[johnnymorgan]

> Tax payers” paid nothing, and benefited from the recovery from the disorderly Lehman collapse and the credit squeeze that caused. There’s a lot of speculation that the relatively mild inflation the US experienced post pandemic was due to all the QE and other moves the government and governmental bodies did, as well as pandemic stimulus

This is completely wrong and naive, please let us know what agency you work for.

You say stuff like that with an references, for the record everytime the money printer is run the tax payers, aka bag holders, pay out the ass.

Saying the inflation is mild is not agreed with, where are you getting that from?

[fnordpiglet]

https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-i...

Let me be clear - the “bailouts” didn’t cost anything. They were never done with tax payer dollars, except for TARP, which was repaid in full plus interest.

> On December 19, 2014, the U.S. Treasury sold its remaining holdings of Ally Financial, essentially ending the program. Through the Treasury, the US Government actually booked $15.3 billion in profit, as it earned $441.7 billion on the $426.4 billion invested.[2][3]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Progra...

Quantitative easing and other long term asset related balance sheet transfers materially reperformed as the assets were acquired during a stressed credit period and as credit improved the long term asset values increased, causing internal growth of the balance sheet value at the fed.

Additionally, the additional money supply contributed modestly towards inflation, but overall relieved enormous market pressures and allowed the economy to stay on stable footing:

> Several studies published in the aftermath of the crisis found that quantitative easing in the US has effectively contributed to lower long term interest rates on a variety of securities as well as lower credit risk. This boosted GDP growth and modestly increased inflation.[94][95][96][97][98][99]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing

To answer your question, I don’t work anywhere right now as I’m taking a break between gigs. But I did used to be a fairly senior person at the mega banks and was a senior person in securities trading during the financial crisis and navigated my bank through it successfully (albeit we were never distressed, but all banks were treated as distressed to prevent further runs). I have no skin in any of these things though, but am always surprised by the populist hot takes from folks so far removed from the system and what actually transpired in real reality that I often wonder how wildly diverged most folks view of reality is from the actual history that I literally saw unfold around me.

[johnnymorgan]

Oh I could tell you work in finance, that was obvious from the language usage and technical terminology.

I'm not going to write an essay to refute this, we shouldn't have to as the results are obvious, aka how's that Big Mac index doing on the 10y.

Do you know who Henry Duncan was, what his value prop was, and how/why it died?

The end game was inevitable, and very senior people were ignored in the 80s when the flaws where pointed out.

What you have stated here, I would argue it is the perception people have of what transpired, you saved the banks but are you really saying there was no cost, and if so where did the value generation come from and at who's expense?

We are talking about different points of view, and I do realize what I'm saying can be viewed as a critique of your value, and many more like you, however I'm not.

I understand, and agree with you, that like yourself many many people have been doing amazing work to keep the financial networks flowing.

The critique is with erosion of purchasing power of our store of value, the average person is not a wall street guy and didn't understand that Henry's value prop died in 1971 and how to store value completely changed.

| but am always surprised by the populist hot takes from folks so far removed from the system

Why are you surprised, serious question. The system isn't straight forward and there are elements that are just straight up dishonest, and unless you work in the industry you won't really understand all these things.

I would argue that the networks are designed this way now, versus how they used to work and this is where people's understanding of how it's supposed work, and the disconnect you see, derives from.