USA banks and industry are sitting on 19 million jobs to make Obama look bad

[Oldstyle]

It was amusing to watch Barack Obama stand on his soapbox and blame bankers for writing the subprime loans that caused the crash...and then turn around six months later and criticize them for NOT writing the same kind of loans. It's the dysfuntional quality of this Administration's economic policy that hurts it so much. They don't really know what they want.

 

[merrill]

You're an incredibly confused person. Yes, the banks accepted taxpayer assistance (in some cases they were not even given a choice) but they paid back the taxpayers IN FULL WITH INTEREST. So why do you think they "owe" something?

You seem to think that the banks should make loans whether they are sound or not...simply because the President you support doesn't have an economic plan that works. So let me carry your illogical reasoning out to it's conclusion. The banks make loans that aren't sound to the "Solyndras" of the world...those companies go belly up...the banks go back into the red again...and we the taxpayers have to bail them out yet again. Is that the "plan" that you have to get things going again? Amusing...

Here's a radical concept...if you'd like to free up investment money? Why not repatriate the trillions of dollars that American multinational corporations have made overseas, allowing them to bring that money into the United States at a low tax rate if they invest the money in infrastructure or jobs? Gee, trillions of dollars pumped into the economy and not only would the US taxpayer not have to go into debt to make that happen but we'd actually get more tax revenues!!!

Or an even more radical concept...how about not hitting businesses with job killing legislation like ObamaCare and threatening them with EPA enforcement of greenhouse gas emissions, Cap & Trade legislation, Card Check legislation, lawsuits if they attempt to build factories in non-union States, and stonewalling permit approvals for drilling and pipeline construction? You want to create 19 million jobs? Tell the idiot in the Oval Office to stop treating businesses like the enemy or an ATM machine.

My my so many seem to believe OUR tax dollars should be available at a moments notice to shore up mismanaged industry. So how does this practice prevent a repeat performance? You thinkers piss and moan about socialism....is this not socialism?

Their unethical behavior put 11 million out of work which is likely losing the USA $$$trillions everyday. And this is okay?

11 million out of work is likely creating tax increases of all sorts due to loss of tax revenue in all of the cookie jars. Any type of increase in water and sewage rates, solid waste disposal rates,swimming pool fee etc etc etc is a tax increase no matter what.

11 million -19 million out of work is unfriendly to business and taxpayers.

Mismanaged industry?
Did the government have any part in the economic collapse?

11 million -19 million out of work is unfriendly to business and taxpayers.

Why is Obama making things worse?

Are you forgiving the white collared bankers and such?

Did the government have any part in the economic collapse?

Please explain...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

My my so many seem to believe OUR tax dollars should be available at a moments notice to shore up mismanaged industry. So how does this practice prevent a repeat performance? You thinkers piss and moan about socialism....is this not socialism?

Their unethical behavior put 11 million out of work which is likely losing the USA $$$trillions everyday. And this is okay?

11 million out of work is likely creating tax increases of all sorts due to loss of tax revenue in all of the cookie jars. Any type of increase in water and sewage rates, solid waste disposal rates,swimming pool fee etc etc etc is a tax increase no matter what.

11 million -19 million out of work is unfriendly to business and taxpayers.

Mismanaged industry?
Did the government have any part in the economic collapse?

11 million -19 million out of work is unfriendly to business and taxpayers.

Why is Obama making things worse?

Are you forgiving the white collared bankers and such?

Did the government have any part in the economic collapse?

Please explain...

Forgive them? For what?

Yes, the government played a part.

First time you've heard that?

 

[Oldstyle]

As long as banks accept taxpayer assistance to keep their banks afloat they need to keep OUR money working for US the stakeholders.

Now if they want to convert to the Free Market system meaning no tax dollars hey I'm all for that. For now they love tax dollars backing up their corrupt home loan scams and their obscene bonus packages.

They owe the taxpayers big time!!

