Topic: Fed 'extremely uncomfortable' about bailouts
Fanta46's photo
Fri 04/03/09 07:45 PM
Any way you add it it proves two things.
One, that Fed Regulations work. These Banks would not have been so eager to pay the money back so fast had they not been imposed.

Two, that the money wasn't free.

You can twist it any way you want but them's the facts.

AndrewAV's photo
Fri 04/03/09 07:46 PM

Different Banks, and I am not a Banker, but here are the numbers.


In addition to the $353 million, the banks paid the government a total of $5.4 million in dividends, Treasury Department spokesman Andrew Williams said.


http://www.nj.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/business-0/123873055053170.xml&storylist=business


Again, that doesn't mean sh*t. You have to see the big picture to truly judge how good a call it was. There are alternatives that are passed on because of this spending. We had to pay interest on it in order to secure the funds. Much of the value will be lost to inflation.

Just because we pocket $353M now does not mean that we didn't lose out on more.

no photo
Fri 04/03/09 07:54 PM


It was Bush and Paulson who chose to change direction with TARP.
They announced it together on Oct 14, 2006 at a press conference.

The original TARP bill was thought up by Bush and Paulson behind closed doors. The bill was presented to Congress as a three page bill without any monitoring devices at all, and they then fought all attempts by Congress to install any.

Is it surprising to anyone that much of the money cant be found and that they changed their original plans for the money several times?

The attempts to blame any of that on the Obama Administration is ludicrous.
They should just add extortion to the charges and go ahead and have several of the Bush Administration arrested and tried!


What? Tarp wasn't even enacted until 2008.

You definitely need some better searches.

http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/opeds/wsj10_14_08oped.htm

Another common theme:

A source familiar with the situation indicated there was a sense of hesitancy within the Treasury Department to let TARP recipients pay back the government funds. That's because doing so could send a signal to the markets about which banks are strong and which are not.




http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/opeds/wsj10_14_08oped.htm

I pointed this out on the Senate floor a few days before Mr. Paulson came to Congress to ask for authority to spend as much as $700 billion to buy up troubled assets. Later, Democratic leaders Sen. Chris Dodd, Rep. Barney Frank and I made explicit our desire to make direct infusions of capital a part of the approach to solving the crisis during our negotiations with the Treasury.

Fanta46's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:00 PM



It was Bush and Paulson who chose to change direction with TARP.
They announced it together on Oct 14, 2006 at a press conference.

The original TARP bill was thought up by Bush and Paulson behind closed doors. The bill was presented to Congress as a three page bill without any monitoring devices at all, and they then fought all attempts by Congress to install any.

Is it surprising to anyone that much of the money cant be found and that they changed their original plans for the money several times?

The attempts to blame any of that on the Obama Administration is ludicrous.
They should just add extortion to the charges and go ahead and have several of the Bush Administration arrested and tried!


What? Tarp wasn't even enacted until 2008.

You definitely need some better searches.

http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/opeds/wsj10_14_08oped.htm

Another common theme:

A source familiar with the situation indicated there was a sense of hesitancy within the Treasury Department to let TARP recipients pay back the government funds. That's because doing so could send a signal to the markets about which banks are strong and which are not.




http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/opeds/wsj10_14_08oped.htm

I pointed this out on the Senate floor a few days before Mr. Paulson came to Congress to ask for authority to spend as much as $700 billion to buy up troubled assets. Later, Democratic leaders Sen. Chris Dodd, Rep. Barney Frank and I made explicit our desire to make direct infusions of capital a part of the approach to solving the crisis during our negotiations with the Treasury.


Suggestions from three or four Senators does not implicate the whole Senate, nor does it implicate force!

no photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:06 PM




It was Bush and Paulson who chose to change direction with TARP.
They announced it together on Oct 14, 2006 at a press conference.

The original TARP bill was thought up by Bush and Paulson behind closed doors. The bill was presented to Congress as a three page bill without any monitoring devices at all, and they then fought all attempts by Congress to install any.

Is it surprising to anyone that much of the money cant be found and that they changed their original plans for the money several times?

The attempts to blame any of that on the Obama Administration is ludicrous.
They should just add extortion to the charges and go ahead and have several of the Bush Administration arrested and tried!


What? Tarp wasn't even enacted until 2008.

You definitely need some better searches.

http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/opeds/wsj10_14_08oped.htm

Another common theme:

A source familiar with the situation indicated there was a sense of hesitancy within the Treasury Department to let TARP recipients pay back the government funds. That's because doing so could send a signal to the markets about which banks are strong and which are not.




http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/opeds/wsj10_14_08oped.htm

I pointed this out on the Senate floor a few days before Mr. Paulson came to Congress to ask for authority to spend as much as $700 billion to buy up troubled assets. Later, Democratic leaders Sen. Chris Dodd, Rep. Barney Frank and I made explicit our desire to make direct infusions of capital a part of the approach to solving the crisis during our negotiations with the Treasury.


Suggestions from three or four Senators does not implicate the whole Senate, nor does it implicate force!


I don't believe I ever referred to the whole senate.....

