In this respect, was more and more U.S. financial institutions seeking government aid. The government tried to support the institutions in hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money, because the economic instability of artificially increasing the liquidity of the credit market has not improved. Thus, the banks, the nationalization of the controversial topic.

At first glance, seems to nationalize a viable and attractive option. Good assets returned to the private sector and the toxic debt is recovered, and is the target. So what’s the downside? Why the government does not act quickly people ALIZE banks and remove this tag in the U.S. economy? First, the nationalization of banks would be able to eliminate the shareholders. Secondly, banks can be restructured for the benefit of politicians. Finally, the nationalization of the bank could reduce the value of the U.S. dollar.

Complete nationalization of banks such as Citigroup, Bank and Bank of America shareholders will be erased. Although President Obama said that his government is not interested in control of the rescued banks, it can be argued that the government is majority shareholder, namely the control of the bank and is essentially a public company. In the case of Citigroup, the bank, for example, the third step of the proposed U.S. rescue to leave the government holding 40% of the shares of Citigroup. If the U.S. government wants the people of ALIZE bank Citigroup, Bank of the Government to convert preferred shares to the general fund, and therefore the current shareholders will be destroyed. This is one reason for the current pressure on bank stocks. As the world observed, 20 February 2009, the government fears that people ALIZE caused shares of banks Citigroup and Bank of Bank of America fall.

Read the rest of this entry »