The only one I really agree with is number 5:
"The rescue of the backs came at a high cost to the Japanese taxpayer"

The following passage from the Wallstreet Journal both explains why Japan nationalized its banks and supports that point:

" But analysts caution the jury is still out on the fate of hundreds of U.S. banks still sitting on huge real-estate-related losses. As the nation debates how to deal with them, Japan’s experience — particularly on how to spend taxpayer money more effectively in a bailout — offers clues.

Japan spent nearly $440 billion in taxpayer money, mostly from 1998 to 2003, to protect depositors, nationalize the sickest of banks and beef up the capital of other financial institutions.

About 70% had been returned to government coffers by last year, according to the Deposit Insurance Corp. of Japan, which is funded by both the government and banks and plays a similar role to that of the U.S. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. More is expected to be recovered later."

In other words, by August 2008 (the time the article was written) 30% of the $440 billion investment by Japan's government had yet to be paid.
Source(s):
1. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121856704170634041.html#articleTabs_article

2. http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/08/lessons-from-japans-bank-crisis.htm...

Asker's Rating:

Permalink | Report