Do OWS loons know how much TARP cost?

[Winehole23]

Does he think it's a winner?

[boutons_deux]

Does Yoni know that TARP was a Repug Paulson Secy of Treasury plan approved by his good buddy dubya?

[DarrinS]

Does Darrin know how much TARP cost?

Well, if I thought it was orders of magnitude higher than the entire US budget, I'd be down there with my torch and pitchfork too.

[Winehole23]

That TARP might've been wrong in principle seems to have eluded you.

[DarrinS]

Well, if she stayed in Hawaii, we'd get BAh for here (basic allowance for housing). But I'd rather she have family to help raise the two kids. Plus, the in-laws rarely get to see the kids so they're happy about it.

Good call.

[Winehole23]

Well, if I thought it was orders of magnitude higher than the entire US budget,

who said so?

[DarrinS]

That TARP might've been wrong in principle seems to have eluded you.

I think the alternative may have been worse (can't prove -- obviously).

[Winehole23]

I said focusing on TARP misrepresents the scale of the bailout. That's undeniably true.

[DarrinS]

who said so?

Your first link had some crazy-ass numbers.

[Winehole23]

funds disbursed, not costs, but the magnitude of the funds committed put TARP in the shade.

[DarrinS]

I said focusing on TARP misrepresents the scale of the bailout. That's undeniably true.

And I think that the younger generation is getting screwed over by demographics and their grandparents' en lements WAAAAAAY more than they are getting screwed by WS fat cats.

[Winehole23]

both are true, but it's telling you choose to minimize the part played by big finance

[Agloco]

Well, if I thought it was orders of magnitude higher than the entire US budget, I'd be down there with my torch and pitchfork too.

And become an unproductive member of society? Say it ain't so.

[DarrinS]

And become an unproductive member of society? Say it ain't so.

But I would absolutely refuse to participate in group chant and jazz hands.

[ElNono]

As Jimmy Kimmel said...

"I don't like this focus on paying for things. That's what future generations are for."

[LnGrrrR]

^

[Drachen]

But I would absolutely refuse to participate in group chant and jazz hands.

There he goes again, making fun of deaf people.

[Winehole23]

http://www.gao.gov/assets/590/587555.pdf

[Winehole23]

http://www.interfluidity.com/v2/2587.html

[Wild Cobra]

Do OWS loons know how much TARP cost?

I think most of them are mindless idiots that want a Nanny state.

[vy65]

Suppose you buy fire insurance from Inflammable Insurance. You pay $1000 for a year of insurance. There is no fire, so you make no claim. Next year, you find a different provider offering a better price, and you switch.

Soon after your relationship has ended, you discover that Inflammable failed to pay any claims at all during the year you were insured, because all customer premiums were diverted to the Cayman Islands and then spent on kiddy porn and Pez. Were you defrauded? Do you have any cause for complaint? After all, ex post your cash flows turned out to be the same as if you had been dealt with fairly.

Of course you have been defrauded. You did not get what you had paid for. You had paid for Inflammable to bear risk on your behalf. It did not do so. The money you paid was simply stolen.

I'm not so sure that's fraud. Ostensibly, the fire insurance contract calls for the insurer to cover the insured's permitted claims in the event of a fire. I'm not aware of a contract for insurance which explicitly (meaning, per its terms) allocates risk.

Is that a function or a byproduct of the contract? Absolutely. But the insurance policy is still a contract. Meaning if there's no fire, there's no allowed or allowable claim - and - if there's no claim, there's nothing to claim that the contract was breached.

In financial markets, risk-bearing is the ultimate commodity. It is what financial market participants buy and sell. As a financial speculator, I spend exorbitant amounts of money buying out-of-the-money options to limit my downside risk. The vast majority of those options expire worthless, just like the vast majority of fire insurance policies end with no claims paid. If only someone would give me all those options for free, or sell them to me for half the market price, or reimburse the cost of the options that I never end up using, I would be rich. Seriously, given the years I’ve been in this game, I’d be pretty set if I had my option premiums back. It doesn’t seem fair at all that I am confined to a modest middle-class life because I had to buy all this insurance I never used.

I understand the argument. And there's some merit to the claim that the government shouldn't act as an insurer for the financial sector's risk taking. But I think that's a matter of public policy; the implication that the bailouts cons ute legal fraud is off the mark.

Now, the author might not be getting at actionable fraud - but then how are you to make sense of his use of "defrauded" in the insurance example above.

[4>0rings]

Just the other day, the Federal Lightbulb Department gave me a citation on incandescent bulb use in my home!

[Winehole23]

$133B outstanding, $34B in likely losses. So much for TARP the moneymaker.

http://www.sigtarp.gov/reports/congr...o_Congress.pdf

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Your first link had some crazy-ass numbers.

Where's your link to anything other than a poorly supported article which you try and pigeonhole me with because it mentions a dislike for babyboomers?

You can hardly speak for yourself without looking like a dip so please refrain from speaking for me.

Thanks!

[Winehole23]

After 3½ years, the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”) continues to be an active and significant part of the Government’s response to the financial crisis. It is a widely held misconception that TARP will make a profit. The most recent cost estimate for TARP is a loss of $60 billion. Taxpayers are still owed $118.5 billion (including $14 billion written off or otherwise lost).

http://www.sigtarp.gov/frate2abAt2a/tre9uPrUvAst.pdf