 TBTF: Where Do We Stand?Imad A. Moosa
Chapter 10 in The Myth of Too Big to Fail, 2010, pp 195-200 from Palgrave Macmillan Abstract: Abstract There is only one (society-wide or economy-wide) perceived (or alleged) benefit that can be gained from bailing out financial institutions deemed too big to fail: avoiding a systemic collapse. However, the claim that the failure of one financial institution can cause systemic failure and significant economic destruction cannot be substantiated by resorting to history, economics or simple intuition. Corporate failure is an integral part of the so-called “creative destruction”, which is a feature of capitalism that the TBTF doctrine is inconsistent with. Avoiding systemic failure is a perceived benefit only because regulators and the managers of failed institutions use the language of fear to warn that failure to bailout the underlying institution will cause misery for millions of people. It is all nonsense because humans are resilient. If people can outlive an earthquake or a tsunami, they can surely survive and flourish in the aftermath of the collapse of a bank, an insurance company or a hedge fund. Keywords: Financial Institution; Moral Hazard; Hedge Fund; Political Connection; Creative Destruction (search for similar items in EconPapers) There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:pmschp:978-0-230-29505-6_10 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Banking and Financial Institutions from Palgrave Macmillan |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.