Obama Wants a GM Bailout Tax on Bank and Insurance Customers

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
58,308
Reaction score
5,091
Points
245
The more I learn, the more I realize I underestimated the duplicity and sheer arrogance of Obama.

In doublespeak that would make even George Orwell do a doubletake, President Obama’s “financial crisis responsibility fee” would tax banks, insurance companies and brokerage houses that have paid back their bailout money — and even some firms that never took a bailout — to pay the tab of irresponsible firms, namely the auto companies that still owe the government billions.
“We also ask the largest financial firms — companies saved by tax dollars during the financial crisis — to repay the American people for every dime that we spent,” President Obama proclaimed in the Rose Garden on Monday. But the fine print in the 80-page plan the president submitted to the Joint Committee on Taxation makes it clear that this fee will only be on firms that have already repaid the Troubled Asset Relief Program funds and likely on some firms who never took a dime of taxpayer money.
“Although many of the largest financial firms have repaid the Treasury for their TARP assistance, they continue to implicitly benefit from the TARP funds that bolstered their balance sheets during a period of great economic upheaval,” the administration states. A fee of an unspecified amount “will be restricted to financial firms with assets over $50 billion and will be imposed until all TARP costs have been recouped.”
Notice that for all the talk of “repayment,” the tax is not on recipients of TARP per se, but financial firms with assets of more than $50 billion. Fidelity Investments, for instance, has weathered the storm relatively well and has not taken any TARP money. But since it has assets of more than $1 trillion under management, Fidelity would still likely be hit by the Obama tax. And some of the TARP recipients, like BB&T Corp., hadn’t engaged in the foolish mortgage and credit practices, yet were pressured by the government to take the bailout money so the “bad banks” wouldn’t be stigmatized by taking TARP money.
Obama Wants a GM Bailout Tax on Bank and Insurance Customers

Watch as the usual suspects defend Obama from my racist attack.
 

Photonic

Ad astra!
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
2,746
Reaction score
248
Points
48
Location
California
Those companies are just going to turn right around and bone their customers. This is a shadow tax on consumers.
 

FA_Q2

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
19,007
Reaction score
3,200
Points
290
Location
Washington State
Wow. The insanity is astounding...


How much longer are we going to ensure that we award the irresponsible at the cost of the responsible. Does no one see what the outcome of such an inane concept brings us??
 

Sallow

The Big Bad Wolf.
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
56,532
Reaction score
6,241
Points
1,840
Location
New York City
Good idea. I would have preferred some arrests and seizures but at least this is something.
 

editec

Mr. Forgot-it-All
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
41,421
Reaction score
5,660
Points
48
Location
Maine
Insisting that banksters set up an insurance policy against the kind of meltdown that they created in 2008 seems to like a good idea to me.

Apparently you do not really understand the nature of the mess the Banksters made of the economy.

Had the FED and TReasury not taken extraordinary steps thery took to bail them out, our economy's banking system would have melted down entirely. There would NOT have been an orderly retreat with bankruptsies and organizations going into recievership, there would have been bank after bank going belly up.

Had the government not stepped in to save them, there wouldn't be a bank open in this nation.

You need to stop reading BLOGS from dubious sources and start reading some books written by the people who were involved in that mess.
 

Sallow

The Big Bad Wolf.
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
56,532
Reaction score
6,241
Points
1,840
Location
New York City
Insisting that banksters set up an insurance policy against the kind of meltdown that they created in 2008 seems to like a good idea to me.

Apparently you do not really understand the nature of the mess the Banksters made of the economy.

Had the FED and TReasury not taken extraordinary steps thery took to bail them out, our economy's banking system would have melted down entirely. There would NOT have been an orderly retreat with bankruptsies and organizations going into recievership, there would have been bank after bank going belly up.

Had the government not stepped in to save them, there wouldn't be a bank open in this nation.

You need to stop reading BLOGS from dubious sources and start reading some books written by the people who were involved in that mess.
It's the sort of thing that gets taken for granted. We had a real disaster in this country that was "staggered" in part by bold federal action. There were no bread lines or an extremely seriously crash in employment. While bad..it's nothing like what the country experienced during the great depression..but that was waiting in the wings.

It's sorta like the guy who can drink water from the tap..but never makes the connection to a plethora of departments working tirelessly to keep the water clean.
 