You're an incredibly confused person. Yes, the banks accepted taxpayer assistance (in some cases they were not even given a choice) but they paid back the taxpayers IN FULL WITH INTEREST. So why do you think they "owe" something?

You seem to think that the banks should make loans whether they are sound or not...simply because the President you support doesn't have an economic plan that works. So let me carry your illogical reasoning out to it's conclusion. The banks make loans that aren't sound to the "Solyndras" of the world...those companies go belly up...the banks go back into the red again...and we the taxpayers have to bail them out yet again. Is that the "plan" that you have to get things going again? Amusing...

Here's a radical concept...if you'd like to free up investment money? Why not repatriate the trillions of dollars that American multinational corporations have made overseas, allowing them to bring that money into the United States at a low tax rate if they invest the money in infrastructure or jobs? Gee, trillions of dollars pumped into the economy and not only would the US taxpayer not have to go into debt to make that happen but we'd actually get more tax revenues!!!

Or an even more radical concept...how about not hitting businesses with job killing legislation like ObamaCare and threatening them with EPA enforcement of greenhouse gas emissions, Cap & Trade legislation, Card Check legislation, lawsuits if they attempt to build factories in non-union States, and stonewalling permit approvals for drilling and pipeline construction? You want to create 19 million jobs? Tell the idiot in the Oval Office to stop treating businesses like the enemy or an ATM machine.

My my so many seem to believe OUR tax dollars should be available at a moments notice to shore up mismanaged industry. So how does this practice prevent a repeat performance? You thinkers piss and moan about socialism....is this not socialism?

Their unethical behavior put 11 million out of work which is likely losing the USA $$$trillions everyday. And this is okay?

11 million out of work is likely creating tax increases of all sorts due to loss of tax revenue in all of the cookie jars. Any type of increase in water and sewage rates, solid waste disposal rates,swimming pool fee etc etc etc is a tax increase no matter what.

11 million -19 million out of work is unfriendly to business and taxpayers.

Actually, I don't believe our tax dollars should shore up mismanaged industry. I believe in the free markets regulating themselves. If your bank makes bad loans and becomes insolvent then your bank goes bankrupt and banks that conducted themselves in a responsible manner take over your market share. What we've done by all of these bailouts is tell businesses that they can take unwise risks in search of huge profits or agree to ridiculous union contracts and that if they fail that we'll protect them. As a fiscal conservative I don't believe that's a wise course.

Tax revenues rise and fall along with the economy. Why doesn't the rate of spending by the government correspond to that rise and fall? Yes, tax revenues are way down because the value of property is substantially lower now than it was four years ago when it was grossly overvalued. You for some reason think that private business should make up for the shortsightedness of government planners who haven't put anything aside for a 'rainy day'.

My contention is that government is bloated and inefficient and needs to be overhauled.

I also contend that deeming businesses "too big to fail" is a recipe for failure. I believe that when big businesses fail that other businesses step into the void left behind.

 

[merrill]

How did the government make business fail? Please explain...

Why did banks accept OUR tax dollars then choose to sit on them instead of making things happen?

If one government put millions out of work then the following government must put them back to work in order to keep generating revenue and boosting economic growth.

Banks take our money then use it to make themselves money in addition to charging the source of that money a host of fees for the privilege of using a bank..... which sucks.

The financial industry is in debt big time to the stakeholders behind their greedy success
those stakeholders being the depositors without which would be reduced to nothing.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How did the government make business fail? Please explain...

Why did banks accept OUR tax dollars then choose to sit on them instead of making things happen?

If one government put millions out of work then the following government must put them back to work in order to keep generating revenue and boosting economic growth.

Banks take our money then use it to make themselves money in addition to charging the source of that money a host of fees for the privilege of using a bank..... which sucks.

The financial industry is in debt big time to the stakeholders behind their greedy success
those stakeholders being the depositors without which would be reduced to nothing.

