The Bailout's Effect

Thursday, March 04, 2010

New figures show that not only did the bailout help avert disaster on Wall Street, but it may have softened the recession's blow throughout the entire New York City economy. James Parrott of the Fiscal Policy Institute examines what we know now about how bad it is and how bad it could have been.


James Parrott

Comments [13]

josh levine from

nick -- it became apparent halfway through the interview that the guest was using his newsworthy and outrageous assertion -- that NYC "averted" disaster -- in order to express his fundamental disapproval for the bank bailout.

It was like an Onion piece. He switched his position halfway through the interview and I'm guessing he's off the BL Show's Xmas card list for a year or two... I wouldn't imagine the outraged commenters, above, seeking to vent against da man were any too pleased either, I mean it's always preaching to the choir around here but really.

Mar. 04 2010 12:54 PM
Nick Lento from NJ

Brian, go back and listen to the tail end of this interview, it's hilarious.

You started reading some of the comments on how/why people are dissatisfied with the bail out and you asked the guest to comment......and when he started to comment, he didn't give you the kind of answer which you expected, so you interrupted him as if to remind him of what he was "supposed" to say.......then after you shut up, the guy went back on track and plainly and simply stated that the bailout was inadequate in it's size and scope and that it did not really help ordinary working people.

He rightly said that the bail out had a great effect on the financial community and gave them high profits but that it failed at the level of main street and ordinary folk....and the poor will be having even harder.

Here in NJ Christie is CUTTING unemployment benefits!!!

If Obama had listened more to Paul Krugman than Rahm Emanuel we would be in MUCH better shape to day and fewer ordinary people would be suffering so much.

It's so so telling, Brian, that your immediate impulse was to back the establishmentarian "take" that the bailouts prevented a complete global collapse and that they were required to save the financial commnity.

The fact is that there is STILL a major threat in the form of trillions of dollars in credit default swaps sitting out there like the sword of Damocles and the fact that something like 10% of the residential real estate market is "under water".

Anyway...go back and listen to the last few minutes and hear yourself trying to save the guest from saying something "too radical". LOL

Mar. 04 2010 10:35 AM
Alvena Ferreira from Western KY

The good ol' boys in Congress gave the good ol' boys on Wall Street a free ride with few stipulations. We are slowly sinking into the dreaded "D" word out here in the trenches, while Wall Streeters brag about how well they're doing--so they should not expect any kind feelings wafting their way. We bought them out and they sold us out.

Mar. 04 2010 10:31 AM
janine from Brooklyn

Yep, that's the solution... print more monopoly money and finance the future of our country into oblivion.

Mar. 04 2010 10:25 AM
Hugh Sansom from Brooklyn NY

Defaults on credit card debt are still rising rapidly. Foreclosure rates are still going up. The number of Americans with negative equity in their homes is still rising.

The circumstances for average New Yorkers and average Americans are dismal.

As Mr. Parrott has hinted, concentration of wealth is skyrocketing.

But there is absolutely no reason to believe that we will get real finance reform. The Oligarchs have spoken. Obama has obeyed. Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman, Nouriel Roubini, Michael Hudson, Elizabeth Warren and many many others have detailed this at length.

Mar. 04 2010 10:19 AM


Mar. 04 2010 10:19 AM
Robert from NYC

Oh good only the small and medium size banks are failing. The large banks that screwed us over in this are doing very well. More to rejoice over everyone!

Mar. 04 2010 10:17 AM
Hugh Sansom from Brooklyn NY

New York State has about 20 billionaires. (Yes, twenty.) All but one of those 20 live in the City. The one other lives in Westchester County.

Up around Buffalo, the economy looks a lot more like Detroit's.

Mar. 04 2010 10:16 AM
Hugh Sansom from Brooklyn NY

The story isn't over yet.

And as Mr. Parrott points out, for AVERAGE New Yorkers, things are just as bad as they are elsewhere -- to which we must add that living expenses are far far higher than anywhere else in the US (San Francisco and Boston being the only two that come close).

Mar. 04 2010 10:14 AM
Robert from NYC

Oh wow, so we should rejoice that only 200,000 people lost their jobs! Hurrah, hurrah, only 200,00 people lost their jobs... and probably healthcare benefits, and possibly living quarters. Let's divert attention to how bad it was at an earlier period. Those poor folks back then. But now? Now? Only 200,000 jobs lost here, only 10.6%.
Yea, yea, hurrah!

Mar. 04 2010 10:14 AM
Joy B from Manhattan

I wonder if my job loss gets counted in these statistics. When I was laid off in October, my boss offered severance; in exchange I agreed not to file an unemployment claim. My job was eliminated.

Mar. 04 2010 10:13 AM
Robert from NYC

What a bunch of crap. You're trying to sell us this spin on the bailout but it's just an excuse to get us to think there was no problem or it wasn't as bad a problem on Wall Street than there actually was. Fact is maybe it's just time this city stopped relying so heavily on Wall Street and it's sleazy mafia-like workings and take a higher road demanding that Wall Street follow that route as well. Wall Street needs NYC as much as the city needs Wall Street.

Mar. 04 2010 10:04 AM

"A Gumment trillion every day promises to keep the disaster at bay!"

Mar. 04 2010 09:51 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.