Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A spending freeze that does not include GETTING OUR $2 TRILLION BACK FROM WALL ST... IS NOT a freeze

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
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:19 AM
Original message
A spending freeze that does not include GETTING OUR $2 TRILLION BACK FROM WALL ST... IS NOT a freeze
Edited on Tue Jan-26-10 09:39 AM by Leopolds Ghost
Based on tweets and rumor? I guess nobody at Kos reads the newspaper anymore. Uninformed.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/1/25/830272/-This-place-has-lost-its-mind

No wonder they're not willing to criticize Sanders (he sold out on the Health Care bill).

Here's a hint for all those people who don't read (newspaper, books, get all their info online
and from the idiot box, and have the gall to criticise DUers for not knowing the story):

The US per capita spending burden increases by over 1% every year.

A spending freeze is a per capita spending CUT on every program for the poor.

A spending freeze that excludes defense and includes continuing demolition of
public housing and welfare (which Obama WANTS to kill) is by definition unjust.

A spending freeze that does not include GETTING OUR $2 TRILLION BACK FROM WALL STREET...

...IS NOT A SPENDING FREEZE. IT IS A BANK ROBBER JUSTIFYING HIS CRIME.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:22 AM
Response to Original message
1. Ha! I got an unrec after 3 or 4 views.
Edited on Tue Jan-26-10 09:24 AM by Leopolds Ghost
Geez this country has gotten so conservative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:35 AM
Response to Original message
2. And... another unrec.
Guess some people don't like to hear the truth. They want to keep us in the dark talking about "you haven't read anything about this plan, the devil is in the details, we will never be privy to the details."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
3. So... doesn't ANYONE agree?
Edited on Tue Jan-26-10 09:56 AM by Leopolds Ghost
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
4. I'm confused--aren't the banks paying back the TARP money?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Not really. You think the banks paying back when we're spending another $2 trillion? another unrec.
Edited on Tue Jan-26-10 09:57 AM by Leopolds Ghost
It's sad to see DUers respond negatively to a request to get back the money from Wall Street.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincna Donating Member (282 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:59 AM
Response to Original message
6. What's this $2 Trillion you're talking about?
If it's US debt held by Wall Street, then it's the most idiotic idea I've ever heard. If it's TARP money, there is no issue, the banks are repaying it already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Yeah. I really don't know what this $2 trillion is. Hell, it's not even $700 billion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Yeah, nothing to see here, move along...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. I've noticed that this is a new gambit from the GD: Blind Worship crowd:
Simply pretend that the only largesse the government has heaped upon Wall Street is the TARP, thus ignoring the trillions in additional aid, including massive tax cuts ($35 BILLION for Citi in 2009 alone!) and "credit facilities" (totaling in the TRILLIONS!) that the Obama admin has extended to the banks.

It really is a sorry argument for a News Based forum, but what else have they got? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #11
26. The actions of the Fed through the credit facilities are not Obama's doing.
That's a strange myth that has been propagated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
8. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
10. Everything must be "revenue neutral" except the blank checks for war, Timmy Geithner's bankster buds
But EVERYTHING ELSE must be "revenue neutral"!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
12. another request for the derivation of your number.
what $2 trillion, exactly. it is not a number that i have seen, so please back it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Do you think TARP is the only money spending on Wall St?
Where do you think the massive deficit increase is COMING from?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. lay it out.
i am as suspicious as the next person about where our tax dollars go and why. but i still want to see actual numbers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. The poster isn't your research assistant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. well then he should stfu.
anybody who bother to post here has 2 choices- back it up, or apologize for talking out your ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Wrong. Your ignorance isn't an argument. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. bullshit. grow up and educate yourself a little bit.
Edited on Tue Jan-26-10 02:02 PM by inna
you can start here, for example:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_q=trillions+bailout+wall+street&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=100&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=images



Behind The Real Size of the Bailout

A guide to the abbreviations, acronyms, and obscure programs that make up the $14 trillion federal bailout of Wall Street



http://motherjones.com/politics/2009/12/behind-real-size-bailout
Mon Dec. 21, 2009 12:23 PM PST

The price tag for the Wall Street bailout is often put at $700 billion—the size of the Troubled Assets Relief Program. But TARP is just the best known program in an array of more than 30 overseen by Treasury Department and Federal Reserve that have paid out or put aside money to bail out financial firms and inject money into the markets. To get a sense of the size of the real $14 trillion bailout, see our chart here. Below, a guide to the pieces of the puzzle:

Treasury Department bailout programs

Money Market Mutual Fund: In September 2008, the Treasury announced that it would insure the holdings of publicly offered money market mutual funds. According to the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP), these guarantees could have potentially cost the federal government more than $3 trillion .

Public-Private Investment Fund: This joint Treasury-Federal Reserve program bought toxic assets from banks and brokerages—as much as $5 billion of assets per firm. According to SIGTARP, the government's potential exposure from the PPIF is between $500 million and $1 trillion .

TARP: As part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the Treasury has made loans to or investments more than 750 banks and financial institutions. $650 billion has been paid out (not including HAMP; see below). As of December 21, 2009, $117.5 billion of that has been repaid.


~snip~

much more at: http://motherjones.com/politics/2009/12/behind-real-size-bailout
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. how about a nice big helping of weasel words-
is often put at, insure the holdings, potential exposure, bought... preferred stock, cover potential losses

ok, try this one-TARP overpayment: This June, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the federal government would lose $159 billion from its TARP loans and investments due to changes in their market value. (So far, Treasury has earned $14.4 billion in dividends from TARP.)

see, my point here is that people are throwing around numbers as though they were amounts that the federal government distributed and will never see again. in point of fact, many numbers are guarantees that we will never have to make good on, many numbers are maximum amounts that far exceed actual payouts to date, and many numbers are loans that are already being paid back, with interest. so, just in the example i cite- in june it was estimated that tarp might lose $159B, but in fact, it earned $14B. so, just tossing around a bunch of numbers that ya found on the google is not really the same thing as having the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ozone_man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. $14.4 trillion and counting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Google is your friend.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. no shit.
picking numbers off a google search is not the same as knowing what you are talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SOS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. From Bloomberg:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #23
28. The Fed and FDIC stuff is independent of the administration.
As for FHA and Treasury actions, the only two of note are TARP and the tax breaks which only total a little over $400 billion in aid to banks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. No need for the rudeness.....
Do some research on your own and stop expecting others to do it for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. cuz your reply was so polite.
i have researched it. that's why i know the op is full of it.

fyi, "google is your friend" is an insult.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #14
27. The Federal Budget is actually fairly transparent.
You should look up OMB documents and CBO reports some time.
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 Tue Apr 30th 2024, 05:50 PM
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