Oh yes, the Democrats sent Billions overseas to bailout foreign banks, and what did it do for main street? The United States did more, with is action to salvage AIG and other institutions, than foreign governments spent on their entire bailout plans. France spent $35 billion on its financial rescue plan, Germany spent $133 billion. The Oversight Report states the U.S. TARP bailout helped overseas banks more than their own national governments' financial rescue packages did. And all we here from the Democrats and Liberals, is the mantra that with out the TARP things would have been worse? well are things any better? Run away spending, skyrocketing deficits, and skyrocketing debts, rising unemployment, the 17th consecutive month when foreclosure activity exceeded 300,000 homes, 3 of the last 4 weeks unemployment numbers have went up.....reaching 484,000 new claims. NASDQ, YTD -78.88.....S&P, YTD -31.49......Wensday dropped -265....today another -58.88. The DOW is in defibrillation not going anywhere.... http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ta...n/2010/08/12/id/367346?s=al&promo_code=A7CE-1 Not to mention the other shoe that will drop on the Business sector next year, a massive tax increase and crushing intrusive regulations. Yes, the Democrats and Washington are; Completely Out of Touch With That Reality French bank Societe Generale ($11.9 billion in AIG money), the French bank BNP Paribas ($4.9 billion in AIG funds), and Germany's Deutsche Bank ($11.8 billion), Banks in Canada, Switzerland, and Britain cashed in on the AIG rescue as well.
I seem to remember, a long time ago, that the bailouts began under Bush. He approved whole heartedly. According to one congressman, their banking committee was basically threatened by Paulsen. "Pass this, or else!" Are you willing to level allegations at ALL culprits, or just Democrats? As far as the DOW (Declaration of War???), what the hell? Do they matter? Catherine Austin Fitts rightfully calls Wall Street the fake economy, because they are. People have put so much, too much, faith in 1's and 0's and all the ridiculous tricks and shady bookkeeping that go along with the banking and trading schemes. Don't tell me that there is much difference between the Republicrats and Dumipublicans when it comes to Wall Street. Way too many people worship at that temple. Left or right doesn't matter when you're in love! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You can't continue to manipulate numbers and trade this or that stock or package and expect results in the larger economy. America suffers from many things, but especially manufacturing and raw production. The computerized casino game that the financial and investment sectors represent cannot keep a country of 300 million floating indefinitely.
Well, you seem to have favorites. I will concede that I may talk like, and certainly have been accused recently, of being a right-winger or a GOP operative or something like that. Back in the Bush years, people would have called me a liberal hippy. I think. Sometimes, you can't win.
Giambattista, it doesn't matter who, if they are spending in contravention to Article 1 Section 8 the Constitution, it doesn't matter if they are Democrat, Republican, Liberal, Independent, RINO, Demican or Republicrat, they all are wrong.
Doesn't everybody, yes there are things I agree with, and there are things I disagree with, and lately the Democrats are mostly on the disagree list. As for Bush, and the expansion of federal spending under His watch, I totally disagree with it, on the War, it is a mixed bag, there are a lot of things that should have been done differently, but the Iraq situation needed to be resolved, that was a festering sore that was going to come back and bite us, and Afghanistan should never have taken this long. The sad part was that Saddam was a buffer to Iran's ambitions, and now there isn't a Arab with the balls to stand up to Iran. The funny thing is I am a registered Democrat, but my Democrats, Hubert Humphry, JFK, Scoop Jackson, would be run out of todays democratic party, when Russ Feingold first ran, I voted for Him because he said he would only serve two terms and get out, but He has turned to the Dark Side. Yes, you sometimes can't win for losing, there are many times I have disagreed with the RINOs of Congress, and the RNC.
Tarp was everybody's, genius, Democrat/Republican, Obama voted for it, and even helped construct it. And it was wrong, it did nothing for the Man on Main Street, and all to often went to the benefit of Financial Institutions outside the United States. Yes Genius, Obama helped craft, and votes to pass TARP, He has major Finger prints on TARP, and it is you liberals who are always crying about how much worse the problem would be with out TARP..... Well OK, then if TARP is Bush's, He did a great thing, and kept the recession from becoming much worse...... So Spider, which is it? Bush is the root of all the Problems in the Economy? or Bush saved the economy from Total Collapse because He passed TARP,
It's that stimulus is universally recognized as the appropriate action to take if the economy collapses. Even Bush knew that. He is also to blame for overseeing that collapse with his economic policies of deregulating the financial markets. Free market my ass, that's just something Republicans say to get elected.
Spidergoat, exactly what deregulation by Bush, there are multiple news stories about the Republicans trying to tighten the Housing and Financial market regulations, and multiple You Tube videos, in their own words and voices, Democrats blocking any regulatory reform by the Republicans of the Housing and Financial markets.
Silly Buffalo. I thought white man extinguished you! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Obama did just regulate the financial sector. Nothing to worry about. Everything solved.
That's what I've been thinking. He was a puppet no matter what. You!?!? A DEMONCRAT?!?!? HA HA HA HA HA AH AHA AHA HAH AH AH AH DHSFAHSDFHASHDFHASDFHASDFHASHDFHSADFAWFJARWLGJAOEIVAOERIGNWOEFIJCKVMSEOIGEOIMVSOIVNOWARINGEOAIFVNAWRVOEINVOESIGNAT48395782900395870398090934894!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'll take that into consideration.
Yep He did, and if you think anything different is in play......everyone except Fannie and Freddie FU, the Democrats money machine.
Hell the first presidental election I was able to vote in I voted for Carter, dam was I young and dumb. Corrected that mistake in the next election.
