What would YOU say to the Oversight Committee if YOU were asked??

Date sort Score sort
Quote:
BTW the Reinvestment act and TARP are NOT the same thing. Different bill different funding source different outcomes etc etc etc.......

AND it is not the feds fault if the locals don't follow the law. THe local contractor broke the law and got busted doesn't mean the Reinvestment Act was a bad idea. H*** it was better than TARP 2 and TARP 3!!
 
Not really.

What happened is at the very end of President Bushes 2nd term. His treasury secretary said our entire banking system was ready to crash and they needed to give the banksters 1 trillion dollars from our tax coffers. They wanted the money at very low interest and no strings attached. In addition there was to be no retribution against the people responsible for the problem. The opposing party did a lot of grandstanding and assured America that the money would be closely watched and regulated. No shenanigans would be allowed. So they had an emergency session and gave the banksters everything they wanted with no strings attached.

In America the poor pay very little in income taxes. However since they are poor it hurts them more than it does the middle or upper classes. So no they didn't rob from the poor. They robbed from everyone except the banksters. The banksters of course are all millionaires or better.

A little background 1st. We used to have a law in this country that banks were banks and investment institutions were used for investing in higher risk assets. In other words you put your money in a bank and expected a 2-4% return. The bank then invested the money you gave them into low risk bonds and such to make a profit. Then about 20 years ago they decided to deregulate the banks and let them invest in whatever they wanted to. So they invested in high risk products that gave an 8-15% return and paid the people who's money they were using 3%. A lot of these high risk investments were in mortgages. The mortgage industry had also been deregulated. If you had a job or even claimed to have a job you could get a mortgage. The 2 issues combined and caused a good portion of our current problems.

Last year they passed new laws to keep the banksters from doing the same thing again. Now the banksters are trying to get the laws repealed under the guise that it would slow down our recovery. At the same time they refuse to give loans to small businesses which severely hampers our recovery. Instead they are investing in high profit high risk investments using the money that the fed is lending them for just about free. There are a lot of banksters as well as Congressmen that could use a little time behind bars.
 
Quote:
Basically, it was a government bailout for whitecollar criminals who work in the economic sector, who are playing three card monty, with the nation's money supply.
Instead of sticking with banking principles, which have worked, for centuries, they decided to get creative, in order to make bundles of profits, and it caught up with them.
Apparently, you can't send several thousand bankers and Wall Street investors to jail at the same time, so, the government just covered their losses, with the people's tax money...The sad thing is, the people recieve absolutely no benefit, except to be told that if the banks went under, everyone would suffer.

Here's what I'm getting from that: America handed banking criminals tax money from the poor in order to fix the economy but since banking criminals are, well, banking criminals - they did what they always do and gambled the money on 'investments' instead of replenishing their coffers from the last time they did that and failed.

Do I have this right?

Good name, tarp. Something that covers everything and fixes nothing.

Mostly you got that right. They actually did the "right" thing for the wrong reasons. They were supposed to replenish the coffers and increase the amount of cash on "hand". They did that. And then some. They did not invest in anything like maybe new business or capital overhead loans for small business, they held on to it and invested it in short term bonds etc to keep it "available".

What people cannot grasp is that the problem is too much money at the top. The money has no where to go since they won't plow it back into the real economy since that is risky so they keep inventing innovative investment vehicles. (Yeah, way less risky to invest in made up nonsense!)
 
I have WHAT in my yard? :

Quote:
BTW the Reinvestment act and TARP are NOT the same thing. Different bill different funding source different outcomes etc etc etc.......

AND it is not the feds fault if the locals don't follow the law. THe local contractor broke the law and got busted doesn't mean the Reinvestment Act was a bad idea. H*** it was better than TARP 2 and TARP 3!!

Bangs head on wall.​
 
Last issue on TARP/ Chances are good that if they had let the poo hit the **%#& in the beginning then the crash would have been very ugly and we all would be very unhappy and screaming fo their heads. So, despite my feelings about socialized banks it was the right thing to do.

What wasn't right was soft pedaling the regulations to prevent it from happening again.

What ISN't right is the utter lack of punishment for people we KNOW were committing fraud. Standard and Poors needs to have some jail cells with their name on it.

And if those pushing for repeal of what regulation did get passed have their way then the new regs will vanish again and we will do this all over again in another ten years.

It took several presidents to get us to this point. Both repubs and dems took each of the steps it took to get us here.

Getting regulators off of the back of small business is a good idea, but some one somewhere MUST rein in the multinational corporations they are utterly incapable of restraining themselves.
 
I think there should have been a 'FINE' if the banks couldn't prove they invested in a 'key' points of the plan. Forcing a slight trickle, rather then holding onto it at the bank level only. Quite seriously, putting a million dollar fine during pay back if they couldn't show and prove a % of investment in small business and other points like refinancing a minimum of homes, at NO to little cost ,for a property close to foreclosure.

Saying they WANT this money to work in such ways, and then being disappointed because there was nothing to push their points forward was an issue with the original plan.

Given I was angry about TARP, and I serious wanted to slam heads on that one.... if the extra time was put into letting banks know there were serious key notes in there so they could build their own recovery and solve an economic down 'fall' (not turn). Instead, its turned back around to bank PROFIT. That was not the point.

Make rules and not suggestions when giving this money up!

Seriously, do you turn a teenager loose with your car keys and suggest they don't use there cell phone while driving, and they aren't to pick up any of their friends while out? NO, you lay down the law, or there are punishments to follow.

That's the point of teaching the banks a lesson, there are consequinces for poor choices and if they NEED the government to fund them to keep us all stable, fine. Long as they are sorry, and CHANGE the behavior.

Why is this easier to get across with kids but not CEO's?
 
Last edited:
Now I KNOW for certain that the world is ending. Royd and I agree on something!

Praise Jesus! You have seen the light.
wee.gif
 
Quote:
I believe they should have had to take their medicine, like big boys. Remember the saying,"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime."?

That includes the bankers, the Wall Streeters, and the financial fixers, in the orginizations , like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac....BTW, whoever thought up those stupid names, needs to be sent up, too, just for general principle.
lol.png


I also believe that General Motors should have taken the same medicine...Here's an anology, which I came up with, last night.

First, what has happened in the unions, is the same thing, which the govt. has done with the Social Security fund.[I'm not abbreviating, because this thread belongs to an Australian girl, who told us to keep it simple.] They took money, which had a dedicated purpose, but it just looked so available. After all, it wasn't being used, right now. Why not put it to use? Namely, the retirement fund. They have used it, to push their socialist union agenda.

So, here's the anology on the bailout: Remember that car, which you purchased, new, back in 1985? Remember that it had, say, $200 built into the cost, to fund union retirements?...Well, guess what, suckers? We want another $500, for that same car, because we didn't handle the money, properly, which you gave us, the first time.
Seriously, why should we, as a nation, throw good money after bad...Those cars, during the 80's, were pieces of garbage, anyway.
 
Last edited:
What happened the last time banks failed?

Does anyone know or do I ned to look this up?

I'm not real up on history after the Reformation.
 

Similar threads

serama hen
    • Like
WAYNE NJ MAN LEGALIZES CHICKENS IS THERE ANYONE IN PATERSON
Replies
2
Views
5K
serama hen
serama hen

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom