http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/reports/applicationguidelines.pdf

I want some TARP money

Quote :

" This morning Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson addressed a skeptical press about the latest plans for those 700 billion dollars that were appropriated for the "TARP" -- or Troubled Asset Recovery Program. Now Paulson says Treasury won't buy those "Trouble Assets" -- one of the many metamorphoses this program has had in its young life. In the meantime, care to apply for some TARP money? Turns out there's a five-page, downloadable document to fill in -- if you're interested...here's the link. And here's ABC's Dan Arnall on whether there has been, as he puts it, a "Great TARP Bait & Switch". No Troubled Asset Purchases? Then what are they doing with that $700 billion blank check? They are buying bank stock, not troubled assets. We probably shouldn't call it the TARP anymore. Instead, they are focused on a capital purchase plan (CPP) which is the widely reported $250 billion plan to use taxpayer money to purchase a stake in banks. "By October 26th we had $115 billion out the door to eight large institutions," said Paulson. "In Washington that is a land-speed record from announcing a program to getting funds out the door. We now have approved dozens of additional applications, and investments are being made in approved institutions." When we'll get a list of those dozens of additional applicants which will be getting a piece of the $125 billion in remaining taxpayer case remains to be seen. The original CPP participants were told about the program at a closed-door meeting at Treasury and no minutes have been released on what was said during the meeting. So, is this the biggest bait and switch in American history? There will certainly be critics who say that Paulson and the Bush Administration were disingenuous when they were selling Congress and the American public on the program back in September. And they’d probably be right. Paulson said today, he knew when the bill was signed the purchase of trouble assets wasn’t the right solution to the problem. But history will judge Hank & Co. on the effectiveness of their response. If the risks to the financial system remain low, the future doesn’t bring bigger bank and financial institution failures, and the recession doesn’t get too deep or last too long, then the quick pivot on this plan will probably go unnoticed."

"is this the biggest bait and switch in American history?"

11/12/2008 10:04:30 PM

I hope Obama brings Bush up on treason charges when he gets inaugurated.

11/12/2008 10:13:24 PM

^ lol gtfo

11/12/2008 10:15:06 PM

^^ Then he'll have to bring himself up on charges, you know, since he supported the bill.

11/12/2008 10:18:38 PM

IT'S A TARP!

11/12/2008 10:20:40 PM

honestly, i think buying ownership in the company is a better use of the money than buying toxic assets that the government will first have to price, and then figure out what to do with.

11/12/2008 10:25:51 PM

OMGSOCIALISM

[Edited on November 12, 2008 at 10:28 PM. Reason : .]

11/12/2008 10:27:57 PM

They need to do both at the same time. Isn't it a bit obvious what is going on? They are trying everything in their power to "help homeowners", but what they really mean is they don't want to have to evaluate how much the MBSs and CDOs are really worth because it will instantly render many institutions (and probably some big ones) insolvent. And Paulson can't let that happen to his buddies on Wall Street. So, we all dance around the elephant in the room that is home prices too elevated hoping we can stave off having to expose just how bad the toxic debt. Along the way we say good things like "helping the home owner afford the mortgage" when what they are really saying is will forgive a portion of his payment now so he just doesn't walk away, sticking us with an even bigger problem, so long as he pays it all back later anyway. Looks good for the balance sheet.

11/12/2008 10:32:33 PM

any way you slice it, it's socialism.

but at this point, it is what it is and the less efficient use of that money is in buying wall street's garbage.

11/12/2008 10:32:40 PM

Don't get me wrong, I agree that trying to get terms similar to buffet is better than outright giving away completely free money (which is what it would have been had we actually tried to buy the toxic debt), but it still isn't the right thing and Paulson and Bernanke are hoping that no one in congress gets smart to their plans. It's going to come out sooner or later, otherwise, we're headed for a Japanese style recession.

11/12/2008 10:40:11 PM

11/12/2008 10:59:39 PM

^

Quote :

"IT'S A TARP!"

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

11/12/2008 11:22:31 PM

Also, I was very irresponsible in the past year. I'm gonna go for it.

11/13/2008 1:09:34 AM

It is most definitely a TARP

11/13/2008 1:55:43 AM

Quote :

"Paulson said today, he knew when the bill was signed the purchase of trouble assets wasn’t the right solution to the problem."

Damnit, I hate some lyin ass politicians. No matter what money he asks for from here on out congress should give him a polite fuck you

Congress gave them the go ahead to buy troubled assets, now they are buying shares in the company. Even if it is a better plan, How can they just change what they are buying without congress reapproving it?

