Don't get me wrong, I too have zero sympathy for them. They rolled the dice on risky investments and lost. However, Bear Sterns going under would've been VERY bad for a lot more that a few rich investors. Think CalPers. I thought the FED actually did a smart thing by guaranteeing the loan to JP.

>What would Bear Stearns have been worth if the government had allowed them to go under, which is what was going to happen? Zero. I had to hold my nose listening to those fat cat brokers whine about how much more their firm was worth. It was worth zip! They were underwater! Bear Stearns was the modern day Drexel. While alive they were absolute barracudas, always skirting the edge of legality. They also declined to participate in at least one bailout that the other brokerages contributed to. I have zero sympathy for them. Good riddance.
>
>>Jim,
>>
>>While there may be hundreds of thousands of foreclosures, I would hardly call them all victims. There obviously was fault on both sides in this issue. I don't have a problem with the loans being packaged and re-sold to investment banks. The problem is with the loans themselves. There were criminal acts happening at the time of signing on both sides. Lenders falsifying their clients assets and buyers were falsifying it themselves. Once the documents are signed, that's fraud, a criminal act.
>>
>>The fact that various investment groups bought up these loans is stupid and people should lose their jobs and money because of bad investing. We agree that the government shouldn't bail out bad investments, but that's not what's happening. Bear Sterns was not bailed out, it was forced to sell at a massively understated price. Investors lost billions.
>>
>>>>I sort of feel bad for people who bought in the past few years and are getting burned by declining values but....not really.
>>>>
>>>>I mean, why should short term fluctuations in home values bother you if you've bought a home as a residence? Isn't it conventional wisdom that you buy a home planning for the next ten years?
>>>>
>>>>IMHO, buncha cry-babies.
>>>
>>>Any speculator who is now crying the blues is indeed a cry-baby.
>>>
>>>But there were hundreds of thousands of folk who intended to stay in the house they 'bought' who were victims. They were victims because:
>>>1. These weren't real 'mortgages'. Yes, they were loans to buy property BUT they did not have the cotrols/scrutiny that real bank mortgages have.
>>>2. In fact, the mortgage sellers got their cut of profit immediately that the 'sale' was approved. And their own office did the approving! It is widely reported that the mortgaga sellers falsified documents (inflating purchasers' assets, deflating debt, revising copies of tax forms, adding an equity loan into the mix, etc. And they certainly under-played the effect of the teaser rate changing after 2 years.
>>>These "mortgages" were then magically "securitized" (most financial people have NO IDEA of the process used to do that) and sold to investmnt firms around the world.
>>>
>>>Hundreds of thousands were badly hurt by this crap. They don't seem to be getting much help from their governments - at least nothing like the investment banks and banking in general are seeing.
>>>>
>>>>>http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/13/business/housing.php?page=1