If the Feds Can't Spend $75B Effectively....

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph from the Land of Funk
Gold Supporting Member
Feb 12, 2007
59,384
24,018
2,290
If the Feds can't effectively use $75B for TARP loan modifications, which is a fairly narrow agenda, how are they going to make sure that $Ts spent on socialized medicine meet the promised objectives?

The Obama administration's $75 billion program to help homeowners risks failure by, "merely spreading out the foreclosure crisis," a top government watchdog said Tuesday.

Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general over the $700 billion financial rescue package, slammed the administration's housing program for having ill-defined metrics and for helping far fewer homeowners than originally proposed.

"The program risks helping few, and for the rest, merely spreading out the foreclosure crisis," Barofsky said in a report. The program encourages companies to modify the terms of home loans so that borrowers can attempt to avoid foreclosure. Mounting foreclosures continue to weigh heavily on a weak housing market, which began declining more than three years ago.

The administration's program has produced 170,000 permanent home loan modifications, which represents roughly 13 percent of the total trial offers extended, according to the latest data.

Barofsky's report said it is possible the program only benefits half of the three or four million homeowners originally envisioned. Among other data, the program measures trial modifications, a metric Barofsky faulted for being, "essentially meaningless." The number of permanent modifications could wind up being a small share of the millions of foreclosures filed in this year and during the past two years....



TARP watchdog blasts Obama housing program - The Hill's On The Money
 
Wasn't 75B what the Iraq war was supposed to cost? Tops?

The feds have always been good at spending money. Spending it wisely is an entirely different matter though.
 
TARP and the stimulus were basically slush funds for the payoff to lapdog Dems and the Stupaks of the world for their votes for Obamacare.
 
This is without a doubt the most corrupt administration in U.S. history... makes even Andrew Johnson and Nixon look honest. Sorry, Carter was just a boob.
 
Wasn't 75B what the Iraq war was supposed to cost? Tops?

The feds have always been good at spending money. Spending it wisely is an entirely different matter though.


I don't believe that is correct. The Iraqi war was funded with annual supplemental bills - not one big bill.
 
Wasn't 75B what the Iraq war was supposed to cost? Tops?

The feds have always been good at spending money. Spending it wisely is an entirely different matter though.


I don't believe that is correct. The Iraqi war was funded with annual supplemental bills - not one big bill.

The Bush admin claimed the Iraq war would cost 80 b I think was the number and would pay for itself.
 
TARP and the stimulus were basically slush funds for the payoff to lapdog Dems and the Stupaks of the world for their votes for Obamacare.

Funny Bush and Paulson would set up Tarpthat way huh?


No you moron. The TARP legislation specifies that repayments are to be used to reduce the deficit. The Obama Administration violated the legislation by turning repayments into their slush fund.
 
What is the military?
The organization that pays $500 for hammers.

Schmuck.

So you think the MILITARY if the US is ineffective?

When it comes to effectively spending money?

FUCK YEAH!!! This may be a difficult concept for you to grasp... but lacking a profit motive, and having the ability to borrow money at will (which private enterprises do not have) does not lend one to exhibiting fiscal responsibility.
 
TARP and the stimulus were basically slush funds for the payoff to lapdog Dems and the Stupaks of the world for their votes for Obamacare.

Funny Bush and Paulson would set up Tarpthat way huh?


No you moron. The TARP legislation specifies that repayments are to be used to reduce the deficit. The Obama Administration violated the legislation by turning repayments into their slush fund.

Prove your claim
 
Wasn't 75B what the Iraq war was supposed to cost? Tops?

The feds have always been good at spending money. Spending it wisely is an entirely different matter though.


I don't believe that is correct. The Iraqi war was funded with annual supplemental bills - not one big bill.

The Bush admin claimed the Iraq war would cost 80 b I think was the number and would pay for itself.

So.. we agree then that the government NEVER gets it right when it comes to money. Thanks.
 
Wasn't 75B what the Iraq war was supposed to cost? Tops?

The feds have always been good at spending money. Spending it wisely is an entirely different matter though.


I don't believe that is correct. The Iraqi war was funded with annual supplemental bills - not one big bill.

The Bush admin claimed the Iraq war would cost 80 b I think was the number and would pay for itself.

"Pay for itself?"

Where do you get this nonsense???

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated the cost of "prosecuting" a war against Iraq at up to $9 billion per month, on top of an initial outlay of up to $13 billion for the deployment of troops to the Persian Gulf region.

As we all know from their Cost/Benefit analysis of the Heathcare Overhaul, The CBO is Never Wrong.
 

Forum List

Back
Top