Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on GOVERNMENT BAILOUTS AND BANKS. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 3-page paper argues that the government should not have bailed out the failing banks in late 2008. Bibliography lists 2 sources.
Page Count:
3 pages (~225 words per page)
File: AS43_MTbankbail.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
get it right was through passage of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP. Even with its fancy name, the aim was clear - this was a government bailout of
investment banks that had risked money in dubious investments. By injecting money into the troubled banks, it was believed that the banks would stabilize, lending would start again and a
crisis would be averted. But some 20 months later, banks still arent lending, yet news is that the executives of these banks ended
up with rather large bonuses, thus sparking the ire of a lot of people. Our contention is that while something needed to be done during the dark days of 2008,
a strict bailout was not the answer to the problems. Williamson with the National Review wrote in late 2009 that free markets
when it came to banking was well and good, however, "its difficult to imagine how . . . the Fed could have intervened to prevent the Great Depression without executing
something equivalent to a bank bailout" (p. 30). Williamson and others who supported the bailout point out that such an action, in the form of a "free loan" isnt so
different from a capital investment or the soaking up of distressed assets (Williamson, 2009). The very existence of the Federal Reserve (and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, for that matter)
points out an "implicit judgment" that bankruptcy laws and markets, in and of themselves, may not be very sufficient when it comes to banks and the economic system (Williamson, 2009).
Others claim that the bailout, in the form of TARP, was necessary. Why? Market economists assume that rational choices plays a role
...