet in einem Kommentar.
Posted by: michael punzet story | February 19, 2009 5:34 AM
Tuesday they ran a story about the hedge fund people living in Bridgeport CT. They ran it to show how the hedge funders and market speculators were suffering too.
Then later they had Mara Lieasson lying thru some political process story.
Those people need to suffer the loss of every penny they stole from this country, and she needs to lose everything she owns and live in a cardboard box in an alley somewhere cold.
That's what NPR has become, out of touch corporate whores. Thankfully I made it home soon after hearing her blather, sparing me more NPR crap. (Yes, I could have turned it off, but there's nothing to change the station too in San Diego, no talk, news, sports, or music during drive home time that is pallatable)
Posted by: Duckman GR | February 19, 2009 8:35 AM
Megan McArdle? Ha ha ha ha, ha ha ha ha, ha ha ha.
No, seriously; McArdle's a hack and a loser. Not even her children listen to her; her dog doesn't even listen to her; so who cares what she says about the economy?
Posted by: Chtulu | February 19, 2009 10:00 AM
Agreed that NPR has become yet another vehicle for the DC "common wisdom" gasbags to express what the beltway boobs think about issues x, y and z.
Factual accuracy? Recently-polled popular opinion? Irrelevant, who cares! I was at a cocktail party last night in Georgetown, so I have the inside scoop that really matters!
Just listen to any of Scott Simon's idiotic interviews on any given Weekend Edition, especially his many simpering, knowing, leering laughs that grate beyond description, and you'll understand where NPR is these days.
Bob Edwards was maybe the last call for NPR being an honest source of info for anyone hoping to get news more informative than that coming from the corporate traditional media.
Posted by: Chris | February 19, 2009 10:17 AM
NPR didn't just get that way by accident. Lynne Cheney made it her personal project to hack away at NPR and PBS through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Posted by: Kenneth Fair | February 19, 2009 10:54 AM
I'm glad you caught this! I emailed NPR my outrage at their disinformation and also emailed Angry Bear.
Keep up the good work!
Posted by: Laurie | February 19, 2009 11:48 AM
"Just listen to any of Scott Simon's idiotic interviews on any given Weekend Edition, especially his many simpering, knowing, leering laughs that grate beyond description, and you'll understand where NPR is these days"
Put so well. Same goes for Steve Inskeep. Note that these people pull down $300k/year for this.
There's at least one blog (NPR Watch) that takes on NPR specifically in its continual shift toward more vapid and more conservative programming.
Posted by: SN | February 20, 2009 1:08 AM