11/13/2008 8:21:35 AM

The alternate plan of buying ownership in these companies was raised a long time ago. Maybe i'm not so worked up because I was aware of it well before the bailout bill passed.

11/13/2008 8:56:46 AM

I'm sure they won't miss a little 0.000002% for me, no?

I tried to warn you

message_topic.aspx?topic=541627

11/13/2008 9:06:51 AM

That's what happens when you just rush a bill through that allocates money without very specifically dictating where it is supposed to go.

11/13/2008 9:07:38 AM

^And I am realizing the entire reason it was rushed through was so that the money would not be specifically allocated, so that they could spend it how they wanted

which call me crazy but im also starting to suspect it wont be spent for the good of the taxpayer or the troubled homeowner

but we were told it needed to be rushed through because the world would end if it wasnt


It was all planned and schemed out, atleast thats my opinion

11/13/2008 9:43:33 AM

I agree terd. Everytime someone tries to RUSH you on spending your money its usually a bad deal for YOU.

These elected assholes are no different.

11/13/2008 10:34:58 AM

it was not all planned and schemed out.

this isn't some evil mastermind plan to steal all our money.

It has more to do with the fact that Paulson, Bernanke, and Christopher Cox have no idea what they're doing.

Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence.

This bailout was pushed through because they were terrified after the commercial paper market came to a screeching halt in September after lehman defaulted on it's commercial paper debt and broke the buck, meaning that for the first time (i believe ever), the largest money market fund's NAV dropped below $1. This is fairly close to a financial apocalypse. If you're not familiar with the commercial paper market, read up. the implosion of this market would pretty much bring our entire economy to a screeching halt.

Lehman filed for bankruptcy on Sept. 15. By September 16, Libor rates that measure how much banks charge to lend to each other had more than doubled to 6.44 percent.

Later that day a big money market mutual fund called the Reserve Primary Fund was forced to inform shareholders it had 'broken the buck', or seen its net asset value fall beneath $1 a share, after it wrote off $785 million invested in Lehman Brothers debt and commercial paper.

This accelerated a stampede of clients demanding their money back from money market funds, forcing them in turn to sell assets like commercial paper, and by Friday the U.S. Treasury had to start guaranteeing the $3.4 trillion in such funds.

You probably didn't hear about this on CNN or Fox news. These issues are far too complex for the lowest common denominator to comprehend, which is what the mainstream news caters to.

There was a really really good explanation of all of this in relatively simple terms, and I can't find it now. But, understanding exactly what has happened and why will help you make more informed opinions.

11/13/2008 11:01:09 AM

I just read the title and thought this would be a good game show.

That's all I had to say.

11/13/2008 12:02:24 PM

Quote :

"I hope Obama brings Bush up on treason charges when he gets inaugurated."

I would love to hear your reasons why you make such an outlandish statement.

11/13/2008 12:08:47 PM

Quote :

"There was a really really good explanation of all of this in relatively simple terms, and I can't find it now. But, understanding exactly what has happened and why will help you make more informed opinions."

if you find that link please post it.

good post btw

11/13/2008 12:30:14 PM

Quote :

"I hope Obama brings Bush up on treason charges when he gets inaugurated."

I think Obama would be VERY cautious about trying to pursue such a thing unless there was truly blatant abuse (and poor judgment/incompetence is different from blatant criminal activity). After all, Obama will eventually retire from office one day, and he probably doesn't want him or any of his cabinet open to prosecution for all but the most serious offenses. Even George W. Bush suppressed Congressional Republican investigations into the Clinton administration back in 2001 for this same reason. Also, Obama probably would rather not have to deal with a massive witch hunt when there are plenty of other more pressing issues out there.

Of course, I'm sure that there are plenty who would say that what Bush did was criminal, but I tend to believe that it was incompetence, not malice, that drove the last administration.

11/13/2008 1:27:16 PM

so i think that myself and one of the professors in my department are going to try to get in on this

11/13/2008 1:49:53 PM

You know, I just seem to recall just a few short weeks ago, there were just a few of us cranks on this board saying, "You know what? I think this bailout is a really bad idea." And we gave reasons pretty much like this one - a total lack of accountability or oversight as to what or where this money would be spent on.

But of course, us cranks got drowned out by the litany of voices saying, "NO! DO SOMETHING!!1one!"

So... is now about the time to say, "We told you so?"

11/13/2008 1:53:26 PM

Yes, TWW had complete control over the bailout package.

11/13/2008 1:58:46 PM

A simple, "Yes, you folks were right, and we should listen to you in the future" would suffice in the circumstances.

11/13/2008 2:06:04 PM