Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is the Obama Admin really prohibiting repayment of TARP funds?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Egalitariat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 08:27 PM
Original message
Is the Obama Admin really prohibiting repayment of TARP funds?
I've read this in many places but can't believe it is true. They seem to imply the Obama administration would rather have the control over private sector companies than have the taxpayers' money repaid.

Is this real?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. Which "many places"? You have any links for that? NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
2. can't say how the source is but
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. And that's from Fox's Stuart Varney. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. that about says it all
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. I doubt it's real.
It sounds like more GOP-controlled media-generated lies.

Unless you hear it out of Obama's mouth, it's not likely he actually said it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
5. Name those places.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wickerman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
6. Yes, and he's gonna take your guns, give aid and comfort to terrorists
and spread dandelions in your lawn. If you don't have a lawn he's surely already pissed in your cornflakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
8. I think they're doing it on purpose.
So they can make sure it all doesn't go to hell. It was started by Paulson. Paulson forced a bunch of banks to take money whether they needed it or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarjorieG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
9. I heard concern by banks more about regulations, and our advising difficulty of giving again. R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
10. I Hate to Say It,
but that is actually a sensible inference to draw. If Bush did something like that, I certainly would question it.

I believe the truth, however, is more mundane, and already in the public record. The TARP funds were offered to all qualifying instutions, some of whom were healthy and some who may have been technically insolvent. It was considered important to hide the weakest institutions, since any hint of bank failure can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. So even healthy institutions were pressed to take the loans in order to hide the culprits. It's the same reason the Fed still won't identify the recipient of the emergency $2T in loans on Sep 15.

Firms that want to return the TARP funds are likewise being pressured to keep suspicions diffused. (Personally I think JP Morgan is the worst off, but who knows?)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hawkowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Exactly true!
I think you hit the nail on the head. If the solvent banks are allowed to return the money, the truly insolvent banks will be revealed, and then there would be a "run" on these banks, forcing them into receivership. This, ironically, WOULD allow Obama to control the banks. He'd have no choice then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 20th 2024, 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC