Bank of America pays back TARP funds

Do you really claim that Bush designed the Tarp and not Paulson?

do you really claim paulson enacted it without the presidents approval.....or is you claim that obama made it work.....

Paulson's been in banking for decades. He's been the CEO of Goldman Sachs, which is probably the most powerful banking institution in the world.

Bush has been a business failure on more than one occasion and most likely doesn't know the first thing about banking.

To credit Bush with ANYTHING other than his signature on the Tarp bill would make no sense.
 
The ability of BoA to payback the TARP money with interest so quickly, is just a testament to the huge profits that BoA has made thru the increased number of foreclosures caused by the massive layoffs that were in turn caused by the banking system choking off the world's economy.

It seems that the increased number of foreclosures more than offset the relative loss caused by the real estate market crash.

In the end the American people got doubly screwed.

How did BofA profit from foreclosures?
 
The ability of BoA to payback the TARP money with interest so quickly, is just a testament to the huge profits that BoA has made thru the increased number of foreclosures caused by the massive layoffs that were in turn caused by the banking system choking off the world's economy.

It seems that the increased number of foreclosures more than offset the relative loss caused by the real estate market crash.

In the end the American people got doubly screwed.

How did BofA profit from foreclosures?
I was going to say...
 
This is good economic news ...





On a side note, fuck Bank of America.......
 
The ability of BoA to payback the TARP money with interest so quickly, is just a testament to the huge profits that BoA has made thru the increased number of foreclosures caused by the massive layoffs that were in turn caused by the banking system choking off the world's economy.

It seems that the increased number of foreclosures more than offset the relative loss caused by the real estate market crash.

In the end the American people got doubly screwed.

can you explain to me how foreclosing on a loan and taking back a property and selling it for less than a loan makes a bank money.....
 
I suppose in the short term it increases cash flow for the bank.

Imagine a bank loaned me 80k on a house on which I put 10k down. Over the course of five years I pay 30k worth of payments to the bank. That means the bank has 40k on initial balance in the home they hold the title to before any interest on the 80k they borrowed to lend me, what could that be, 10k? So lets say the bank is in the house for 50k.

Now in 2009 I lose my job. My 90k house was neglected by me and banks don't sell houses worth crud so they sell it for only 70k five years after I bought it. The bank made 20k then in 2009 instead of the 6k they would have made from my mortgage payments.
 
The ability of BoA to payback the TARP money with interest so quickly, is just a testament to the huge profits that BoA has made thru the increased number of foreclosures caused by the massive layoffs that were in turn caused by the banking system choking off the world's economy.

It seems that the increased number of foreclosures more than offset the relative loss caused by the real estate market crash.

In the end the American people got doubly screwed.

How did BofA profit from foreclosures?

You'll do well to just pretend Richard doesn't exist. The man has never said a single thing that made any sense.
 
I suppose in the short term it increases cash flow for the bank.

Imagine a bank loaned me 80k on a house on which I put 10k down. Over the course of five years I pay 30k worth of payments to the bank. That means the bank has 40k on initial balance in the home they hold the title to before any interest on the 80k they borrowed to lend me, what could that be, 10k? So lets say the bank is in the house for 50k.

Now in 2009 I lose my job. My 90k house was neglected by me and banks don't sell houses worth crud so they sell it for only 70k five years after I bought it. The bank made 20k then in 2009 instead of the 6k they would have made from my mortgage payments.
Your scenario has very little basis in reality. A 30 yr mortgage at 6% with a starting balance of 70K would have an outstanding balance of $65,137.71 after 5 years of payments. If the bank foreclosed and sold the house for 50K they would lose $15k plus the transaction costs. (BTW, a 15 yr mortgage would still have a balance of $53,206.32 - still a loser for the bank)

PS- your house payment would have been only $420.00/month for the 30 yr loan- less than the cost of most car payments.
 
Last edited:
My apologies for not digging out my amortization chart! You do that stuff for a living?

