Did TARP save America???

[loosecannon]

You carry on pretending, if it makes you feel better. I'm not 'carrying the water' for the banks

Of course you are, you are buying into the fabricated notion that saving the banks is a pre requisite to staving off financial ruin, paving their path to the next round of bailouts 12 years from now.

And I am the only one here who doesn't pretend to know what would have happened if and only if we hadn't passed the TARP legislation that was foist upon us with demands that it be passed within a week.

Do you realize how you have been manipulated far afield of reality and sanity over this?

 

[Paulie]

You are aware that the gubmint didn't have money stashed in a mattress or buried in the backyard to fund TARP don't you? Just like the stimulus, it is borrowed money that eventually has to be paid back to places like China. Tell me, if you make $30k a year and have $75k in credit card debt, do you pay that credit card debt off by borrowing the money? Eventually the bill comes due and the loan shark sends around his enforcer to collect. Not getting our spending under control and continuing to borrow from our political enemy (China) could lead to them controling our country without firing a single shot.

It doesn't really matter, since those bailouts are being paid back, with a premium, well ahead of schedule.

If you work under the assumption that the payments being made are being used to pay back the kind folks who lent us the money. $5 says it isn't. The gubmint don't work that way.

Yeah.

Last time I looked at the national debt clock, it was still rising by the millisecond.

That repayment of TARP just provides congress with more spending cash.

 

[loosecannon]

and yet we have pretty much been surviving without a banking system ever since. At least without a functioning commercial banking system.

Smart money failed to see the disaster looming, go figure.

What world are you living in? The banks still work, credit is still available. It's tighter than before, but it's still there. And TARP helped make that happen.

Part of what made the Great Depression, well, Great, is that the Feds let the banks collapse. A large number of folks lost their entire life savings and businesses were suddenly cut off from money they need to stay open.

Once banking collapses, that's just about it. Investment money stops flowing, personal wealth dissapears and the whole system shuts down.

according to Ben Bernanke the collapse of banks, 9000, in the early 30's wasn't what made the Great Depression great. It was the failure of the Fed to add liquidity to the system, and he was at least half wrong, as we now know because he got his chance to test his theory two years ago and despite adding liquidity AND saving the banks the money supply still shrank and the banks won't lend.

That's the world I live in, not the one where I accept being brainwashed into believing that saving the banks mattered and that DISASTER would have struck if we hadn't done it, in that specific way.

I mean, believe it or not, it is possible to have voted TARP down and yet still taken steps to actually overcome the recession. You know, facilitate an actual recovery.

 

[loosecannon]

The very fact that economic advisors for Bush and Obama came to the same conclusions indicates how necessary TARP was

huh? I would think just the opposite! After all the dems and repubs caused this recession!

Actually, while I agree that both parties carry a huge chunk of blame, let's be real about the whole thing. It was not just politicians, it was the banks, business, and 'we, the people'. Everyone who borrowed more than they could afford, the Unions and groups like Acorn for forcing banks to lend to people who could not afford to borrow, and those to took those loans, and those of us who overspent on credit. There's plenty of blame to go around. We can't go on pretending it was 'the other guy'. We all did it.

Oh I absolutely agree. 110%!

But seriously, if the twin parties both say we have to attack Iraq to liberate them are we supposed to take their word for it? Or are we supposed to know better by now?

If the twin parties both tell us that TARP saved the earth from Armagedon, our first instinct should probably be to reject that idea until it can be proven critically.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

TARP was great, especially when you add the Trillions that the Fed doled out to, well we don't know who they doled it out to, they refuse to say.

The banks paid the Gubbamint back with taxpayer money from the Fed.

 

[Paulie]

and yet we have pretty much been surviving without a banking system ever since. At least without a functioning commercial banking system.

Smart money failed to see the disaster looming, go figure.

What world are you living in? The banks still work, credit is still available. It's tighter than before, but it's still there. And TARP helped make that happen.

Part of what made the Great Depression, well, Great, is that the Feds let the banks collapse. A large number of folks lost their entire life savings and businesses were suddenly cut off from money they need to stay open.

