The Supreme Court decided on Monday not to stop the release of Federal Reserve Board documents that identify financial companies that received Fed loans to survive the financial crisis.The high court, without comment, refused to hear an appeal from an association of bankers trying to keep the information from becoming public.The Fox News Network, which is owned by the News Corporation, and Bloomberg L.P., the parent company of Bloomberg News, had sued separately for details about Fed loans that commercial banks and Wall Street firms received and the collateral they put up. Other news agencies, including The Associated Press, filed briefs with the appellate court in their support.
This is another example of why I just don't think I'll ever really 'get it'. To me, making this information public makes perfect sense. Where's the reasonability in keeping hidden who got our money? Worst outcome of publicity I've heard is 'well, then, people might leave a bank if they thought it weak enough that it needed propping up'. To which I say: So?
I guess I'm not yet ready to be an adult.
4 comments:
heh - you're not ready to be an adult...
I knew that. But,what do you think? Should that sort of thing be kept secret?
I've been continually baffled why it is being kept secret. It's our money, after all! The banks will not want it getting out - and that's why it's secret.
I try to resist black and white comparisions (too much of that leads to being a conservative - [shudder]), but this one really does seem to lend itself to that kind of analysis.
There are good reasons for secrecy, but no one seems to have come up for one in this case. But the people who want it have the money, and we ARE talking about politicians.
Post a Comment