Where the Bailout Went Wrong

[Gerald]

TWO and a half years ago, Congress passed the legislation that bailed out the country’s banks. The government has declared its mission accomplished, calling the program remarkably effective “by any objective measure.” On my last day as the special inspector general of the bailout program, I regret to say that I strongly disagree. The bank bailout, more formally called the Troubled Asset Relief Program, failed to meet some of its most important goals.

From the perspective of the largest financial institutions, the glowing assessment is warranted: billions of dollars in taxpayer money allowed institutions that were on the brink of collapse not only to survive but even to flourish. These banks now enjoy record profits and the seemingly permanent competitive advantage that accompanies being deemed “too big to fail.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/op...0barofsky.html


Note: March 29, 2011

[Catfish]

Why your money isn't worth anything, and inflation is a hidden tax on the pubic, first 45 minutes :



Greetings,
Catfish

[mookiemookie]

Oh but gosh, I was told that wealth redistribution upwards can't happen!

This is the greatest theft in history. See it for what it is or not, it changes nothing. Your government has sold you out to their corporate masters and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

[tater]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Oh but gosh, I was told that wealth redistribution upwards can't happen!

This is the greatest theft in history. See it for what it is or not, it changes nothing. Your government has sold you out to their corporate masters and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

Where did the bailout money come from? They borrowed it. Who will pay for the borrowed money? The people who pay disproportionate taxes. I am indeed curious how wealth never owned by the poor can make the rich, rich. The sum total wealth of the bottom tiers isn't enough to make a huge difference. It's not like they used to have it and gave it away.

Not in favor of the bailout, BTW, I'd have let companies fail.

[Ducimus]

I am indeed curious how wealth never owned by the poor can make the rich, rich

I think it's implied. The impression I have is America is supposed to be the land of opportunity, make it or break it is up to you, you had the opportunity either way. However, the impression now is that the rich became super rich by removing those opportunities in the way of automation, outsourcing jobs to foreign shores, domestic outsourcing (hiring illegals), etc etc what have you. Sure they made themselves super rich, but seemingly at everyone else's expense in terms of opportunity.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

I think it's implied. The impression I have is America is supposed to be the land of opportunity, make it or break it is up to you, you had the opportunity either way. However, the impression now is that the rich became super rich by removing those opportunities in the way of automation, outsourcing jobs to foreign shores, domestic outsourcing (hiring illegals), etc etc what have you. Sure they made themselves super rich, but seemingly at everyone else's expense in terms of opportunity.

The rich become richer by removing opportunity? Oh, you mean that a loss of opportunity is somehow an accident of the rich becoming rich?

One, that's not redistribution. That means taking something one person has, and giving it to others.

I also don't buy it, anyway.

100 years ago, some robber-baron has a big company, and you invent something in the same field that is the next big thing. Is your opportunity greater or less than someone with a new idea right now? Presumably you think less. There are laws on the books now that are far more restrictive on the big outfit than were around 100 years ago. I think things are not harder now than then.

I think even the basic metric of just relative wealth is only good during limited contemporaneous time intervals, too. Saying that the relative balance of rich and poor is different fails entirely to look at what people actually have. We've all talked about this in other threads. What the average, say, lower middle class family has in 2011 might be less in $ terms relative to the top of the heap, but they have far MORE than a family in the same bracket in 1911. Weight dollars with square footage, mobility, communications, entertainment, etc. Until someone figures out how to value that stuff, I don't think I buy the rich vs poor ratio stuff.

People now complain of high real estate prices making urban areas hard to live in. 100 years ago the lower end people had a simpler solution. They never owned a home in their entire life. We seen the stats in recent, previous years about all time high home ownership... turns out that was a bad idea. My dream might be to own a P-51, but it's a dream, not something that will ever happen. Back in the day the "American Dream" was just that—a dream—for most people.

Anyway, I don't think opportunity has evaporated (ask people what they thought in 1930-something).

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by tater

Where did the bailout money come from? They borrowed it. Who will pay for the borrowed money? The people who pay disproportionate taxes. I am indeed curious how wealth never owned by the poor can make the rich, rich. The sum total wealth of the bottom tiers isn't enough to make a huge difference. It's not like they used to have it and gave it away.

Not in favor of the bailout, BTW, I'd have let companies fail.

except they don't, because they have many deductions, and accounts to hide much of their earnings. there are some very clever accountants out there. If GE can pay NO taxes then im sure some clever accountants are working for their million and billionaire clients as well.

Plus theres the fact that they makes sickening amounts of money..and after taxes the amount taken by uncle sam matter much less than the amount taken from the average joe.

[Bakkels]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Why your money isn't worth anything, and inflation is a hidden tax on the pubic, first 45 minutes :



Greetings,
Catfish

What?!?! They're taxing my pubes now???? What has this world come to?
Sorry, couldn't resist.
But it's an interesting movie in your link. I've seen it a few years ago. Here and there it get's a little bit too 'new world order conspiracy-ish' for my taste, it DOES bring up some really interesting questions we should ask ourselves more often about how the modern economy works.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Bakkels

What?!?! They're taxing my pubes now???? What has this world come to?
Sorry, couldn't resist.
But it's an interesting movie in your link. I've seen it a few years ago. Here and there it get's a little bit too 'new world order conspiracy-ish' for my taste, it DOES bring up some really interesting questions we should ask ourselves more often about how the modern economy works.

It's got some valid points, but also a lot of inaccuracies. Definitely made by someone with an agenda to push.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Vendor

. The bank bailout, more formally called the Troubled Asset Relief Program, failed to meet some of its most important goals.

If it failed to meet some of the important goals, then I would say the program was mostly successful.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Platapus

If it failed to meet some of the important goals, then I would say the program was mostly successful.

To dream you can always do,