But that's how the original Tarp plan got changed. And as you say facts are facts.

Fanta46's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:09 PM





It was Bush and Paulson who chose to change direction with TARP.
They announced it together on Oct 14, 2006 at a press conference.

The original TARP bill was thought up by Bush and Paulson behind closed doors. The bill was presented to Congress as a three page bill without any monitoring devices at all, and they then fought all attempts by Congress to install any.

Is it surprising to anyone that much of the money cant be found and that they changed their original plans for the money several times?

The attempts to blame any of that on the Obama Administration is ludicrous.
They should just add extortion to the charges and go ahead and have several of the Bush Administration arrested and tried!


What? Tarp wasn't even enacted until 2008.

You definitely need some better searches.

http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/opeds/wsj10_14_08oped.htm

Another common theme:

A source familiar with the situation indicated there was a sense of hesitancy within the Treasury Department to let TARP recipients pay back the government funds. That's because doing so could send a signal to the markets about which banks are strong and which are not.




http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/opeds/wsj10_14_08oped.htm

I pointed this out on the Senate floor a few days before Mr. Paulson came to Congress to ask for authority to spend as much as $700 billion to buy up troubled assets. Later, Democratic leaders Sen. Chris Dodd, Rep. Barney Frank and I made explicit our desire to make direct infusions of capital a part of the approach to solving the crisis during our negotiations with the Treasury.


Suggestions from three or four Senators does not implicate the whole Senate, nor does it implicate force!


I don't believe I ever referred to the whole senate.....

But that's how the original Tarp plan got changed. And as you say facts are facts.


That was Oct 14, 2008!
I didnt copy it. It was from memory, and I hit a wrong number!
Check it if you doubt Im right!

Fanta46's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:12 PM
Edited by Fanta46 on Fri 04/03/09 08:12 PM
Paulson was the Treasury Sec.
If he had a sound plan to begin with 3 or 4 senators would not have been able to influence him.
He had no plan.
I'll agree to that!

no photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:15 PM

Paulson was the Treasury Sec.
If he had a sound plan to begin with 3 or 4 senators would not have been able to influence him.
He had no plan.
I'll agree to that!


Man, the plan was to use the Tarp to buy the toxic assets. How can you say that?

Fanta46's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:20 PM


Paulson was the Treasury Sec.
If he had a sound plan to begin with 3 or 4 senators would not have been able to influence him.
He had no plan.
I'll agree to that!


Man, the plan was to use the Tarp to buy the toxic assets. How can you say that?


Paulson and Bush changed the plan several times. Plus the fact that he could be drawn out of the original by a few Senators screams of self-doubt and poor leadership!

no photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:22 PM


Paulson was the Treasury Sec.
If he had a sound plan to begin with 3 or 4 senators would not have been able to influence him.
He had no plan.
I'll agree to that!


Man, the plan was to use the Tarp to buy the toxic assets. How can you say that?


http://paul.kedrosky.com/archives/2008/09/20/text_of_paulson.html

LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL FOR TREASURY AUTHORITY TO PURCHASE MORTGAGE-RELATED ASSETS

Section 1. Short Title.

This Act may be cited as ____________________.

Sec. 2. Purchases of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Authority to Purchase.--The Secretary is authorized to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase, on such terms and conditions as determined by the Secretary, mortgage-related assets from any financial institution having its headquarters in the United States.

AndrewAV's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:22 PM



Paulson was the Treasury Sec.
If he had a sound plan to begin with 3 or 4 senators would not have been able to influence him.
He had no plan.
I'll agree to that!


Man, the plan was to use the Tarp to buy the toxic assets. How can you say that?


Paulson and Bush changed the plan several times. Plus the fact that he could be drawn out of the original by a few Senators screams of self-doubt and poor leadership!


This is the ultimate failure of the plan. There was no plan. It was hurried, loosely worded, and ultimately did nothing to help even the symptoms, let alone the root problem.

Fanta46's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:24 PM
Edited by Fanta46 on Fri 04/03/09 08:25 PM




Paulson was the Treasury Sec.
If he had a sound plan to begin with 3 or 4 senators would not have been able to influence him.
He had no plan.
I'll agree to that!


Man, the plan was to use the Tarp to buy the toxic assets. How can you say that?


Paulson and Bush changed the plan several times. Plus the fact that he could be drawn out of the original by a few Senators screams of self-doubt and poor leadership!


This is the ultimate failure of the plan. There was no plan. It was hurried, loosely worded, and ultimately did nothing to help even the symptoms, let alone the root problem.


Luckily it does appear to have helped as the op attest to!!

no photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:25 PM
I was made as heck when Paulson changed the plan to inject capital into the banks claiming it was covered in the plan Congress approved when it was not specifically said.

Fanta46's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:27 PM

I was made as heck when Paulson changed the plan to inject capital into the banks claiming it was covered in the plan Congress approved when it was not specifically said.