Once banking collapses, that's just about it. Investment money stops flowing, personal wealth dissapears and the whole system shuts down.

according to Ben Bernanke the collapse of banks, 9000, in the early 30's wasn't what made the Great Depression great. It was the failure of the Fed to add liquidity to the system, and he was at least half wrong, as we now know because he got his chance to test his theory two years ago and despite adding liquidity AND saving the banks the money supply still shrank and the banks won't lend.

That's the world I live in, not the one where I accept being brainwashed into believing that saving the banks mattered and that DISASTER would have struck if we hadn't done it, in that specific way.

I mean, believe it or not, it is possible to have voted TARP down and yet still taken steps to actually overcome the recession. You know, facilitate an actual recovery.

There would have been more pain, and I don't think that's debatable. And I'm anti-TARP.

How MUCH more pain is debatable.

But you make a good point. Balance sheets were propped up with 800 billion from TARP, and another 1.5 trillion of liquidity was provided by the Fed's various purchasing programs...and still credit is frozen and jobs have been lost in the tens of millions.

Looks pretty damn bad to me, even with 2 trillion thrown at the problem.

The only ones sitting pretty at this point are the ******* BANKS.

 

[Toro]

it saved the big banks, that's pretty certain....america? I dunno?

What do you think would have happened if the big banks had failed? Think it wouldn't have impacted every single one of us far more than the current situation has? Because it would have been horrific, Care.

Yes, absolutely. I believe with no doubt that the situation would have been much worse had the government not stepped up to save the financial system. I give Bush a ton of credit for doing that. I believe we were on the brink of another Great Depression.

 

[Toro]

All it did was prolong the inevitable and add insurmountable debt. It was a catastrophic **** up, and will be remembered as such.

Total cost of TARP is estimated to be $50 billion. In the end, the government may not lose any money at all.

 

[Toro]

Of course, even when the bill comes due to pay it back and draconian cuts in everything across the board cause riots and civil unrest, possibly even another revolution or Civil War, the obama ass lickers will still be waving their pom poms chanting in lock step that TARP was a success.

Morons.

TARP was started by Bush, and fixed by Obama. Were you on the road when that happened?

TARP was started by Bush and continued by Obama. I'm not sure what he fixed.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Of course, even when the bill comes due to pay it back and draconian cuts in everything across the board cause riots and civil unrest, possibly even another revolution or Civil War, the obama ass lickers will still be waving their pom poms chanting in lock step that TARP was a success.

Morons.

TARP was started by Bush, and fixed by Obama. Were you on the road when that happened?

TARP was started by Bush and continued by Obama. I'm not sure what he fixed.

Converting preferred shares to common voting shares lit a fire under those who received the bailout, plus pushing that the banks receiving the bailouts renegotiate some of those mortgages.

 

[Sallow]

When historians write the history of this era, the Bush generated TARP bailouts may be the one thing that saves him from being considered the worst President in history.

Well that..and aid to Africa..and the whole declaration of protected seas near hawaii. Also, as far as we know, he didn't show up to the job ranting about Jews and drunk like Grant did..

History will still have to weigh in on the Bush presidency. So far it has him number 5 from the bottom (39th)

He still has to answer for Afghanistan and Iraq and how he executed them. History will not look approvingly at his decision to attack Iraq. His brave decision to surge troop strength saved his butt in terms of a collapsed Iraq. Wars that go on for over ten years do not help you though.

In the economy, Bush will take the role of Nero (or Hoover)fiddling while the economy collapsed around him. TARP may have salvaged his presidency

Preaching to the choir here...I pretty much think if there ever were reason to impeach and remove a President from power..Bush was it.

 

[Avorysuds]

Considering that the right was screeching "socialism" when Obama converted the preferred shares to voting common shares, the tea baggers would have started an armed insurrection if he took over the banks.

I'm sorry, is that your answer to what would have happened if we let the banks fail?

No, that's my answer to what would have happened if there was a government take-over of the banks. I've already given my position that if we had allowed the banks to fail, we'd by in a full scale major depression.

No one on the face of the earth would have been able to purchase the major banks, except a government, if nothing were done. Where would they get that kind of major financing? From the failing major banks?

