Banks TOOK taxpayer money??

Discussion in 'Economy' started by flacaltenn, Sep 4, 2011.

  1. flacaltenn
    Offline

    flacaltenn USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    30,037
    Thanks Received:
    4,659
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +13,352
    It's a constant drone from the lefties on the board. "The big banks TOOK taxpayer money to bail them out".. Usually posted as a justification for taxing "fat-cat bankers"..

    The truth is more interesting. The TARP money was actually FORCED into many banks under threats that the regulators would later REQUIRE them to sign up for the deal. The government was ACTIVELY seeking an equity stake in the banks that would allow them to dictate policies on lending and executive pay..

    Paulson Forced Banks To Accept US ‘Buy In’ | Sweetness & Light

    New details of that meeting show that Geitner et al TOLD the CEOs that the regulators would later REQUIRE them to procure TARP funds in exchange for stock anyway. And that the regulators would prefer to issue "clean bills of health" to the banks that decided to participate.

    Yeah -- those fat cat bankers were FRANTIC to be micromanaged by the Feds. Begged for a Bailout? --- Conclusively no...

    Banks forced to take bailout money they don’t want or need | Scholars and Rogues

    And what happened when the Banks realized how pesky this govt buyin was to operations and WANTED to pay back the investment???

    Barack Obama Maintains Control Over Banks By Refusing to Accept Repayment of TARP Money - WSJ.com

    THe admin WANTS power and control over the banks on one hand. And also be free to villify them and make them a scapegoat on the other.

    Don't let this meme survive that the Banks BEGGED for a bailout or even NEEDED a bailout. And that ALL banks fell into financial disrepair because of "de-regulation". Point those lefties to the facts about the TARP money that went to banks and how their arms were twisted to take it.
     
  2. sparky
    Offline

    sparky VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    3,327
    Thanks Received:
    324
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    paradise
    Ratings:
    +341
    Tarp was all for show, a mere drop in the bailout bucket Flatdude...........~S~
     
  3. flacaltenn
    Offline

    flacaltenn USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    30,037
    Thanks Received:
    4,659
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +13,352
    Sparky:

    You need to a grip on the rheostat there. $700Bill is "a mere drop in bailout bucket"??
    Do you know how many bad sci fi movies could be made for that?

    I just don't want to hear that lefty phrase again about bankers ASKED for the bailout..
     
  4. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Many finiancial instututions rapidly converted to banks to get in on the money.
    Not sure how that happens, but they seemed eager to enter regulated status for some reason.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    I guess that conversion to being a bank is sort of like being saved by the grace of Gold?
     
  6. American Horse
    Offline

    American Horse AKA "Mustang"

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    5,741
    Thanks Received:
    892
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    The Hoosier Heartland
    Ratings:
    +938
    "Losers"'would; but many strong banks were forced so that the losers would be seen to be in good company thus not be seen as the losers they actually were at the time. Now though the gubmt may prefer the sway they hold.
     
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2011
  7. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    I am sorry but I seem to need a bit of help understanding what that means.
     
  8. flacaltenn
    Offline

    flacaltenn USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    30,037
    Thanks Received:
    4,659
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +13,352
    Many?? I don't think so.. Geitner et al had the nine biggest in that room and only ONE probably would have signed without being strong-armed.

    Once the bankers figured out the strings attached, they tried to throw that money back thru the Treasury windows as quick as possible --- And guess who didnt' want the cash returned?

    If you can back up "many" -- let me know..

    AmericanHorse is right --- Bernanke/Geitner needed to show a consensus so they diluted the weak WITH the strong. Also --- some go beyond that and theorize that these former "bankers" (geitner/bernanke) were diluting risk because they WANTED the high interest returns from the TARP money. Kinda like putting together the bad debt with good debt and calling it a "mortgage backed security"..
     
  9. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Why is Everyone Becoming a Bank Holding Company? It’s All About the Benjamins
    by Kristin Jones
    ProPublica, Nov. 12, 2008, 6:05 p.m.

    AMEX is the latest company to go into bank-holding for bailout bucks
    This morning, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson announced that the bailout may be expanded [1] to include credit card companies and auto and student loan companies. But American Express isn’t taking any chances. On Monday, AmEx became the latest business to turn itself into a bank holding company, thus making it eligible for the TARP [2] and other emergency loan programs recently set up by the Federal Reserve.

    “It makes absolute sense in the current economic environment to be in a position to be able to take advantage of the government-sponsored programs and be on equal footing with others in the industry,” AmEx spokeswoman Joanna Lambert told us after Paulson’s announcement this morning. “It’s what we believe to be the right thing to do.”

    Becoming a bank means that AmEx must jump through extra regulatory hoops in exchange for further protection, which also includes federal deposit insurance, access to the Fed discount window [3] and an array of new Fed lending facilities [4] for banks. While the company has said that it will not change its core business strategy, it may bulk up its small banking operations, said Red Gillen, senior analyst for Celent, a financial research group. It is betting that the payout in the short term will be worth the cost.

    “Right now they’re really in survival mode,” said Gillen.

    The company is following in the footsteps of Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, the investment banks that turned themselves into bank holding companies with the Fed’s blessing in September.

    Why is Everyone Becoming a Bank Holding Company? It
     
  10. OohPooPahDoo
    Offline

    OohPooPahDoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Messages:
    15,342
    Thanks Received:
    976
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    N'Awlins Mid-City
    Ratings:
    +1,320
    They did such a great job of it themselves, right?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page