Anyone else see the NY Times article about the $23 trillion bailout number being completely bogus? [View All]

[HamdenRice]

If I weren't being lazy and in a rush to do things off line, I'd google it and post a link. Anyway, front page of the NY Times deconstructs the number and calls it completely bogus along the lines of the discussion here yesterday or the day before. It said that every single bank would have to fail, every money market would need to fail, every mortgage would have to default, and all the collateral that backed these up would have to have zero value.

It then said the actual outlays for the bailouts were around $2 trillion, but that almost all of it was backed up by valuable collateral, and did not in the end give an estimate of the actual cost.