Preview

Lehman Brothers and the Persistence of Moral Hazard

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
714 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Lehman Brothers and the Persistence of Moral Hazard
Lehman Brothers and the Persistence of Moral Hazard

Not only is it questionable public policy to use taxpayer money to bail out private companies, but, more important, it creates a moral hazard: the incentive for those companies to take excessive risks with the knowledge that the government will save them should things go wrong.

Of course, the plan backfired completely. The chaos that ensued forced the government to step in to protect almost every financial instrument involved in the credit markets, from money market funds to commercial paper to asset-backed securities, and to ride to the rescue of some of America's largest banks. In the process, the government created moral hazard on an epic scale, transforming a vague expectation that certain financial institutions were "too big to fail" into a virtual government guarantee. Moral hazard already existed in the system on at least three levels.

First, bank employees and managers had asymmetric compensation structures. In good years, they stood to make huge amounts of money; in bad years, even if the bank lost money, they would still make healthy sums. This gave employees the incentive to take excessive risks because they could shift their potential losses to shareholders.

Second, shareholders had the same payoff structure. Banks are highly leveraged institutions; every dollar contributed by shareholders is magnified by 10 to 30 dollars from creditors. This meant that in good years, shareholders benefited from profits that were juiced by leverage, but should things go wrong, they could shift their potential losses to creditors. As a result, paying bank executives in stock did not mitigate their behavior; in fact, the most senior executives at both Bear Stearns and Lehman had and lost enormous amounts of money tied up in their companies.

Third, creditors had only limited incentives to watch over major banks.
Ordinarily, creditors should demand high interest rates on loans to highly
leveraged

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    The government could have placed tighter constraints on the credit market; the government agencies charged with managing banking policies and procedures could’ve formulated a policy that would require that banks were only able to hedge a certain amount of liability as long as they had enough capital to cover double the amount of the liability. The government could also have placed more stringent regulations on banks and related financial institutions to provide proof that the potential buyers of homes could fiscally make the required home/mortgage payments in lieu of the poor economy. This could have been accomplished by verifying their credit score, annual salary, and reviewing 6-12 months of the potential homeowner’s financial statements to ensure their candidacy and responsibility. Another regulation that could have averted the 2008 credit disaster would be requiring all potential home buyers to take a financial course that included content covering how to read legal contracts” or something similar. Yes, this additional step would prolong the home buying process but in the long run it would potentially weed out the vast majority of homeowners that would likely default on their mortgages.…

    • 496 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    pineda

    • 253 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Politics have a role in bailing out and propping up shaky financial firms during the economic crisis.…

    • 253 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Inside the Meltdown

    • 490 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The stock of a global investment company, Bear Stearns, began to drop drastically on March 10th, 2008. A share of Bear Stearns was as high as $171 and by the afternoon dropped to $57. Former CEO of the company, Ace Greenberg, tells CNBC that all of these rumors are “ridiculous.” As time goes on, Bear Stearns’ cash reserves were disappearing and people invested in the company were immediately withdrawing. Bear Stearns was basically racing to find a company to buy them out or they would go under. Current CEO of Bear Stearns, Alan Schwartz, got ahold of JP Morgan’s CEO, Jamie Dimon, to buy out Bear. A ton of government officials come to Bear to look over their records and it is not a pretty sight. Bear was deep in toxic assets. The Federal Reserve was prohibited from lending any money to Bear so they used JP Morgan to bail out Bear Stearns. Unfortunately the company could not be saved and Bear Stearns was gone after being sold to JP Morgan at $2 per share.…

    • 490 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The federal government responded to this crisis by spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to bail out Wall Street. While the government rushed to save the big banks because "they were too big to fail," they did very little to hold Wall Street executives responsible for their illegal behavior, and not nearly enough to reform the banking system and prevent such a crisis from happening again. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act did provide some very important regulations…

    • 222 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    They took all the money from the banks to buy stocks. People bought on credit and couldn’t afford the payments and then couldn’t buy new things. People were buying on margin. When people spend money, they do not have it. This caused problems for the entire country.…

    • 425 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The private sector had to try and make it on their own. If the company was not important to strengthen of the economy they did not get bailout. The state the company is in they should try hard to make sure that company start an make a profit so they can stay in that state.…

    • 494 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Tv Advertisement Room 101

    • 659 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Banks have made millions and indeed Billions of pounds in profit over the last 20 years at many peoples expense, through overblown interest charges and mortgage default payments for example. The top tie within these firms are paid gross bonuses and wages, that is extreme in an area of business.…

    • 659 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Black Box

    • 732 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Considering that the banks earn a transaction fee from selling securities, it may have been more profitable for them to hide the risks from investors and increase sales…

    • 732 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Progressive Reform Essay

    • 931 Words
    • 4 Pages

    As soon as Franklin D. Roosevelt entered office he closed down all the banks to stop them from closing down. He began to shift the economy to have a stable dollar value that could be inflated or deflated if needed. After, the Glass-Steagall Act enabled the government to regulate banks, and give money to those whose banks failed through the Federal Deposit Insurance (Brinkley page 668). The Securities and Exchange Commission was established to regulate the stock market, so it wouldn’t crash again (Brinkley page 668). The regulations made the financial sector stable and promoted the public to participate in the stock market. The government’s role in the economy had increased, but it wasn’t very effective in relieving the conditions of the Great Depression. The policies helped more to prevent this from happening again, but did little to overall solve the Great Depressions problems.…

    • 931 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thousands of banks filed for bankruptcy and at that time there was no insurance that insured customer’s money. So no matter how much you had in the bank, you lost it all, because the government took the money. This is why when election came and Franklin D. Roosevelt was up for president he was elected. He actually had a legit plan for Americans, so they wouldn’t be in what they were going through anymore and there would be happy families. This is what Americans wanted someone that wanted to help them and realize they were in need. That’s is why Franklin D. Roosevelt developed a plan he called the New Deal,…

    • 407 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    This most likely caused the people to not trust banks or governments anymore because I don’t blame them. In my opinion, I think that if the government protected and insured bank accounts then not as many people would’ve lost their saving accounts and if the banks didn’t invest in the stock market then people could get some of their money back. Many banks ended up failing though. In 1929, 600 banks closed. By 1933, 11,000 of the nation’s 25,000 banks had failed.…

    • 744 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The banks just like many others put all their money into investments in the stock exchange but when that all crashed it left them with no money to give to the rightful owners, this caused a massive five thousand banks to close and over nine million saving accounts destroyed without those nine million getting their money. The economy or lack thereof, led to people getting fired from their jobs or their job just completely shutting down resulting in the rate of unemployment to soar. There was said to be one million unemployed citizen in New York City alone and a disturbing fifty percent of the able bodied workers in the city of Cleveland were out of…

    • 661 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Great Depression

    • 864 Words
    • 4 Pages

    which led to 11,000 banks to bankruptcy (Taylor N. A, Short History of the Great Depression,…

    • 864 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Too Big To Fail

    • 305 Words
    • 1 Page

    government will provide assistance to prevent its failure. "Too big to fail" describes the belief…

    • 305 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Public money is essentially the people’s tax money which should go towards bettering the roads, upgrading hospitals and schools and providing the poor with housing. Private companies therefore, should not be bailed out with the public’s money as these companies chose to be private and therefore have to bail themselves out of their financial situation. Private companies, do provide essential services to the public at a cost, this, however, does not make using public money to bail private companies out a financial situation…

    • 1740 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays