“A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon we’re talking about real money.”
Should that be revised?
Can we even wrap our minds around how much freaking money two trillion dollars is?
Where will it come from?
Where do we draw the line?
New Bank Bailout Could Cost $2 Trillion:
Government officials seeking to revamp the U.S. financial bailout have discussed spending another $1 trillion to $2 trillion to help restore banks to health, according to people familiar with the matter.
President Barack Obama’s new administration is wrestling with how to stem the continuing loss of confidence in the financial system, as it divides up the remaining $350 billion from the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program launched last fall. The potential size of rescue efforts being discussed suggests the administration may need to ask Congress for more funds. Some of the remaining $350 billion of TARP funds has already been earmarked for other efforts, including aid to auto makers and to homeowners facing foreclosure.
…
The aim is to encourage banks to begin lending again and investors to put private capital back into financial institutions. The administration is expected to take a series of steps, including relieving banks of bad loans and distressed securities. The so-called “bad bank” that would buy these assets could be seeded with $100 billion to $200 billion from the TARP funds, with the rest of the money — as much as $1 trillion to $2 trillion — raised by selling government-backed debt or borrowing from the Federal Reserve.
Just print money out of thin air.
If you don’t have enough, just print some more.
What’s another two trillion dollars?
Oh, and this is just wonderful:
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said Wednesday that he wants to avoid nationalizing banks if possible. “We’d like to do our best to preserve that system,” Mr. Geithner said. But given the weakened state of the banking industry, with bank share prices low and their capital needs high, economists say the government probably can’t avoid owning at least some banks for a temporary period.
If we go that route, it’s socialism. No way around it.
What do we say? We’re out of power. Stand back and cross your fingers.
—
[H/T HEATH - I 
YOU HEATH; I KNOW HOW BADLY YOU WANTED A H/T 
]
January 29th, 2009 at 6:10 am
Thanks, even though I would have liked the h/t.
That’s a lot of zeros and a lot of money.
Night mate.
January 29th, 2009 at 6:20 am
Oh. I’ll h/t you, then.
January 29th, 2009 at 6:48 am
Thank you Mr. Knepper for fighting for capitalism and against Socialism!
January 29th, 2009 at 9:19 am
Alex – here is a clue for you. Regarding something that you guys are going to have to learn how to do if you are ever going to win power again.
Make a substantive argument for how to prevent the banking system from collapsing in some other way.
Maybe it just plays into your party’s obsession with childish Limbaugh-like namecalling, but the truth is that none of the Democratic players are really socialists – they have no desire for the government to play any role in the private banking industry,,,,unless it is absolutely necessary for a short defined time. And that is the argument that Geithner is making – that it may be necessary.
Once again – give us something substantive to demonstrate why you understand the banking system better than the guy George Bush made head of the NY Fed. Explain to us exactly what the problem is with the banking system, and how YOU would solve it.
Your argument seems to be that the problem is just so big that we have to “draw the line’ and ….. and what? Deny that the problem exists? Pretend that there is some magic solution that doesnt involve the government doing something? So…what is it?
January 29th, 2009 at 10:27 am
Off topic: Obama is now signing the biggest trial-lawyer employment bonanza in years: the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. So the trial lawyer lobby wins first place in the big Dem Party Constituent Payoff Marathon.
That should put business’s cajones in a vice, teaching those evil employers another valuable lesson: Employing people is risky, avoid it at all costs…
January 29th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Make a substantive argument for how to prevent the banking system from collapsing in some other way.
I agree with Tano on this one. The GOP has been so spineless and devoid of solutions lately. Look at all those cowards that voted for TARP. The national Republican party is truly worthless. I’ve decided to focus on my state party, though small it may be. At least they try to appear competent.
January 29th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
In our current economic situation, there aren’t any good solutions/choices. Just a bunch of bad choices. The question is whether or not our government official are taking the “least bad” path, and navigating that path with acceptable competence.
These issues should be debated and discussed. Throwing bricks from the cheap seats at the people tasked with solving an incredibly difficult problem isn’t really all that productive.
The problem is that the situation is so complicated, and not fully understood by anyone on either side of the aisle. It is hard to know where this is all going. It’s all so depressing. As Bush said in September of 2008, “How did we get here?”
January 29th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
On an unrelated note…
Ford reported earnings today and is losing tons of money, but they are determined not to ask the government for a handout. Don’t you think consumers should organize to respond favorably to this, and encourage people to buy Ford as a result?
January 29th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
SteveS,
I would say soooo……but maybe if Ford hadn’t thumbed their noses at the socons previously, they wouldn’t have this problem now anyways. In case you didn’t know, there was a major boycott against Ford for supporting gay rights. The boycott ended in late 2007/early 2008. Ford was forced to abandon their policy of supporting homosexual rights.
I support their right to be for whatever they want to be for, but they have to understand how it will effect business first. My dad loves Ford, but he didn’t buy a ford vehicle for a long time because of the boycott. He’s a socon. Now that the boycott is over, he has a ford truck. However, it won’t help ford, because it isn’t new it was used. lol.
January 29th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
9
This is why so many decent Americans just absoloutely detest you thuggish bigots.
And it is why the GOP will never again be an acceptable mainstream party, so long as you guys call the shots.
January 29th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
#9: F’ing bigots. This party deserves to die.
January 29th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
#10: Nice timing.
At least there is an understandable reason for some to oppose gay marriage. But for a movement to oppose an employer for granting benefits for loved ones is pure bigotry and anti-human.
January 29th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
#9: That’s gotta be one of the strangest criteria I’ve ever heard for boycotting Brand X. I’m happy with my Toyota and don’t actually care if it’s built by a team of flaming pinko commies that share the looks and views of Rosie O’Donnell. The darned thing starts every time (knock wood) and will climb a tree in four-wheel drive. That’s all I want…
January 29th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Guys, the topic of this post is about the size of the bailout, let’s not turn it into a war about social issues, let’s stand united on this issue: fiscal policy.
By the way, $2,000,000,000,000 is a staggering figure… but that may not be all of it. Even before these new bailout proposals, some estimates have the bailout as high as $8.5 trillion. This is absolutely astronomical. I am seriously worried we are going to break the camel’s back here:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11236
January 29th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Here’s another obscene econo-porn illustration for those with a strong constitution:
http://clusterstock.alleyinsider.com/2009/1/the-real-problem-our-debt-mountain
Keep that mountain in mind as the Federal Dems rush to pile on more and more debt. Where’s Al Gore to point out the obvious hockey stick?
January 29th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Thanks mate
.
January 29th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Roughly the time period I bought my Ford, though I wasn’t aware there was a boycott, and wouldn’t have given a rat’s heinie anyway.
January 29th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Rasmussen Reports: Public Support for Economic Recovery Plan Slips to 42%