Conservative

Type 40
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
17,082
Reaction score
2,053
Points
48
Location
Pennsylvania
The more I learn, the more I realize I underestimated the duplicity and sheer arrogance of Obama.

In doublespeak that would make even George Orwell do a doubletake, President Obama’s “financial crisis responsibility fee” would tax banks, insurance companies and brokerage houses that have paid back their bailout money — and even some firms that never took a bailout — to pay the tab of irresponsible firms, namely the auto companies that still owe the government billions.
“We also ask the largest financial firms — companies saved by tax dollars during the financial crisis — to repay the American people for every dime that we spent,” President Obama proclaimed in the Rose Garden on Monday. But the fine print in the 80-page plan the president submitted to the Joint Committee on Taxation makes it clear that this fee will only be on firms that have already repaid the Troubled Asset Relief Program funds and likely on some firms who never took a dime of taxpayer money.
“Although many of the largest financial firms have repaid the Treasury for their TARP assistance, they continue to implicitly benefit from the TARP funds that bolstered their balance sheets during a period of great economic upheaval,” the administration states. A fee of an unspecified amount “will be restricted to financial firms with assets over $50 billion and will be imposed until all TARP costs have been recouped.”
Notice that for all the talk of “repayment,” the tax is not on recipients of TARP per se, but financial firms with assets of more than $50 billion. Fidelity Investments, for instance, has weathered the storm relatively well and has not taken any TARP money. But since it has assets of more than $1 trillion under management, Fidelity would still likely be hit by the Obama tax. And some of the TARP recipients, like BB&T Corp., hadn’t engaged in the foolish mortgage and credit practices, yet were pressured by the government to take the bailout money so the “bad banks” wouldn’t be stigmatized by taking TARP money.
Obama Wants a GM Bailout Tax on Bank and Insurance Customers

Watch as the usual suspects defend Obama from my racist attack.
so... Obama wants to penalize corporations for taking TARP funds and doing with those funds exactly what they were supposed to do.

Fucking idiot.
 
OP
Quantum Windbag

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
58,308
Reaction score
5,091
Points
245
Good idea. I would have preferred some arrests and seizures but at least this is something.
You think it is a good idea to tax punish people that were responsible because other people were irresponsible? Why don't we just lock everyone up and stop worrying about guilt or innocence? It would certainly make things easier.
 
OP
Quantum Windbag

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
58,308
Reaction score
5,091
Points
245
Insisting that banksters set up an insurance policy against the kind of meltdown that they created in 2008 seems to like a good idea to me.

Apparently you do not really understand the nature of the mess the Banksters made of the economy.

Had the FED and TReasury not taken extraordinary steps thery took to bail them out, our economy's banking system would have melted down entirely. There would NOT have been an orderly retreat with bankruptsies and organizations going into recievership, there would have been bank after bank going belly up.

Had the government not stepped in to save them, there wouldn't be a bank open in this nation.

You need to stop reading BLOGS from dubious sources and start reading some books written by the people who were involved in that mess.
Bullshit.
 

AmericanFirst

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
12,204
Reaction score
1,060
Points
175
Good idea. I would have preferred some arrests and seizures but at least this is something.
Obamaturd just proving what everybody says about him, he is just a big spending socialist. Keep backing him and your next statement will be "hello comrade".
 

iamwhatiseem

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
25,759
Reaction score
8,029
Points
900
Location
On a hill
Good idea. I would have preferred some arrests and seizures but at least this is something.
Starting with the FED and congress?
To expand on that - Goldman Sachs is probably...no...they ARE the largest criminal empire the world has ever known. Only...they are not.
What they did to earn $billions should have been against the law - I mean...how could it not have been?
But it wasn't. And it wasn't because those who wanted to "double home ownership" looked the other way as outfits like Goldman Sachs raked in $billions in fees and interest on $trillions of dollars in mortgages that should NEVER have been made in the first place.

Pheh...if you are going to start putting people in jail - put them ALL in jail. Including those that passed laws allowing these people to make $billions every month knowing full well what they were selling was worth far-far less and would eventually wreck the economy.
 

