Mark-to-market accounting is back in the headlines now that the federal government has approved a the bailout to the financial industry. As an adopted New Yorker, I have two minds of the bailout and the current accounting rules. On the one hand, I want the economy in the city to recover as soon as possible. The empty subway cars during rush hour are really freaking me out lately.
On the other hand, the last thing I want to happen is for bankers to be rewarded for poor decisions. Or, as Paul La Monica at CNN says:
A moratorium on mark-to-market accounting would only reward bankers for their reckless behavior of the past.
What’s more, it only would serve to delay what obviously must be done: banks need to get rid of the assets soon — whatever the short-term cost — instead of sitting on them indefinitely.
I tend to agree with him. If the short term economic prospects are a little worse but we are better in the long term, my vote is for long term health every time.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Is mark-to-market accounting rule driving financial crisis? (dailyfinance.com)
- Mark-To-Market Accounting To Get Public Hearing (huffingtonpost.com)
- Should US banks be allowed to lie? (english.martinvarsavsky.net)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=2532364c-5660-4725-9630-b8c3b081b1f7)