by In a paper, Larry Ball argues that inadequate collateral and lack of legal authority were not the reasons that the Fed let Lehman fail. … … the primary decision maker was Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson–even though he had no legal authority over the Fed’s lending decisions. … evidence supports the common theory that Paulson was influenced by the strong political opposition to financial rescues. … Another factor is that both Paulson and Fed officials, although worried about the effects of a Lehman failure, did not fully anticipate the damage that it would cause. James Stewart comments in the New York Times.
Topics:
Dirk Niepelt considers the following as important: Bailout, Federal Reserve, Lehman Brothers, Moral Hazard, Notes, Solvency, Treasury
This could be interesting, too:
Dirk Niepelt writes Does the US Administration Prohibit the Use of Reserves?
Dirk Niepelt writes “Report by the Parliamentary Investigation Committee on the Conduct of the Authorities in the Context of the Emergency Takeover of Credit Suisse”
Marc Chandler writes US Dollar is Offered and China’s Politburo Promises more Monetary and Fiscal Support
Marc Chandler writes Busy Wednesday: French Confidence Vote, Fed’s Powell Speaks, ADP Jobs Estimate, and Beige Book
In a paper, Larry Ball argues that
inadequate collateral and lack of legal authority were not the reasons that the Fed let Lehman fail. …
… the primary decision maker was Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson–even though he had no legal authority over the Fed’s lending decisions. … evidence supports the common theory that Paulson was influenced by the strong political opposition to financial rescues. … Another factor is that both Paulson and Fed officials, although worried about the effects of a Lehman failure, did not fully anticipate the damage that it would cause.
James Stewart comments in the New York Times.