Lots of things were bundled together. I'm pointing out what cost money and what didn't.
> That said, to claim that they were "too big to fail", bail them out, and then not address that "too big" issue is bullshit. Either they're too big and need to be broken up, or they weren't, and should've been allowed to fail.
I agree, but point out that there's no good reason to limit that argument to financial institutions.
For example, it applies to govt institutions (fannie and freddie come to mind) and even govts (the US govt being a prime example).
Lots of things were bundled together. I'm pointing out what cost money and what didn't.
> That said, to claim that they were "too big to fail", bail them out, and then not address that "too big" issue is bullshit. Either they're too big and need to be broken up, or they weren't, and should've been allowed to fail.
I agree, but point out that there's no good reason to limit that argument to financial institutions.
For example, it applies to govt institutions (fannie and freddie come to mind) and even govts (the US govt being a prime example).