Bank nationalization, from Greenspan? but WHY? (follow the....)

[underpants]

But now Greenspan, a famous compatriot of Ayn Rand and fervent believer that markets "self-correct," has come out in favor of the nationalization of the banks. This would be more impressive, however, if the 82-year-old Greenspan didn't also continue to work as an extravagantly paid consultant. Who forks over big bills to such a widely discredited codger? Bond giant Pimco would be one, and the now-famous hedge-fund king John Paulson. What do these two clients have in common? They stand to profit mightily if the banks get nationalized. Because here's what generally happens in a nationalization — the equity holders, which is to say anyone who owns the banks' stock, which could be you and me, get wiped out. The stock becomes worthless. That benefits Paulson, who, according to the latest records, maintains huge short positions on U.S. financials. The senior debt holders, which is to say the people who own the banks' bonds, which is to say firms like Pimco, are basically bailed out — the government will, in most scenarios, continue to pay the debt service, and the value of the bonds would actually rise in a nationalization, as the threat of default has been effectively nullified.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/02/what_alan_greenspan_means.html

[rpannier]

1. Bond giant Pimco

Had to look a second time.
I thought it said, "Bond giant Pimpco"

on a serious note: Thanks for sharing the info

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Sounds like this template for nationalization is just another scheme

for the rich to socialize their losses while capitalizing on their gains.