The government mandated banks make a certain amount of loans to people with lower incomes and lower credit scores.
The government forced Fannie and Freddie to buy more of these low quality loans.
The banks didn't sit on the dollars. They increased their capital, sold more stock and repaid the loans.
Yes, banks accept our deposits and use them to make money. First time you've heard that?

You should stop using the term "stakeholder", it makes you sound like a Commie.

 

[merrill]

"The government mandated banks make a certain amount of loans to people with lower incomes and lower credit scores." BUTTTTTT not to people who were unemployed or simply could not afford the house they were being sold.


"The government forced Fannie and Freddie to buy more of these low quality loans."

Which government? names please

Yes banks are indebted to we the stakeholders. Without WE THE STAKEHOLDERS they would NOT be in business. It's
one thing to provide a service it is entirely another to screw your customer base with obscene interest rates and all sorts
of fees that have no reason. Not to mention handing out bonus packages that are beyond belief.

 

[Oldstyle]

"The government mandated banks make a certain amount of loans to people with lower incomes and lower credit scores." BUTTTTTT not to people who were unemployed or simply could not afford the house they were being sold.


"The government forced Fannie and Freddie to buy more of these low quality loans."

Which government? names please

Yes banks are indebted to we the stakeholders. Without WE THE STAKEHOLDERS they would NOT be in business. It's
one thing to provide a service it is entirely another to screw your customer base with obscene interest rates and all sorts
of fees that have no reason. Not to mention handing out bonus packages that are beyond belief.

Don't take this the wrong way, Merrill...but why are you here wasting your (and our) time arguing about something that you obviously don't know very much about? Instead of copying someone else's rather dubious viewpoint don't you think you'd be better served to find out about the subject yourself?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"The government mandated banks make a certain amount of loans to people with lower incomes and lower credit scores." BUTTTTTT not to people who were unemployed or simply could not afford the house they were being sold.


"The government forced Fannie and Freddie to buy more of these low quality loans."

Which government? names please

Yes banks are indebted to we the stakeholders. Without WE THE STAKEHOLDERS they would NOT be in business. It's
one thing to provide a service it is entirely another to screw your customer base with obscene interest rates and all sorts
of fees that have no reason. Not to mention handing out bonus packages that are beyond belief.

The US government. They work in this place called Washington D.C.

If you don't like the way your bank treats you, withdraw your money.
If you don't like their bonus package, sell your stock.

 

[merrill]

"The government mandated banks make a certain amount of loans to people with lower incomes and lower credit scores." BUTTTTTT not to people who were unemployed or simply could not afford the house they were being sold.


"The government forced Fannie and Freddie to buy more of these low quality loans."

Which government? names please

Yes banks are indebted to we the stakeholders. Without WE THE STAKEHOLDERS they would NOT be in business. It's
one thing to provide a service it is entirely another to screw your customer base with obscene interest rates and all sorts
of fees that have no reason. Not to mention handing out bonus packages that are beyond belief.

The US government. They work in this place called Washington D.C.

If you don't like the way your bank treats you, withdraw your money.
If you don't like their bonus package, sell your stock.

"The government forced Fannie and Freddie to buy more of these low quality loans."

Which government? I asked...

The you pretend not to know therefore it must have been the one of Bush/Cheney and Henry Paulson....

In what way were they forced to buy loans?

Who is forcing financial institutions to sit on 9-10 million foreclosed properties?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"The government mandated banks make a certain amount of loans to people with lower incomes and lower credit scores." BUTTTTTT not to people who were unemployed or simply could not afford the house they were being sold.


"The government forced Fannie and Freddie to buy more of these low quality loans."

Which government? names please

Yes banks are indebted to we the stakeholders. Without WE THE STAKEHOLDERS they would NOT be in business. It's
one thing to provide a service it is entirely another to screw your customer base with obscene interest rates and all sorts
of fees that have no reason. Not to mention handing out bonus packages that are beyond belief.

The US government. They work in this place called Washington D.C.

If you don't like the way your bank treats you, withdraw your money.
If you don't like their bonus package, sell your stock.

