RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected

RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (12/9/2009 11:53:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven quote: ORIGINAL: Fellow The major banks are still zombies. They are allowed to use accounting tricks to hide non-performing assets (derivatives). The big hurry to pay back bailout money is for removing the restrictions from the size of year-end bonuses (not sure but I guess so). US goes down if nothing will be done soon to get rid of this parasitism. Exactly. Part of the problem is that the basic problem - permitting the banks to create crap derivatives with no real valuations and ignored risk factors - has not been addressed. Part of the problem is that the money was handed to them with no strings attached - so they are still not lending, which was the idea behind the bailout in the first place. My ideas are: 1. Indict the banks' CEOs for fraud if their banks sold derivatives while claiming that they had value. 2. Have local governments seize foreclosed houses that have not sold after six months in the banks' hands and sell them at auction. Subtract the auction costs from the sale price and remit to the banks, and explain that their nonperforming assets just got valued. Both the Bush and Obama administrations have been ridiculously loose with taxpayer money to bail out crooks... I asked Tazzy and she couldnt respond, maybe you can. Why arent they lending? I did respond. Go look again. Not my fault you didnt like the answer. Youll have to point me to it. I love answers that "I don't like" because they are almost always wrong.

Fellow -> RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (12/9/2009 3:31:36 PM)
Actually, in theory, TARP was a loan. It should not be expensive at all but it should bring in interest.

tazzygirl -> RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (12/9/2009 10:07:17 PM)
quote: Youll have to point me to it. I love answers that "I don't like" because they are almost always wrong. LOL i dont HAVE to do anything. nor am i going to find it for you. you posted the lie. go find it for yourself.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (12/10/2009 8:11:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: Youll have to point me to it. I love answers that "I don't like" because they are almost always wrong. LOL i dont HAVE to do anything. nor am i going to find it for you. you posted the lie. go find it for yourself. Youre poorly reasoned posts arent worth searching for.

mnottertail -> RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (12/10/2009 8:41:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: Youll have to point me to it. I love answers that "I don't like" because they are almost always wrong. LOL i dont HAVE to do anything. nor am i going to find it for you. you posted the lie. go find it for yourself. Youre poorly reasoned posts arent worth searching for. LOL. if that be the case, it would be a wonderment that your posts are saved on servers, or even tying up any internet at all. Ron

slvemike4u -> RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (12/10/2009 9:43:37 AM)
Wow,imagine the ego that would publically assert....." I love answers that "I don't like" because they are almost always wrong" By implication,if nothing else,he is almost always right? I guess we should be thankful he left a small window of possibility that he could be ....wr...wro....wrong!

mnottertail -> RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (12/10/2009 9:56:56 AM)
well like that shit he was spouting as a financial wizard about the laffer curve and I posted the minmax problem (which is how he is seeing it) when indeed it is finding the area under the curve which is a series of minmax problems via derivatives, as was alluded to by invisableblack who said that he did his thesis on it, and found that each derivation was unique in and of itself and the timeline in question as well as the 'ROI' was variable for each slice of delta. Anyway, the bottom line is when he runs out of jokes on a subject, or is called bullshit on he slinks away hurriedly, to pop up in another place. Oh, sure occasionally he will debate with several succeeding posts like: No, it isn't. thats the stupidest thing I heard. You don't have a clue. And other such drivel. But what he claims is that he is some financial wizard and you look at his financial acumen and can only come to the conclusion that he is a financial planner spouting company propaganda, and that he invests in REITS as a good thing......well, it is just laffable. Ron

Brain -> RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (12/10/2009 3:42:14 PM)
There's only one problem. No bank CEO can reconcile more lending with a deteriorating economy -- especially one in which economic conditions are the worst they've been in generations. But that's exactly the claim the bank chief is making. Why banks (still) aren't lending - MSN Money http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/why-banks-still-are-not-lending.aspx quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven quote: ORIGINAL: Fellow The major banks are still zombies. They are allowed to use accounting tricks to hide non-performing assets (derivatives). The big hurry to pay back bailout money is for removing the restrictions from the size of year-end bonuses (not sure but I guess so). US goes down if nothing will be done soon to get rid of this parasitism. Exactly. Part of the problem is that the basic problem - permitting the banks to create crap derivatives with no real valuations and ignored risk factors - has not been addressed. Part of the problem is that the money was handed to them with no strings attached - so they are still not lending, which was the idea behind the bailout in the first place. My ideas are: 1. Indict the banks' CEOs for fraud if their banks sold derivatives while claiming that they had value. 2. Have local governments seize foreclosed houses that have not sold after six months in the banks' hands and sell them at auction. Subtract the auction costs from the sale price and remit to the banks, and explain that their nonperforming assets just got valued. Both the Bush and Obama administrations have been ridiculously loose with taxpayer money to bail out crooks... I asked Tazzy and she couldnt respond, maybe you can. Why arent they lending?

Fellow -> RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (12/10/2009 5:31:26 PM)
quote: I asked Tazzy and she couldnt respond, maybe you can. Why arent they lending? Here is the experts explanation: http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/12/tech-tickers-bank-lending-jobs-2010.html 1. the banks prepare for future large losses (personal credit cards, commercial real estate etc...) 2. there is very little demand for loans I would add that speculating on world markets is more profitable at the moment Also, it appears, sitting on money could be a good thing as they do not need another bailout this way.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Tarp - not as expensive as projected (12/10/2009 5:45:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fellow quote: I asked Tazzy and she couldnt respond, maybe you can. Why arent they lending? Here is the experts explanation: http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/12/tech-tickers-bank-lending-jobs-2010.html 1. the banks prepare for future large losses (personal credit cards, commercial real estate etc...) 2. there is very little demand for loans I would add that speculating on world markets is more profitable at the moment Also, it appears, sitting on money could be a good thing as they do not need another bailout this way. Finally a reasoned answer! Though the article can be summed up in 1 word: RISK. Current business/secured interest rates are too low for banks to assume very much risk. Meanwhile everything going on in DC creates uncertainty, ie adds risk. There will be no major loosening of credit until cap and trade and health care, the biggest risks out there, are resolved. And if they are resolved as the Democrats want them to be, there will still be no loosening of credit except in very narrow sectors, because both of those make the risk even more clear. 2. is true only in certain sectors. There is a lot of demand for loans that is being filled by private placements that are commanding much higher interest rates and/or equity kickers.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125