Kuros

Rookie
Joined
Jun 25, 2011
Messages
550
Reaction score
69
Points
0
Location
Louisville
Good idea. I would have preferred some arrests and seizures but at least this is something.
You think it is a good idea to tax punish people that were responsible because other people were irresponsible? Why don't we just lock everyone up and stop worrying about guilt or innocence? It would certainly make things easier.
Dude, I usually like your posts. But your ignorance here is pissing me off.

Yes, we should lock up the heads of the Wall Street firms that caused the crash. Not because they made mistakes, but because they engaged in purposeful fraud. In the meantime, taxing their toxic activity is nothing but sensible.
 

FA_Q2

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
19,007
Reaction score
3,200
Points
290
Location
Washington State
Good idea. I would have preferred some arrests and seizures but at least this is something.
You think it is a good idea to tax punish people that were responsible because other people were irresponsible? Why don't we just lock everyone up and stop worrying about guilt or innocence? It would certainly make things easier.
Dude, I usually like your posts. But your ignorance here is pissing me off.

Yes, we should lock up the heads of the Wall Street firms that caused the crash. Not because they made mistakes, but because they engaged in purposeful fraud. In the meantime, taxing their toxic activity is nothing but sensible.
But you missed the entire POINT. The point was that this is NOT attacking those that needed the funds or those that put the nation in danger. It is attacking those that did everything RIGHT. That is the problem, we are not holding the crooks accountable at all. What we are doing is holding the good and honest of us accountable to the crooks. Make a bad loan - don't worry that company over there that is being ethical will cover the loss for you. Make a mortgage that you cannot EVER afford, don't worry, your good neighbor will ensure that it gets paid. That is the attitude that we have and it will ruin us in the long run by allowing the crooks that are the problem to continue to profit when they should be in jail.
 

Immanuel

Gold Member
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
16,824
Reaction score
2,265
Points
183
Those companies are just going to turn right around and bone their customers. This is a shadow tax on consumers.
But at least he is not raising taxes on couples making less than $250k/year. Well, he already did that when he raised the cigarette tax but we are not supposed to consider that a tax on families making under $250k/year because... well, just because.

Immie
 
OP
Quantum Windbag

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
58,308
Reaction score
5,091
Points
245
Good idea. I would have preferred some arrests and seizures but at least this is something.
You think it is a good idea to tax punish people that were responsible because other people were irresponsible? Why don't we just lock everyone up and stop worrying about guilt or innocence? It would certainly make things easier.
Dude, I usually like your posts. But your ignorance here is pissing me off.

Yes, we should lock up the heads of the Wall Street firms that caused the crash. Not because they made mistakes, but because they engaged in purposeful fraud. In the meantime, taxing their toxic activity is nothing but sensible.
Their "toxic activity" is non existent.

Besides, this tax is going after people who didn't do anything other than make some money without getting involved in the trades you think are responsible for the problem.
 
Last edited:

Kuros

Rookie
Joined
Jun 25, 2011
Messages
550
Reaction score
69
Points
0
Location
Louisville
You think it is a good idea to tax punish people that were responsible because other people were irresponsible? Why don't we just lock everyone up and stop worrying about guilt or innocence? It would certainly make things easier.
Dude, I usually like your posts. But your ignorance here is pissing me off.

Yes, we should lock up the heads of the Wall Street firms that caused the crash. Not because they made mistakes, but because they engaged in purposeful fraud. In the meantime, taxing their toxic activity is nothing but sensible.
But you missed the entire POINT. The point was that this is NOT attacking those that needed the funds or those that put the nation in danger. It is attacking those that did everything RIGHT. That is the problem, we are not holding the crooks accountable at all. What we are doing is holding the good and honest of us accountable to the crooks. Make a bad loan - don't worry that company over there that is being ethical will cover the loss for you. Make a mortgage that you cannot EVER afford, don't worry, your good neighbor will ensure that it gets paid. That is the attitude that we have and it will ruin us in the long run by allowing the crooks that are the problem to continue to profit when they should be in jail.
This is what I meant by ignorance. You take the claim that they have paid back their loans at face value. You shouldn't. There's $1 trillion in Wall Street obligations to the Fed Reserve (besides TARP) that are still outstanding. $1 trillion. And those are on low- to no-interest loans.

I agree that we aren't holding the crooks accountable. And I lambast Obama on these boards constantly for his failure to launch a modern-day Pecora Commission.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top