Yes, but thankfully, and the market has responded, Obama and Geitner fixed the problem!

no photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:28 PM
Text of Paulson Plan

Here is the full text of the Paulson/Treasury plan as sent to congress late yesterday. It is deliberately vague, of course, which will makes its Congressional ride a roller-coaster. At least as importantly, the two key numbers: $700-billion and $3-trillion. The former is the amount that Paulson would like authorized for securities purchases, and the latter is the amount by which Paulson would like to "temporarily" increase the U.S. debt limit.

LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL FOR TREASURY AUTHORITY TO PURCHASE MORTGAGE-RELATED ASSETS

Section 1. Short Title.

This Act may be cited as ____________________.

Sec. 2. Purchases of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Authority to Purchase.--The Secretary is authorized to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase, on such terms and conditions as determined by the Secretary, mortgage-related assets from any financial institution having its headquarters in the United States.

(b) Necessary Actions.--The Secretary is authorized to take such actions as the Secretary deems necessary to carry out the authorities in this Act, including, without limitation:

(1) appointing such employees as may be required to carry out the authorities in this Act and defining their duties;

(2) entering into contracts, including contracts for services authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, without regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts;

(3) designating financial institutions as financial agents of the Government, and they shall perform all such reasonable duties related to this Act as financial agents of the Government as may be required of them;

(4) establishing vehicles that are authorized, subject to supervision by the Secretary, to purchase mortgage-related assets and issue obligations; and

(5) issuing such regulations and other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to define terms or carry out the authorities of this Act.

Sec. 3. Considerations.

In exercising the authorities granted in this Act, the Secretary shall take into consideration means for--

(1) providing stability or preventing disruption to the financial markets or banking system; and

(2) protecting the taxpayer.

Sec. 4. Reports to Congress.

Within three months of the first exercise of the authority granted in section 2(a), and semiannually thereafter, the Secretary shall report to the Committees on the Budget, Financial Services, and Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committees on the Budget, Finance, and Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate with respect to the authorities exercised under this Act and the considerations required by section 3.

Sec. 5. Rights; Management; Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Exercise of Rights.--The Secretary may, at any time, exercise any rights received in connection with mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act.

(b) Management of Mortgage-Related Assets.--The Secretary shall have authority to manage mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act, including revenues and portfolio risks therefrom.

(c) Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.--The Secretary may, at any time, upon terms and conditions and at prices determined by the Secretary, sell, or enter into securities loans, repurchase transactions or other financial transactions in regard to, any mortgage-related asset purchased under this Act.

(d) Application of Sunset to Mortgage-Related Assets.- -The authority of the Secretary to hold any mortgage- related asset purchased under this Act before the termination date in section 9, or to purchase or fund the purchase of a mortgage-related asset under a commitment entered into before the termination date in section 9, is not subject to the provisions of section 9.

Sec. 6. Maximum Amount of Authorized Purchases.

The Secretary's authority to purchase mortgage-related assets under this Act shall be limited to $700,000,000,000 outstanding at any one time

Sec. 7. Funding.

For the purpose of the authorities granted in this Act, and for the costs of administering those authorities, the Secretary may use the proceeds of the sale of any securities issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, and the purposes for which securities may be issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, are extended to include actions authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative expenses. Any funds expended for actions authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative expenses, shall be deemed appropriated at the time of such expenditure.

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Sec. 9. Termination of Authority.

The authorities under this Act, with the exception of authorities granted in sections 2(b)(5), 5 and 7, shall terminate two years from the date of enactment of this Act.

Sec. 10. Increase in Statutory Limit on the Public Debt.

Subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking out the dollar limitation contained in such subsection and inserting in lieu thereof $11,315,000,000,000.

Sec. 11. Credit Reform.

The costs of purchases of mortgage-related assets made under section 2(a) of this Act shall be determined as provided under the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, as applicable.

Sec. 12. Definitions.

For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) Mortgage-Related Assets.--The term mortgage- related assets means residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before September 17, 2008.

(2) Secretary.--The term Secretary means the Secretary of the Treasury.

(3) United States.--The term United States means the States, territories, and possessions of the United States and the District of Columbia.


AndrewAV's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:28 PM


I was made as heck when Paulson changed the plan to inject capital into the banks claiming it was covered in the plan Congress approved when it was not specifically said.


Yes, but thankfully, and the market has responded, Obama and Geitner fixed the problem!


treated the symptom. the problem will arise again, marking this whole venture as a failure.

Fanta46's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:31 PM
Thus the Regulations put in place.
So that it wont happen again.

No one can be 100% sure, but it stands a better chance now than ever of not happening again.

Fanta46's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:32 PM
Ive read that several time crickster!drinker

Fanta46's photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:35 PM
I was for it then and Im for it now.
My biggest gripe is the monitoring of the plan by the previous Administration.

They never intended to monitor the funds from day one, and did everything they could to prevent anyone else from monitoring it!

no photo
Fri 04/03/09 08:35 PM

Ive read that several time crickster!drinker


So how can you say there was no Paulson Plan.
So how can you blame Bush and Paulson for solely being the ones to change the plan?
And how can you not see that if only unhealthy banks took the money no one would do business with them?