By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 16 April 2012
Edit Thread
Rath said:
thismeintiel said:
Kasz216 said:

Ah duh. Probably should explain that.

They're claiming a profit essentially because federal reserve excess funds are greater then the projected.

So there claims of profit aren't actually based off of TARP but over what is "projected" economic bonuses that allowed the Federal Reserve to make more money off of it's usual stuff.

Since the Federal Reserve tends to make an excess profit and pass that along to the government. (Despite conspiracy theorists claims that the Fed is owned by banks.)

The biggest issue with it is well... Economic models quite honestly suck 90% of the time.  Your lucky if they're remotley accurate... as can be seen by the fact that the same economic model completely overestimated the effect of the stimulus.

So basically they are basing this on a few billion extra the Fed might make, as opposed to the government making back the 1T+ spent on bailouts?

They're saying that the sale of the banking institutions and car values that were bought by the government (which was what the bailout essentially did) is going to generate more money than was spent on buying them. Net profit.

 

@Wiifan. If any of the big banks (or Fannie/Freddie) had failed they would have brought the others down with them. The entire system is tied together. Total economic collapse is not really that healthy.


That doesn't look like what the actual slides say.  I think it's a matter of your recap just getting things wrong.

Worth noting too they've excluded about 46 billion in bailout funds on the basis of "Not meant to be recovered." and  in general counts zero stimulus measures.

I'd suggest reading the actual source material.   Again...

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/Documents/20120413_FinancialCrisisResponse.pdf

Each slide seems to have it's own asterick to make itself look good and count things such as US treasury bond buys.  Which are well... silly... because the tax payers don't actually win out on US taxpayer bonds.  Since US taxpayer bonds are paid by US taxpayers.

 

Or at least some better reportered articles on the matter

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/04/13/treasury-taxpayers-likely-to-profit-from-financial-rescue-programs/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-13/treasury-says-crisis-stability-programs-expected-to-break-even.html

 

It's a small selection of a bigger issue that's been selected and presented with not a small amount of trickery to make things look good.  It's a puff politcal piece to gear up for election season.

You've more lr less been had.