So, TARP officially worked....
- Thread starter Onceler
- Start date
G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
So you admit you are a moronic asshole
Poor Blabo.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
The problem is, the too big to fail banks are now bigger. Glass Steagall is still not back in place. The banks are playing the treasury game to boost profits, while again increasing the risks they are taking. While I agree TARP was a success in preventing a meltdown, something both Bush and Obama deserve credit for, the lack of action to prevent another occurrence is disheartening.
I am going to agree with Water. The Wall Street bankers are benefiting too much from their bailout. If any of the big banks goes through something similar in the next few years, the executives should be (the following is for Water) taken out back and shot.
Why don't you just admit that you know little of economics and even less about the significance of our banking system? Sheesh.
This sentence has no bearing on my previous statement, nor are you a capable judge. It is a witless non sequitur that you spout in the hopes that it will make you seem smart to people you politically agree with.
I didn't promote TARP because "too big to fail" needs to be "too big to exist" and TARP did nothing at all to resolve that issue.
While I agree w/ you & SF that "too big to fail" needed to be addressed, it's ridiculous to say that TARP should have been the vehicle for addressing it. TARP was an emergency, time-sensitive measure.
We spend way too much time ignoring the problems until they are all "emergency, time-sensitive" measures and then use that as an excuse not to address the actual problem.
I don't disagree w/ the general sentiment, but again, it's ludicrous to assert that TARP could have possibly addressed something as complex as a "fix" on "too big to fail." I will agree that this should have been addressed subsequently, but it was not a good reason for opposing TARP, nor was it a reasonable expectation for TARP.
"Too Big To Fail" makes a nice bumper sticker but has nothing to do with reality, durno. You should know that.
Had TARP been propounded as the temp fix to bridge the gap until we can fix "too big to fail" I likely would have supported it more readily. It became, as I predicted, a new platform for "too big to fail" to become even more "too big" and we failed once again to take proper advantage of a crisis to affect positive change.
Wow, you can't possibly be as stupid as this post makes you sound, this is clearly based on how much you want to disagree with every statement I ever make based on political ideology and completely fails to take into account that you have no idea what my position is on this, or any other issue for that matter, issue and should possibly shut up for a bit and learn things before you begin to knee-jerk your way into oblivion.
It's just a bit of advice, but you should know where people stand before you begin to fire the arrows. You've missed here, miserably, because you first aimed in the wrong direction and forgot to fletch the arrows first.
Your criticism has nothing to do w/ TARP. You think gov't should do something about "too big to fail," but nothing about TARP was what you predicted. It ended up costing nothing, and saved millions of jobs.
How does someone not support a measure like that? Your alternative (not passing TARP), would have certainly been pretty gloomy for a lot of people.
Basically, Onceler. I told you back then that because of this "too big to fail" would not be addressed and we would set ourselves up for this again in the future. So far my predictions have borne out.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
While I understand your viewpoint, that is not entirely true. TARP could have been passed while including the reimplementation of Glass Steagall. They could have received the bailout as occurred while also breaking them back into retail and investment banks. While it didn't have to happen together, it is incorrect to say that it couldn't have been done together. It is reasonable to expect them to address the problem at the same time as providing a solution. Given the history of the two parties in DC, it is unreasonable to assume they would do anything to piss off their benefactors after the fact. Hence we get an extremely watered down and largely ineffective Dodd/Frank.
So, you're cool with "too big to fail"? Could've fooled me.
No you didn't, you lying fuck. Pull up Huffington Post and go indoctrinate yourself.
No you didn't, you lying fuck. Pull up Huffington Post and go indoctrinate yourself.
In the context that I wrote that I do take it. That's why you didn't include the entire quote. Fuck off, buttlicker.