[lbo-talk] Timmy & Ben luv Goldman!

[// ravi]

On Aug 24, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Jordan Hayes <jmhayes at j-o-r-d-a-n.com> wrote:
>> Coulda made more had they paid less than 100.
> 
> If only that was their mandate, instead of what they did which was stabilize the market.
> 
> Hell, *Goldman* could have made more money on this.  But I guess that's my point: no one wanted to take the risk, so you need to have backstops against this kind of panic.
> 

Does that mean that with these kinds of last resorts against panic, the system is basically sound i.e., these guys are not creating profits out of whole cloth (or) endless growth is possible?

I mean: AIG IIUC made a lot of bad calls and lost money. As a result nobody was willing to loan them money (or do business with them?) to keep them going. Government stepped in and gave them money to keep going, pay off stuff, etc. And that was enough for AIG to recover quickly and significantly enough to pay off the government, including a neat return on the investment?

	—ravi