via Scribd:

BofA Merrill Lynch How Did a Private Deal Turn Into a Federal Bailout

Category: Bailouts, M&A, Really, really bad calls, Think Tank

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

4 Responses to “BofA/Merrill Lynch Merger: How Did a Private Deal Turn Into a Federal Bailout”

  1. Moopheus says:

    Cool. Hits all the key bankster/Republican talking points, except the CRA.

  2. Centurion9.41 says:

    Moop, clearly you desire to misrepresent the piece. It points to government policies (CRA was but one) as being the primary root in the last two paragraphs on the second page.

    We all know BR doesn’t want to admit CRA played a roll. But we also know well that not every cause and effect is mathematically quantifiable or demonstrable; which is the love affair of BR and the Chicago School.

    * SNIP *

    ~~~

    BR: There are lots of places where you can post discredited nonsense that is without a factual basis. This isn’t one of them

  3. Centurion9.41 says:

    After reading the whole report, my conclusion is simply this.

    Bernank, Paulson & Geithner wanted to avoid taking a “bail out Wall Street” message to the public, which is exactly what trying to save Merrill Lynch would be perceived as. Whether or not ML going under would have been a catastrophic systemic issue is academic; either these men believed it was the case or they had other motivations which could only be based in greed for power &/or money. Either way they couldn’t go that route.

    What these mssrs could do was tie ML to a major bank and thus force the American people/tax-payer one giant step closer to bailing-out of the financial sector.

    Had the financials been allowed to fail, three facts are inescapable:
    #1: the financial executives would have been held financially and legally held accountable

    #2: the economic picture as regards America’s balance sheet and way forward would be far more clear and the government & Fed would have had far more options available than they have now to address the challenges

    #3: the ability for politicians to wage class warfare would be almost non-existent because the equity and bond holders who took the risk would have paid their price and in doing so would have left politicians who live off of such evil without ammunition.

    What would have been lost? Litterally, 1s & 0s that make up the accounting ledgers of the financial system and the Feds “printing press” would have been adjusted to reflect the game’s standing. That’s it. Not one piece of physical material, not one $ bill, not one coin, not one building, or any other material object would be destroyed or changed.

    The whole fiat-currency system is nothing more than a giant IOU work/activity ledger that tracks and records perceived productivity and transfers that trust from one person to another. That’s it. Nothing more. The day that people stop believing that the green & white piece of paper in their pocket will get them something they want or is no will no longer be accepted by another person for the same, the piece of paper becomes worthless.

  4. boveri says:

    Had no reason to wate time reading this because it wasn’t a private deal. Merrill Lynch was double the size of Lehman and was going down the toilet. Paulson and Bernanke decided BAC could not back out from the takeover for obvious systemic reasons. Why make it anymore complicated than that?