Bank Of America Gets Taxpayer Bailout, Bails Out Climate
    By Hank Campbell | June 12th 2012 02:05 PM | 7 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    Bank of America was recently so crushed by its risky derivatives investments it needed $45 billion in bailout money from taxpayers - and then proceeded to engage in questionable practices to cover its losses, much like it engaged in questionable practices to acquire the losses.  

    Things are so much better now they can afford to fix global warming and are devoting $50 billion to the cause. 
    Bank of America Corp. (BAC) said it will contribute $50 billion over the next 10 years to address climate change, the latest company to boost its investments toward environmental goals.
    I'm no Paul Krugman - if I were, this would make complete economic sense - but if the company so strapped it endured the public relations fiasco of charging for ATM cards has $50 billion laying around, wouldn't it make sense to pay off all those Countrywide Financial Group "losses due to misrepresentations"?

    Bank of America Pledges $50 Billion to Combat Climate Change by Kristin Jones, Dow Jones

    Comments

    UvaE
    This link has a longer article, and the "contribution" includes loans, so it's in part a form of greenwashing... but indeed, what a turnaround, thanks to taxpayers.
    Hank
    Oh my gosh, that makes it even more ridiculous.  Good find!
    Want more no-nonsense, independent science? Buy Science Left Behind
    Thor Russell
    Global investment in renewable energy is increasing rapidlyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_commercialization 

    and of course investment involves banks, so even if they had no policies in the area at all, the "status quo" of investing in the same as everyone else would cause something like this. So perhaps its not saying much at all.
    Thor Russell
    Hank
    After seeing the Science 2.0 page fiasco, Wikipedia has even less legitimacy than it always had anyway - but 'investment' subsidized by taxpayers is not really investment. America was number two in the world in solar power 'investment' last year but it was all subsidized purchase of solar panels made in China.

    Banks made no difference in that, other than holding the money companies got from the government.
    Want more no-nonsense, independent science? Buy Science Left Behind
    Thor Russell
    What exactly is your point, money spent is still money spent whatever you think about the reasons behind it. Holding money companies get from the govt is as much my point because the bank isn't really doing anything at all. In order to "invest" less than billions per year the bank would have to actively avoid anything to do with renewables and refuse to look after money from such companies. Just by "going with the flow" it can make those kind of claims hence whatever you think about the politics, the claim is pretty meaningless.
    Thor Russell
    V.I.P-GUYS have produced some wonderful reports, which have assisted me in the decision making process and though this I have a better understanding
    "Global warming is a marvellous excuse for worldwide Socialism." ~ Margaret Thatcher
    I'm glad you agree Krugman is an idiot.