of the swiss bank credit suisse. the bank was bought by its rival ubs, after regulators worked around the clock to secure the takeover. the problems confronting credit suisse had sparked fears over the global financial system. we can now speak to lananh nguyen, us finance editor at reuters. thank you for taking time to come in the programme. with so much uncertainty within the financial banking sector, what do you think is going through the minds of the customers? should they be at ease? iretell the minds of the customers? should they be at ease? well i think in the should they be at ease? well i think in the short-term, - think in the short term, customers, particularly in the us, should feel at ease because most their deposits are guaranteed by a government backstop so anyone who has less than $250,000 in the bank is pretty safe at this point but i think the broader question is whether customers will eventually feel the brunt of what looks to be a sort of economic result of people
apparently there were buyers in last week and they should have been able to sell it. as soon as we get it out of the hands of the government and in the hands of the private sector, that will ensure that the tax payer is not on the hook. martha: no bank is going to by this bank in 24 hours when you own the litigation liability. as long as there s no government backstop, they have to do they due diligence. they re not just martha: a good argument to say let s see what the market is for these assets. look under the hood. martha: let s see who wants to buy it. the government doesn t have to jump in and do everything. let it find equilibrium here in terms of what the assets are worst. the sooner the better. martha: thanks. the market seems to be ignoring it today. thank you, gentlemen. good to see you both. say good-bye to tik tok? the ceo comes to washington to make his case before congress.
neil, is that the student who s going to be going to college will get the imlegs that there s a government backstop. so he or she is going to indebt himself more and handicap their future even further, expecting this to continue. which it effectively cannot. so i think a major issue especially in an inflationary environment, neil, where we have inflation at nearly 8.5%, the highest in 40 years. you know, it s very silly, i think, and i think it s a blatant government ploy to buy votes ahead of the november elections. neil: it would not be the first administration to try that. danielle, let me can ask you a little bit about your view from the fed, if you don t mind, and that however you look at this, it s seen as similarlative and that this money is going to get further get spending going because people have up to $20,000 more in savings that they could spend, and that worries the federal reserve and might lead to a continued pace of interest rate hikes even though yesterday s advance i
or down. or they can be very complex. so, for example, you and i might decide to bet different ways on some portion of a bunnen of mortgage-backed securities, a credit defauld swap we won t get into that what that is the key part that s a risky bet. when that bet blows up, it can mean lots of big losses for banks. that s one of the reasons that the financial bust that occurred back in 2007 was so severe. and that the problem that senator warren is trying to do something about, this was something we addressed in dodd/frank, that is when those risky derivatives blew up, they were held in the part of the bank that gets insured by the federal deposit insurance and back stopped by the federal reserve. so they have a government backstop. that puts taxpayers at risk. dodd frank took the risky derivatives out of the insured part of the bank and put them
ownership overall. is it a nation of wealthy or privilege, those that can t affo can afford 20% down payment are in onhome. the rest, good luck to you. saying fannie and freddie caused the crisis. that s oversold argument. fannie and freddie played a role in the crisis. i will say we need to have a much smaller government backstop than we ve had. the way in which that government backstop was manipulated by the private sector to shoulder the risk, stick the risks on the taxpayer when push came to shove, we can t defend the status quo. that said, this idea that i think is now oversold that what we really need to do is get the government out of the mortgage industry so private money can take over, we ve seen that money. we have private money running every crevice of finance in the run-up to the crisis. we know how that worked out. it worked out taxpayers ponying