Why must the shareholder get stuck holding the bag? It's not like they get special inside knowledge or treatment. We're punishing the people who bought Citi's story instead of the ones who ran it into the ground?
So you'd rather punish the US taxpayer, who very likely has no direct investment in the company (outside of index funds), and has nothing to gain if the company does well? Sure, it sucks for the shareholders, but that's exactly what they signed up for - a share of the companies returns in good times and bad.
Because that's the point of being a shareholder. We're not punishing anyone. The real question is why should the government reward people who bought bad equities?
Comments
Why must the shareholder get stuck holding the bag? It's not like they get special inside knowledge or treatment. We're punishing the people who bought Citi's story instead of the ones who ran it into the ground?
So you'd rather punish the US taxpayer, who very likely has no direct investment in the company (outside of index funds), and has nothing to gain if the company does well? Sure, it sucks for the shareholders, but that's exactly what they signed up for - a share of the companies returns in good times and bad.
Because they get compensated for the risk they are taking. Now if the shareholders want to sue or overthrow the management they have that right.
Because that's the point of being a shareholder. We're not punishing anyone. The real question is why should the government reward people who bought bad equities?