"The government forced Fannie and Freddie to buy more of these low quality loans."

Which government? I asked...

The you pretend not to know therefore it must have been the one of Bush/Cheney and Henry Paulson....

In what way were they forced to buy loans?

Who is forcing financial institutions to sit on 9-10 million foreclosed properties?

In what way were they forced? Congress passed a law.

 

[merrill]

The US government. They work in this place called Washington D.C.

If you don't like the way your bank treats you, withdraw your money.
If you don't like their bonus package, sell your stock.

"The government forced Fannie and Freddie to buy more of these low quality loans."

Which government? I asked...

The you pretend not to know therefore it must have been the one of Bush/Cheney and Henry Paulson....

In what way were they forced to buy loans?

Who is forcing financial institutions to sit on 9-10 million foreclosed properties?

In what way were they forced? Congress passed a law.

No way jose' that is nonsense.

 

[Harry Dresden]

every large and small business needs to hang a sign on their front door "WE WILL BEGIN HIRING WHEN OBAMA LOSES IN 2012".

What happens when they don't hire and you lost the best president in the last couple of decades?

Bill Clinton?.....he is still around.....just cant run anymore....

 

[merrill]

Big Businesses Have Enough Extra Cash to Create 19 Million Jobs
By Seth Fiegerman

NEW YORK (MainStreet) – Wondering where all the jobs are? Just follow the money.

Big businesses and banks currently have enough extra cash lying around to create 19 million jobs between 2012 and 2014 and thus bring unemployment in this country back down to its normal rate of 5%, according to a new report from economists at the University of Massachusetts’ Political Economy Research Institute.

In total, America’s corporations are sitting on an estimated $3.6 trillion in liquid assets and cash reserves, or roughly a quarter of the country’s entire gross domestic product.

Some of this is in fact needed to cover companies in the event that their business – or the economy as a whole – takes a turn for the worse. But according to the report, even accounting for a “highly risky economic environment,” these corporations would still have $1.4 trillion in excess liquidity.

To put that in context, that’s nearly twice the amount of money that the federal government set aside for its stimulus package to rescue the economy in 2009. But while the stimulus saved or created some 3 million to 4 million jobs, the economists predict that these private sector funds could do significantly more if invested in the right way.

The group of economists used data from the Commerce Department that estimated the number of jobs created from every $1 million spent in a number of sectors including health care, infrastructure and small business lending.

Based on this, they found there is the potential for the excess liquidity of banks and businesses to create more than 13 million jobs directly or indirectly, and another 5.4 million jobs would be created thanks to greater consumer spending from those who gained a steady salary.

con't
Big Businesses Have Enough Extra Cash to Create 19 Million Jobs | Employment | Career | Mainstreet

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"The government forced Fannie and Freddie to buy more of these low quality loans."

Which government? I asked...

The you pretend not to know therefore it must have been the one of Bush/Cheney and Henry Paulson....

In what way were they forced to buy loans?

Who is forcing financial institutions to sit on 9-10 million foreclosed properties?

In what way were they forced? Congress passed a law.

No way jose' that is nonsense.

IN 1992, AN AFFORDABLE housing mission was added to the charters of Fannie and Freddie, which--like the CRA--permitted Congress to subsidize LMI housing without appropriating any funds. A 1997 Urban Institute report found that local and regional lenders seemed more willing than the GSEs to serve creditworthy low- to moderate-income and minority applicants. After this, Fannie and Freddie modified their automated underwriting systems to accept loans with characteristics that they had previously rejected. This opened the way for large numbers of nontraditional and sub-prime mortgages. These did not necessarily come from traditional banks, lending under the CRA, but from lenders like Countrywide Financial, the nation’s largest sub-prime and nontraditional mortgage lender and a firm that would become infamous for consistently pushing the envelope on acceptable underwriting standards.

