Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The Banks paid the Bailout back. Are you hippies going to?

Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 18, 2011, 3:28 p.m. EST by YuckFouHippies (189)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Are you all going to pay back the tax payers for the mess and property damage? You are no better than the bankers you vilify.

29 Comments

29 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by pissedoffconstructionworker (602) 13 years ago

I love Denninger. If anyone gives the impression of "typing through clenched teeth", it's him.

[-] -2 points by YuckFouHippies (189) 13 years ago

Yeah, about those links...I don't get my news from liberal bloggers, perhaps you shouldn't either. Here's a real link, with the latest report from the biggest banks repayment. http://www.sigtarp.gov/reports/audit/2011/Exiting_TARP_Repayments_by_the_Largest_Financial_Institutions.pdf

[-] 3 points by pissedoffconstructionworker (602) 13 years ago

Well-known liberal blogs zero hedge and market ticker [/rolls eyes]

[-] 0 points by YuckFouHippies (189) 13 years ago

The Zero hedge article fails to mention they included Detroit in those figures, who have not been So lucky at repayment. Kind of explains why the unions are so on board with this movement.....

[-] 2 points by Vooter (441) 13 years ago

They shouldn't have been bailed out in the first place--that's the problem. Why weren't they allowed to fail? That's what good capitalists would have done--allowed them to fail....

[-] 0 points by YuckFouHippies (189) 13 years ago

I'm a die hard capitalist, and while I think failing companies should be allowed to fail, I would not want to be around when 2-500 thousand people lost their jobs in a span of weeks due to total banking collapse. A run on grocers, supply chains grinding to a halt because of liquidity, Colleges shutting down due to inability to get cash. You are talking apocalypse. Detroit would have collapsed right behind, there's another half million added to the bunch immediately after. We don't respect how close to doom we were.

[-] 1 points by redgar (55) 13 years ago

There wouldn't have been a total banking collapse. Some banks would have failed and their assets (loans and deposits) would have been bought up by healthier banks. In the end we would have had a healthier economy than what is going on now. The bail outs and the Keynesian spending is drawing out the recession.

[-] 1 points by Vooter (441) 13 years ago

OH, WELL! Either you believe in free-market capitalism or you don't. An apocalyptic collapse would have thoroughly cleaned out all of those nasty market excesses, right? And if millions of lives were ruined in the process, well, those people would just have to suck it up and suffer, right? Nice double standard, Mr. Capitalism....

[-] 2 points by anotherone773 (734) from Carlyle, IL 13 years ago

What hippies?

[-] 2 points by gtyper (477) from San Antonio, TX 13 years ago

Not that I'm for any bailout -- but saying the banks paid it back is a little bit of a misnomer.

They took money from a different program in the treasury and used that money to pay back the loans. Worse, they took more money from the Fed at 0% interest and invested in higher interest government bonds.

All of which is to say that these banks repaid cash owed to a program run by the Treasury Department by. . . borrowing from another program run by the Treasury Department.

When looking at all these TARP repayments, it is imperative that you read the footnotes. Then you realize that these banks were simply switching out taxpayer funding sources from expensive TARP to low cost small business strategic funding.

[-] 0 points by YuckFouHippies (189) 13 years ago

They raised cash by selling securities. It's kind of what banks do.....

[-] 2 points by gtyper (477) from San Antonio, TX 13 years ago

Actually, no they didn't.

The government ensured that the field was going to be profitable for bank industry. The fed lent money at near 0% interest. The banks took advantage of Small Business Lending programs to shift the TARP owed money to SBL owed money.

Additionally, TARP which congress approved only accounts for 2% of the trillions of dollars being provided to our banks by the treasury and fed. We are continuing to prop them up with funding.

A partial audit of the Fed has shown over 16.7 Trillion to this industry.

Meanwhile the major banks are still gambling with our money because Glass Steagall was never placed back in.

Understand the system before you try to play in this forum.

[-] 0 points by YuckFouHippies (189) 13 years ago

You mince words, with the intent of slanting the view. You make it sound like the money was charity, when you know in fact they were loans. The 16t was in fact the peak, and these were overnight loans to stem the blood loss, and keep banks from defaulting under short term liquidity crunch. These overnight loans, were to prevent further blood loss that could have happened as a result of another major bank failure.

Bottom line: the bailouts saved hundreds of thousands of jobs, and while government and politics don't mix, the banks paid the money back and that's that. Don't make it sound like they owe tax payers 16T dollars. That's just irresponsible propaganda.

[-] 1 points by gtyper (477) from San Antonio, TX 13 years ago

They did NOT pay the funds back. That's a blatant lie.

They took money from one federal program to pay back the other. They took money from the Fed, beyond the amounts laid out, and rather than using it for the reasons set forth (lending for new ventures and jump starting the economy) - they lent it to the government for interest.

Bottom line - the banks shifted the burden from one aspect of government assistance to a cheaper one.

Food for thought: http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10?op=1

The simple fact is - the government is in bed with corporations and are lying through their teeth as they funnel the life blood of America to these people that got them into office.

[-] 2 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3360) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Banks managed to turn hundreds of billions of dollars in a market they monopolize into a profit. Shocking.

If only that kind of help and privilege was extended to the average guy, who isn't a bank.

[-] 1 points by GhostAD2008 (34) 13 years ago

"Are you all going to pay back the tax payers for the mess and property damage? You are no better than the bankers you vilify."

The monetary, societal, educational, environmental, and global impacts from the damage caused by the actions of either 'group' are innumerably different. At least these 'hippies' can make positive change at the cost of $2M rather than the trillions the banks costed in negative change.

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 13 years ago
[-] 1 points by Benny14 (101) 13 years ago

Actually they didnt

[-] 0 points by YuckFouHippies (189) 13 years ago

Funny, this thread generated a ton of commentary roughly amounting to "Banks baaad!". Not a single comment on taking personal responsibility. I think that pretty much sums up this movement in it's entirety.

To the occupiers: when you do finally get back to work, why yes....I will take fries with that!

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

Hippies? Did you just wake up from your 35 yr. nap dude? Hippies have been gone for decades.

[-] 0 points by YuckFouHippies (189) 13 years ago

Is there a more appropriate term? Bums seemed harsh.

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

Bums is what u mean, so why soft soap it. You and people like you hate these people because they're losers in your estimate and deserve the bottom of your boot. Say it stop this beating around the bush.