To be fair: (1) As the man quoted from the CATO Institute says, the banking world is global...all of the banks you name have New York operations with significant numbers of American employees, Soc Gen, Deutche Bank, BNP, so of course some of the money was going to flow their way. We could have excluded them, of course, but just like prtectionism is a bad idea, that would be a sort of protectionist instinct and the actual system is not obviously all that much better than a system where that money was diverted to U.S. banks alone. 2) We eventually spent about $250 billion under the TARP program, and so far about $170 billion was repaid. So the numbers you quese, I suspect, are the aggregate numbers and likely don't account for the amounts repaid by those foreign banks. Since foreign banks have rebounded better than some of their U.S. counterparts, they may have even repaid more, as a percentage, than domestic banks. I might be wrong about that, but it seems likely to me. It seems to me the real complaint in the obviously spun newsmax article is that they don't like the TARP, and the hope is to dial-up anti-foreigner sentiment to turn people against it. If you hate the program intrinsically, and can show why, then you shouldn't need that sort of silly side-show tactic.
You have any proof of this mr. buffalo roam? All of the banks receiving TARP money were US banks and those US banks used the money to fund their liabilities. Did some of those banks have liabliities to forigen banks? Yes they did. So in a larger picture, keeping US banks alive did help support foriegn banks by ensuring that investments in US banks were good. That is a far different picture than what you limbaugh, hannity, levin, et al are trying to paint. Money is fungible, and you cannot prove that TARP money was exported to support overseas banks. This is just another sound bite used to cause people to anger (based on a false premise) so they will be more easily convinced to do something stupid. I don't suppose you have an proof of this do you? Given your propensity to lie and your careless disregard for the truth in the past, I think you owe us something to support this claim of yours. As previously stated, TARP helped everyone who was owed money by US banks. There is nothing new here. There is no magical revelation now versus a two years ago. The whole point of the TARP money was to restore bank integritiy so they could pay their liabilities foriegn or domestic. Preventing banks receiving TARP money from paying their foriegn obligations would have been devestating the the US economy. Don't forget, US corporations have at least half of their assest overseas. It would have been catestrophic to limit the ability of banks to pay their foriegn debts. Business today is international mr. buffalo roam. Frankly, your suggestion that banks not pay their foriegn debt is just plain STUPID and shows a real lack of understanding at the very least! The fact is, those outside the limbaugh beltway are saying it is true...TARP was successful. So succesful all other industrial nations did similar things. Things are much better today as a result of the action taken by the george II administration in Q4 of 2008 (TARP) and auto industry bailout that it would have been had they let the economy collapse. Well you know mr. buffalo roam, when economies go off the cliff as they did in 2008 it takes time for them to recover. In the last Great Depression it took more than 10 years to recover. When Japan ran into trouble, it took 10 years to recover. So why should President Obama be held to a higher standard (a year and a half)...do things that no one has been able to do before? The bottom line is it takes time to restore confidence in markets. And confidence is not restored when you have a signficant group of yahoos threatening to do the same things that caused the recession (e.g.Repbulicans, conservatives, Tea Partiers, etc) and doing the stupid things like not allowing banks to pay their debts to foriegners. Nice try, but like I said it is stupid to limit a bank or insurance company's ability to pay their debts. And letting the george II tax cuts for the wealthy expire is not going to cause any harm to the economy. In fact it may do just the opposite, by sending a message to the world that The United States is willing to do and is capable of doing the things needed to bring its fiscal house back into order. Outside of a few conservative/Republican political hacks, there is no one in the busines community who thinks letting the george II tax cuts for the wealthy expire would materially and adversely affect the US economy. Nice of you also to use NewsMax a conservative rag, similar to Clear Channel (limbaugh) in terms of credibility. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I guess times are tough when you have to resort to such information sources.
I briefly looked for your 2008 comments criticizing the Bush bailout of AIG and I could not find them. Calling the AIG bailout a Democratic bailout is dishonest. The Bush Administration and the Bush appointee dominated Fed started it on their own. More Republicans did oppose the first congressional votes for bailout in 2008 than the Dems did and I give them credit for that but those votes were largely bipartisan. The Wall Street corporate welfare queens dominate both parties. I knew I was not a Dem but I thought I might be a some sort of obscure variation of liberal. You never heard me defend TARP. Actually most people on the left were against TARP. It is the Centrists that supported TARP. Both the left and right opposed it. Granted there are very few real lefties in congress. ..................................... AIG From http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/05/news/companies/AIG_earnings_preview/index.htm August 5 2010 "So far, the government has given out $136.5 billion in loans and direct payments, of which AIG (AIG, Fortune 500) still owes $102 billion" From http://www.creditwritedowns.com/201...-clusterstock-how-the-aig-bailout-worked.html Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_International_Group AIG collateral postings to credit default swap counterparties, from the period 9/16/08 to 12/31/08 [68] Counterparty US $ posted Counterparty US $ posted Société Générale $4,100,000,000 Deutsche Bank $2,600,000,000 Goldman Sachs $2,500,000,000 Merrill Lynch $1,800,000,000 Calyon $1,100,000,000 Barclays $900,000,000 UBS $800,000,000 DZ Bank $700,000,000 Wachovia $700,000,000 Rabobank $500,000,000 KFW $500,000,000 JPMorgan $400,000,000 Banco Santander $300,000,000 Danske Bank $200,000,000 Reconstruction Finance Corp $200,000,000 HSBC Bank $200,000,000 Morgan Stanley $200,000,000 Bank of America $200,000,000 Bank of Montreal $200,000,000 Royal Bank of Scotland $200,000,000 Other (unknown) $4,100,000,000