Fannie and Freddie used their affordable housing mission to avoid additional regulation by Congress, especially restrictions on the accumulation of mortgage portfolios (today totaling approximately $1.6 trillion) that accounted for most of their profits. The GSEs argued that if Congress constrained the size of their mortgage portfolios, they could not afford to adequately subsidize affordable housing. By 1997, Fannie was offering a 97 percent loan-to-value mortgage. By 2001, it was offering mortgages with no down payment at all. By 2007, Fannie and Freddie were required to show that 55 percent of their mortgage purchases were LMI loans and, within that goal, 38 percent of all purchases were to come from underserved areas (usually inner cities) and 25 percent were to be loans to low-income and very-low-income borrowers. Meeting these goals almost certainly required Fannie and Freddie to purchase loans with low down payments and other deficiencies that would mark them as sub-prime or Alt-A.

The American Spectator : The True Origins of This Financial Crisis

 

[g5000]

Bear Stearns. Lehman Brothers. AIG.

Remember them? Not subject to CRA or any of the laws regarding LMI loans.

Nor were Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, or Morgan Stanley.

Nor were any of the countless other banks and countries around the world which crashed.

The GSEs were less than half market share by 2005.

 

[g5000]

Now, about the topic of this thread.

Anyone who says a business hoards cash out of spite is an idiot. Do you really think the CEO of a company is sitting somewhere saying, "You know, I could be investing our cash and beatin the pants off our competitors and selling shit and making record profits, but oh, hell no! I want my competitors to do all that. I'm going to sit here and not make money. 'Cause I hate Obama and...somehow...not making and selling stuff will hurt him more than me..."

 

[WillowTree]

Big Businesses Have Enough Extra Cash to Create 19 Million Jobs
By Seth Fiegerman

NEW YORK (MainStreet) – Wondering where all the jobs are? Just follow the money.

Big businesses and banks currently have enough extra cash lying around to create 19 million jobs between 2012 and 2014 and thus bring unemployment in this country back down to its normal rate of 5%, according to a new report from economists at the University of Massachusetts’ Political Economy Research Institute.

In total, America’s corporations are sitting on an estimated $3.6 trillion in liquid assets and cash reserves, or roughly a quarter of the country’s entire gross domestic product.

Some of this is in fact needed to cover companies in the event that their business – or the economy as a whole – takes a turn for the worse. But according to the report, even accounting for a “highly risky economic environment,” these corporations would still have $1.4 trillion in excess liquidity.

To put that in context, that’s nearly twice the amount of money that the federal government set aside for its stimulus package to rescue the economy in 2009. But while the stimulus saved or created some 3 million to 4 million jobs, the economists predict that these private sector funds could do significantly more if invested in the right way.

The group of economists used data from the Commerce Department that estimated the number of jobs created from every $1 million spent in a number of sectors including health care, infrastructure and small business lending.

Based on this, they found there is the potential for the excess liquidity of banks and businesses to create more than 13 million jobs directly or indirectly, and another 5.4 million jobs would be created thanks to greater consumer spending from those who gained a steady salary.

con't
Big Businesses Have Enough Extra Cash to Create 19 Million Jobs | Employment | Career | Mainstreet

Keep demonizing big business. They'll come play wit you any minute now.. Right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Bear Stearns. Lehman Brothers. AIG.

Remember them? Not subject to CRA or any of the laws regarding LMI loans.

Nor were Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, or Morgan Stanley.

Nor were any of the countless other banks and countries around the world which crashed.

The GSEs were less than half market share by 2005.

Last time I checked, taxpayers aren't on the hook for Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, or Morgan Stanley.

We are on the hook for Fannie and Freddie.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Now, about the topic of this thread.

Anyone who says a business hoards cash out of spite is an idiot. Do you really think the CEO of a company is sitting somewhere saying, "You know, I could be investing our cash and beatin the pants off our competitors and selling shit and making record profits, but oh, hell no! I want my competitors to do all that. I'm going to sit here and not make money. 'Cause I hate Obama and...somehow...not making and selling stuff will hurt him more than me..."

It's true, Merrill is an idiot.