The way we did it is irrelevant. This country would have been better off liquidating the bad companies.
I have advocated no special interests or pet groups, you made all this up. You are a liar. Once again, you invent a philosophy that you want to argue against and then attribute it to me. How stupid can you get? I'm only going to point out your lies and false insinuations. You are a shameless liar. Please, point out to everyone where I said that. I didn't. You made it up as a straw man after making stupid lies that you couldn't back up. But I will simply refute your obvious and childish lies.
Possibly, but it wasn't his Act. It was Bush's. Some here want to paint Obama with the bailout brush for bailouts that were not his.
Possibly Red, really!! Possibly! As you often say - look it up. TARP was a Bush administration initiative TARP passed with a great deal of bipartisanship TARP was supported by Obama as candidate and President Obama threatened to veto any restriction of funding So it may not be fair to give Obama all of the credit/blame - but he should get his fair share. But something I've noticed, is that team Obama give Obama credit for the parts they think worked; and blame Bush for the parts that failed. Of course they just are following the the lead of their stand up President.
you did, you favor the bailouts for automakers and banks. those are your special interests. my special interest is the taxpayers. you said earlier that the problem with the bailouts was that they allowed bonuses for executives. you want to control the salaries.
Red BHO was consulted by Bush, advocated for as president elect and voted for the TARP act as senator. He OWNS part of it. Dems love to blame Bush for every thing bad that happened but Frank-Dodd was the act that created the loan frenzy that caused the bubble. Bankers were forced to make a certain number of loans to marginal or non qualifiers (BAD loans) or face scrutinity from justice. They saw how much they could make and went crazy. The Dems love to say the Reps are owned by the bankers but the critical actions that put us where we are were Dem initatives. First was the repeal of Taft Hartley which tore the barriers between commercial and investment banks down. This set things up for the "too big to fail" situation we have. It forced investment banks which were partnerships where the partners had personal responsibility to cover losses to stck companies where individual responsibility was shifted to stockholders and bond holders. They were also ripe for takeover by commercial banks which had the same effect. Look at FANNY MAE & FREDDY MAC; they are still bleeding money and being propped up by the government. You, BHO and the dems can't avoid taking responsibility for a significant portion of the mess we are in. Man up Red and if BHO can't it shows how craven he is.
They are not MY "special interests". I have been a huge and continuing critic of big banking and their coxy relationship with the Republican party and the Bush administration. My special interest is the best interests of the United States, which was what I was arguing for, NOT the investment bankers. You are very imperceptive or simply being contrary. And you lie. That was one problem with the bailouts, there were many more. I said absolutely nothing about controlling salaries. You made that up. How can you justify giving huge BONUSES to the executives whose incompetence and greed caused the huge losses? Those bonuses came from the bailout money of American taxpayers and only rewarded incompetence and unbridled greed. Your lies have painted you into a corner, once again.
TARP should not be referred to as a Bush/Obama bailout. It was a Bush Act, pure and simple. Obama and many other members of Congress may have supported it, but the buck stops with the man who signed it into law. It has proven to be quite unpopular with the public, so now the GOP mantra is that it had "bipartisan support". They said that about the Iraq War, too and it lost them the 2006 and 2008 elections. Nobody is fooled. How naive. You haven't noticed this from the Republicans as well? It's an election year and rhetoric runs wild.
you complained that salaries were not regulated. do you read your own words? now you are asking me how i can justify not controlling the subsidies. it is not for me to justify how much one person pays another person. it only matters to you because you favor stealing from taxpayers to give to these companies. if you are gonna give to those companies and tell them how to spend it, then you are running those companies and making their decisions for them. this is what people who are not retards call socialism. it is a recipe to for human misery for the government to run private businesses. i know you like it because you want money for your special interest groups and dont give a damn about the common taxpayer.