Your scenario has very little basis in reality. A 30 yr mortgage at 6% with a starting balance of 70K would have an outstanding balance of $65,137.71 after 5 years of payments. If the bank foreclosed and sold the house for 50K they would lose $15k plus the transaction costs. (BTW, a 15 yr mortgage would still have a balance of $53,206.32 - still a loser for the bank)

PS- your house payment would have been only $420.00/month for the 30 yr loan- less than the cost of most car payments.

So if I put 10k down on an 80k house and after five years the bank forecloses on the balance is $65k and some change. I've paid 60months x $420 = $25,200 the bank has collected. Almost 5k of my payments have gone to principal, 20k to interest. Out of that 20k of interest the bank collected some goes to pay their interest, some goes to profit. I don't know how much to profit 4k sound right? If I understand right I think banks pay between 0.5% and 3% for money depending on how and from who so on a 6% loan they make the difference between the 6% mortgage we pay and whatever % they pay before expenses I'd ASSUME.

That would leave the bank needing to sell my 80k house for $61,137 to break even ($65,137 - 4k for interest profit?). Seems like selling it for 65k or even 70k is a winner, 50k, a loser. Unless PMI pays off. Then again a lot of banks used reappraisals to kill PMI for folks.

Closer to right?
 
Isn't it funny how the Republicans insist Obama owns the disaster in Iraq and the disaster in Afghanistan but something positive that happens economically, suddenly, it's the one thing Bush did right in 8 years. Well, I don't "buy" it. The Party of "Fail" strikes again.
 
Isn't it funny how the Republicans insist Obama owns the disaster in Iraq and the disaster in Afghanistan but something positive that happens economically, suddenly, it's the one thing Bush did right in 8 years. Well, I don't "buy" it. The Party of "Fail" strikes again.

Bank of America was selling highly inflated Stock Shares to fund the Tarp buyback. I do not see that as a positive. A strong negative, yes, because that sale of stock shares is in fact STICKING it to the common man again.

There are fools out there who are putting all of their work savings in their 401K plans into mutual funds. They are doing so because they believe all of the Obama lies that the economy is improving. If you look at the real data, all you can see is that it is still collapsing. A lot of people are going to lose a lot of money very soon and they are going to be left wondering "What happened to the Recovery?"
 
There are fools out there who are putting all of their work savings in their 401K plans into mutual funds. They are doing so because they believe all of the Obama lies that the economy is improving.
Well thank goodness no one decided to put their social security funds into the market!
 
There are fools out there who are putting all of their work savings in their 401K plans into mutual funds. They are doing so because they believe all of the Obama lies that the economy is improving.
Well thank goodness no one decided to put their social security funds into the market!

We should put at least part of our savings into Social Security.
 
We should put at least part of our savings into Social Security.
I saw a statistic on that a few weeks ago. Something like sixty percent of the people have only SS payments to retire on. With the way my wife spends, there is no way in hades I could retire on just that.
 
The desire of folks to retire early while not saving for retirement do amaze me. For the record I only believe social security is necessary due to those human failings.
 
The desire of folks to retire early while not saving for retirement do amaze me. For the record I only believe social security is necessary due to those human failings.

So we should keep giving humans a safety net to fall into so they can continue to fail and not learn from it?

The reason people don't save for retirement is becuase most truely believe that the safety net is enough for them. Maybe we should yank the safety net out from under them so they're FORCED to be financially prudent.

Or is that just too "mean"?
 
NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Bank of America Corp. (BAC) has paid back its $45 billion in TARP funds, marking an official end to the Charlotte bank's most chaotic chapter, in which it counted the U.S. government as a reluctant and hard-nosed investor.

"We owe taxpayers our thanks for making these funds available to the nation's financial system and to our company during a very difficult time," said outgoing Chief Executive Kenneth Lewis, in a statement.
2nd UPDATE: Bank Of America Repays $45 Billion In TARP Funds
I still wouldn't want to have an account with B of A.
One of the greediest as far as fees are concerned.
 

Forum List

Back
Top