Ahh ok.

Well to answer your question about who would have the money to buy the banks. Either Banks that did not go under would buy up banks for a price that the market would be able to charge or investors.

So, if a bank thinks they are worth 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 bucks but have failed and can't collect from the people that owe them, that mean they are really not worth as much as they claim... To me it was a bail out to the investors, they lost nothing while we the people lost a lot. They take a risk and because of the bailout they made money while we took the risk of barrowing and are still being held to it. Do you see what i mean?

 

[loosecannon]

it saved the big banks, that's pretty certain....america? I dunno?

What do you think would have happened if the big banks had failed? Think it wouldn't have impacted every single one of us far more than the current situation has? Because it would have been horrific, Care.

Yes, absolutely. I believe with no doubt that the situation would have been much worse had the government not stepped up to save the financial system. I give Bush a ton of credit for doing that. I believe we were on the brink of another Great Depression.

Oh Come on Toro, get real!

You mean to tell me that retrospectively you can't figure out a remedy that would have been more effective than TARP?

And if you can then any benefit derived from TARP was not reliant on TARP.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Did TARP 'save' America? - The Week

We should be "eulogizing" it as the one piece of legislation that has done more to "save" America's financial system — and therefore its economy — "than any passed since the 1930s." Read an excerpt:

No one can doubt that without TARP financing sources would have fled in terror from the banking system. Almost immediately institutions that dwarfed Lehman in size — potentially, AIG, Citigroup, and Bank of America — would certainly have collapsed. Runs on other banks would have followed, causing credit to evaporate in the economy. A depression-era landscape of shuttered banks is easily imagined.

Without TARP, General Motors and Chrysler would also have been at the mercy of Congress, whose dithering ways would have resulted in at least one of them running out of money, shutting down and liquidating. If Congress then failed to act quickly the other carmaker would have immediately followed suit. That would have brought down the vast majority of the sector’s many suppliers, already teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.

Read the full article in the Financial Times (registration required).

Yes, for the moment. Soon the forces of Grover Norquist may regain power. No longer fear the neo conservatives, they have returned as the tea party ever willing to shrinlk government so that it can be drowned in a bathtup, leaving Americans to be governed by the power elite of coporate fascists.

 

[rightwinger]

What do you think would have happened if the big banks had failed? Think it wouldn't have impacted every single one of us far more than the current situation has? Because it would have been horrific, Care.

Yes, absolutely. I believe with no doubt that the situation would have been much worse had the government not stepped up to save the financial system. I give Bush a ton of credit for doing that. I believe we were on the brink of another Great Depression.

Oh Come on Toro, get real!

You mean to tell me that retrospectively you can't figure out a remedy that would have been more effective than TARP?

And if you can then any benefit derived from TARP was not reliant on TARP.

Who in the private sector was willing to stand up and back the banks? The financial sector was in a panic....stock values crashed, they were shedding workers at 700,000 a month, there was no lending

Without TARP we would have had a Depression

 

[California Girl]

huh? I would think just the opposite! After all the dems and repubs caused this recession!

Actually, while I agree that both parties carry a huge chunk of blame, let's be real about the whole thing. It was not just politicians, it was the banks, business, and 'we, the people'. Everyone who borrowed more than they could afford, the Unions and groups like Acorn for forcing banks to lend to people who could not afford to borrow, and those to took those loans, and those of us who overspent on credit. There's plenty of blame to go around. We can't go on pretending it was 'the other guy'. We all did it.

Oh I absolutely agree. 110%!

But seriously, if the twin parties both say we have to attack Iraq to liberate them are we supposed to take their word for it? Or are we supposed to know better by now?

If the twin parties both tell us that TARP saved the earth from Armagedon, our first instinct should probably be to reject that idea until it can be proven critically.

