Why poor people should receive Ferrari's paid with taxpayer money

[Midnight FM]

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Early estimates for the bailout's risk cost were as much as $700 billion; however, TARP recovered $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested, earning a $15.3 billion profit (an annualized rate of return of 0.6%), which may have been a loss when adjusted for inflation.

The bank bailout of 2008 potentially cost as much as $700 billion.

Instead of bailing out the banks, we should have purchased $700 billion worth of Ferraris for poor people. Just a thought.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Shakin' my head.

Wealth redistribution never turns out well.

 

[BackAgain]

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Early estimates for the bailout's risk cost were as much as $700 billion; however, TARP recovered $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested, earning a $15.3 billion profit (an annualized rate of return of 0.6%), which may have been a loss when adjusted for inflation.

The bank bailout of 2008 potentially cost as much as $700 billion.

Instead of bailing out the banks, we should have purchased $700 billion worth of Ferraris for poor people. Just a thought.

Another absurd and mindless OP. You’re on a roll today.

Don’t drink and post.

 

[Midnight FM]

Shakin' my head.

Wealth redistribution never turns out well.

Well, the question would be, do you support $700 billion of taxpayer money being used to bail out banks?

If you do, then you might as well just favor it being spent on Ferraris for poor people instead.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Shakin' my head.

Wealth redistribution never turns out well.

Neither does bailing out banks

 

[Midnight FM]

Another absurd and mindless OP. You’re on a roll today.

Don’t drink and post.

I mean, if taxpayer money is being spent one way or another, then I propose that every dollar of it spent on rich people and institutions simply be spent on poor people instead. Seems like a better set of priorities.

 

[Scoutster]

Another absurd and mindless OP. You’re on a roll today.

Don’t drink and post.

 

[BackAgain]

I mean, if taxpayer money is being spent one way or another, then I propose that every dollar of it spent on rich people and institutions simply be spent on poor people instead. Seems like a better set of priorities.

Your underlying assumption isn’t factually supported.

Your argument is simply silly.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Early estimates for the bailout's risk cost were as much as $700 billion; however, TARP recovered $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested, earning a $15.3 billion profit (an annualized rate of return of 0.6%), which may have been a loss when adjusted for inflation.

The bank bailout of 2008 potentially cost as much as $700 billion.

Instead of bailing out the banks, we should have purchased $700 billion worth of Ferraris for poor people. Just a thought.

You don't think you troll.

 

[Midnight FM]

As an anecdote, the bank bailout of $2008 cost as much as $700 billion of taxpayer money.

Early estimates for the bailout's risk cost were as much as $700 billion; however, TARP recovered $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested, earning a $15.3 billion profit (an annualized rate of return of 0.6%), which may have been a loss when adjusted for inflation.<a href="Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>3<span>]</span></a>

So my thought is that we should pass a law which makes it illegal to complain about taxpayer money being spent on poor people (e.x. Food Stamps), since this promotes the misinformation that most or all of taxpayer spending goes to poor people, when in reality, much of it goes to rich people and institutions.

Once taxpayer money stops going to rich people, we can make it legal to complain about it going to poor people again. But until then, STFU.

 

[The Duke]

The depositors should have been paid off and everything else liquidated and all of them fired and scattered to the winds.
That's not what happened, though.
That was sickening and a huge transfer of wealth from regular people to elsewhere.

 

[Thinker101]

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Early estimates for the bailout's risk cost were as much as $700 billion; however, TARP recovered $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested, earning a $15.3 billion profit (an annualized rate of return of 0.6%), which may have been a loss when adjusted for inflation.

The bank bailout of 2008 potentially cost as much as $700 billion.

Instead of bailing out the banks, we should have purchased $700 billion worth of Ferraris for poor people. Just a thought.

This must be your lucky day, they're giving out free Ferraris in the next town over. Better get there and wait for them to call your number.

 

[Independent thinker]

Well, the question would be, do you support $700 billion of taxpayer money being used to bail out banks?

If you do, then you might as well just favor it being spent on Ferraris for poor people instead.

Fact is, Americans would have lost a shitload of money in many different ways if we hadn't done it.

 

[BackAgain]

As an anecdote, the bank bailout of $2008 cost as much as $700 billion of taxpayer money.

Early estimates for the bailout's risk cost were as much as $700 billion; however, TARP recovered $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested, earning a $15.3 billion profit (an annualized rate of return of 0.6%), which may have been a loss when adjusted for inflation.<a href="Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>3<span>]</span></a>

So my thought is that we should pass a law which makes it illegal to complain about taxpayer money being spent on poor people (e.x. Food Stamps), since this promotes the misinformation that most or all of taxpayer spending goes to poor people, when in reality, much of it goes to rich people and institutions.

Once taxpayer money stops going to rich people, we can make it legal to complain about it going to poor people again. But until then, STFU.

That STFU advice applies most to your recent slate of idiotic posts.

 

[The Duke]

Fact is, Americans would have lost a shitload of money in many different ways if we hadn't done it.

No. The banks and predatory lenders would have. It was all against everything the FDIC was supposed to be.
It was an end-around that. That was handled wrongly for the American people.

 

[Leo123]

As an anecdote, the bank bailout of $2008 cost as much as $700 billion of taxpayer money.

Early estimates for the bailout's risk cost were as much as $700 billion; however, TARP recovered $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested, earning a $15.3 billion profit (an annualized rate of return of 0.6%), which may have been a loss when adjusted for inflation.<a href="Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>3<span>]</span></a>

So my thought is that we should pass a law which makes it illegal to complain about taxpayer money being spent on poor people (e.x. Food Stamps), since this promotes the misinformation that most or all of taxpayer spending goes to poor people, when in reality, much of it goes to rich people and institutions.

Once taxpayer money stops going to rich people, we can make it legal to complain about it going to poor people again. But until then, STFU.

2008 was yet another economic debacle caused by un-reined in Democrats messing with Fannie Mae by creating lowered lending standards so 'poor people' could afford buying a home. Those loans were guaranteed by Fannie to be solid except........They weren't because people could not afford to pay back those loans because they were allowed to lie about their income. Securitization of those bad loans caused the 2008 collapse of the housing market. More Democrat, Marxist policies ruining America's economic system.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Early estimates for the bailout's risk cost were as much as $700 billion; however, TARP recovered $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested, earning a $15.3 billion profit (an annualized rate of return of 0.6%), which may have been a loss when adjusted for inflation.

The bank bailout of 2008 potentially cost as much as $700 billion.

Instead of bailing out the banks, we should have purchased $700 billion worth of Ferraris for poor people. Just a thought.

The bank bailout of 2008 potentially cost as much as $700 billion.

Profitable short-term loans that saved the banking system were awful.
But not as awful as the money wasted on your education.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No. The banks and predatory lenders would have. It was all against everything the FDIC was supposed to be.
It was an end-around that. That was handled wrongly for the American people.

Exactly! Making billions on short term TARP loans was much worse than the trillions the government would have spent to have the FDIC pay off everyone's deposits at failed banks.

 

[The Duke]

Exactly! Making billions on short term TARP loans was much worse than the trillions the government would have spent to have the FDIC pay off everyone's deposits at failed banks.

AND they got all the properties. Terrible! Wrong!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well, the question would be, do you support $700 billion of taxpayer money being used to bail out banks?

If you do, then you might as well just favor it being spent on Ferraris for poor people instead.

If the poor people were going to pay for the cars, like the banks repaid their loans, I'd say go for it.