[nicmarlo]

My exact question was as follows: “Why shouldn’t Bear Stearns’ Chief Executive Jimmy Cayne be forced to rescind his stock to US taxpayers who will be footing $29 billion?”

And I shall leave it at that.

[Toddsterpatriot]

If you can explain how US taxpayers will be footing $29 billion, we could answer your stupid question.

[palmer]

My exact question was as follows: “Why shouldn’t Bear Stearns’ Chief Executive Jimmy Cayne be forced to rescind his stock to US taxpayers who will be footing $29 billion?”

I would call it a rhetorical question, but I don't think the rhetoric is accurate. For one thing, Cayne was forced to rescind his stock, all but $2/share worth. He was forced to lose at least $8/share looking at post "agreement" market action.

To answer Toddster's question about "US taxpayers": The US taxpayers do not fund the Fed strictly speaking. But the Fed gets interest payments on the T-Bills it holds like anyone else who holds them, and the source of those payments is the US taxpayers. The Fed also gets money printed up at printing cost to "expand" or inflate the money supply. The electronic inflation is done in a variety of ways (e.g. lowering reserve requirements). That affects all dollar holders, not just US taxpayers. The actual "bill" from this debacle is still TBD, but it is a major departure from the past when junk debt was only collateral. Now it is owned by the Fed which means it was monetized which is also inflationary in the whole (inflated money being fungible).

[groanup]

My exact question was as follows: “Why shouldn’t Bear Stearns’ Chief Executive Jimmy Cayne be forced to rescind his stock to US taxpayers who will be footing $29 billion?” And I shall leave it at that.

So you pose a question with a false pre text and expect us all to agree? Or ignore it? Maybe you'd better stick to posting exact quotes from third parties.