If you could stop comparing oranges to orangutans, you might make a coherent argument. I go by what independent economists said - I give jack shits worth of credence to any politician when it comes to economics. Economist - all over the world - were predicting this collapse for close to 10 years. No one listened to them. Not the politicians, not the banks, not the public. You know who did listen? Wealthy people.... they insulated themselves from the worst of it. That's why they're still wealthy.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Actually, while I agree that both parties carry a huge chunk of blame, let's be real about the whole thing. It was not just politicians, it was the banks, business, and 'we, the people'. Everyone who borrowed more than they could afford, the Unions and groups like Acorn for forcing banks to lend to people who could not afford to borrow, and those to took those loans, and those of us who overspent on credit. There's plenty of blame to go around. We can't go on pretending it was 'the other guy'. We all did it.

Oh I absolutely agree. 110%!

But seriously, if the twin parties both say we have to attack Iraq to liberate them are we supposed to take their word for it? Or are we supposed to know better by now?

If the twin parties both tell us that TARP saved the earth from Armagedon, our first instinct should probably be to reject that idea until it can be proven critically.

If you could stop comparing oranges to orangutans, you might make a coherent argument. I go by what independent economists said - I give jack shits worth of credence to any politician when it comes to economics. Economist - all over the world - were predicting this collapse for close to 10 years. No one listened to them. Not the politicians, not the banks, not the public. You know who did listen? Wealthy people.... they insulated themselves from the worst of it. That's why they're still wealthy.

The price of gold demonstrates that point.

 

[Toro]

Actually, while I agree that both parties carry a huge chunk of blame, let's be real about the whole thing. It was not just politicians, it was the banks, business, and 'we, the people'. Everyone who borrowed more than they could afford, the Unions and groups like Acorn for forcing banks to lend to people who could not afford to borrow, and those to took those loans, and those of us who overspent on credit. There's plenty of blame to go around. We can't go on pretending it was 'the other guy'. We all did it.

Oh I absolutely agree. 110%!

But seriously, if the twin parties both say we have to attack Iraq to liberate them are we supposed to take their word for it? Or are we supposed to know better by now?

If the twin parties both tell us that TARP saved the earth from Armagedon, our first instinct should probably be to reject that idea until it can be proven critically.

If you could stop comparing oranges to orangutans, you might make a coherent argument. I go by what independent economists said - I give jack shits worth of credence to any politician when it comes to economics. Economist - all over the world - were predicting this collapse for close to 10 years. No one listened to them. Not the politicians, not the banks, not the public. You know who did listen? Wealthy people.... they insulated themselves from the worst of it. That's why they're still wealthy.

Most economists didn't predict this. A few did, but the profession was generally spectacularly wrong.

 

[loosecannon]

If you could stop comparing oranges to orangutans, you might make a coherent argument. I go by what independent economists said - I give jack shits worth of credence to any politician when it comes to economics. Economist - all over the world - were predicting this collapse for close to 10 years. No one listened to them. Not the politicians, not the banks, not the public. You know who did listen? Wealthy people.... they insulated themselves from the worst of it. That's why they're still wealthy.

I have no interest in making an argument, much less one that you find coherent.

I am making points. In this case my point is you simply have no idea whatsoever what would have happened IF.

And you were drug kicking and screaming into TARP by a bunch of plunge protection team goons whose expertise and responsibility was to insulate us all from just this kind of event. Oooooops!

And you are carrying water for the banks by paving the way for the next round of socialized risk/privatized profits/too big to fail, bailouts.

All on the basis of a cataclysm that never happened and that we have no possible way to know would have happened.....

esp when you fail to even consider that if we had refused to effect TARP our options would still have been open to any other kind of remedy, any of which might have also rescued us from this potential for disaster.

You are basically saying "I have a magic whistle called TARP that keeps elephants out of my kitchen".

And I am making the point that maybe it does no such thing.

 

[loosecannon]

Who in the private sector was willing to stand up and back the banks? The financial sector was in a panic....stock values crashed, they were shedding workers at 700,000 a month, there was no lending

Without TARP we would have had a Depression

Who cares if the banks all died? NON issue.

The Fed is perfectly capable of lending directly to the public just like any bank does. And at much lower interest rates. The "banks" in the middle are just marking up a product the Fed provides them free.

The banks survived while the economy flounders, don't you see the failure in that result?

Lemme rephrase that:

The baby died but we saved the bath water.