In 2009 and 2010, investment banks were under fire for interest rate swaps sold to municipalities and nonprofits. For example, California's water resource authority paid about $$\$ 305$$ million, North Carolina paid about $$\$ 60$$ million, and Harvard University paid about $$\$ 923$$ million to unwind swaps agreements. To unwind a swaps position, you make a reverse trade. For example, if you had agreed to a fixed-for-variable swap, you would enter a variable-for-fixed swap. The controversy was caused because many people felt that investment banks had taken advantage of municipalities and nonprofits. Is this argument correct? Why or why not?