[{"document_url": "https://3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2009/04/obamas-ersatz-capitalism.html", "unformatted_src": "/wp-content/legacy/6a00d8341c562c53ef01156ebe1bfc970c-320wi", "src": "https://3quarksdaily.com/wp-content/legacy/6a00d8341c562c53ef01156ebe1bfc970c-320wi", "formatted_filename": "a d c c ef ebe bfc c wi", "alt_text": "Stiglitznyt", "original_width": 190, "original_height": 260, "format": "jpeg"}, null]
{"url": "https://3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2009/04/obamas-ersatz-capitalism.html", "warc_filename": "crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2022-27/segments/1656103669266.42/warc/CC-MAIN-20220630062154-20220630092154-00360.warc.gz", "warc_record_offset": 115254098, "warc_record_length": 14340}
Joseph Stiglitz in the NYT:

In theory, the administration’s plan is based on letting the market determine the prices of the banks’ “toxic assets” — including outstanding house loans and securities based on those loans. The reality, though, is that the market will not be pricing the toxic assets themselves, but options on those assets.

The two have little to do with each other. The government plan in effect involves insuring almost all losses. Since the private investors are spared most losses, then they primarily “value” their potential gains. This is exactly the same as being given an option.

Consider an asset that has a 50-50 chance of being worth either zero or $200 in a year’s time. The average “value” of the asset is $100. Ignoring interest, this is what the asset would sell for in a competitive market. It is what the asset is “worth.” Under the plan by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, the government would provide about 92 percent of the money to buy the asset but would stand to receive only 50 percent of any gains, and would absorb almost all of the losses. Some partnership!