McDanger is a milquetoast faggot.

11/28/2011 9:24:30 PM

Treasury Statements Omit Projected TARP Losses, GAO Says

Quote :

"The U.S. Treasury Department has highlighted projected gains while omitting estimated losses in press releases about federal bailouts, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office. Treasury statements from the past two years that discuss the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program’s profitable investments sometimes include the projected gains for taxpayers, according to a report yesterday from the GAO, a watchdog that works for Congress. The expected costs have been omitted from statements about TARP investments that may be unprofitable, including the government’s stake in insurer American International Group Inc., according to the GAO. “This inconsistent disclosure of lifetime cost estimates raises concerns about the consistency and transparency of Treasury’s press releases and suggests a selective approach that focuses on reporting program lifetime income and not lifetime costs,” according to the GAO report. The overall projected cost for TARP has declined since the program was authorized in 2008, as banks including Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Citigroup Inc. repaid rescue funds at a profit for taxpayers. The Treasury, led by Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, predicted a $70 billion cost as of Sept. 30, down from $78 billion a year earlier, according to the GAO."

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-11/treasury-statements-omit-projected-tarp-losses-gao-says.html

1/11/2012 6:21:17 AM

hahahahahahaha. busted. where's your God now, Shrike? You know, "Treasury Press Release God" that you worship

1/11/2012 1:44:13 PM

BBBut the government numbers said the government was doing a great job. ( can i get another 1.2 trillion to get me to June)

1/12/2012 11:26:02 PM

a report out today, as reported by NPR, says that TARP is still 118B in the hole, and is not projected to make all of it back. so much for your "mythbusting." Even the gov't is now saying we got hosed.

4/25/2012 8:08:24 PM

TARP was never about making money or even breaking even, it was originally expected to cost about 300b, which it's beat out, but it's definately been a bargain compared to S&L and a lot of others in the past.

4/26/2012 10:25:26 AM

Or it could have been an even bigger bargain by not giving taxpayer money to the richest 0.1%

That said, the title of the thread is not "we didn't lose as much as we thought" but "the myth of the bailouts were bad for tax payers"

[Edited on April 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM. Reason : .,.]

4/26/2012 11:01:03 AM

Well "what could have been" will never be easily seen. You and I could debate for 20 more pages about whether or not it was "good", but TARP was at least not as big of a loss as it was originally planned to be, so I think that's the part of the "myth" that was originally being brought up in the first post.

4/26/2012 12:06:13 PM

Yeah anytime you can strike a deal to only lose $120 billion dollars you absolutely gotta do it. Don't even ask questions.

4/26/2012 1:55:52 PM

I mean, we can now sit back and ignore the actual argument Shrike was using, where he said TARP was gonna make money, or we can say what he really meant... It's obvious what Kris is trying to do, lol

5/2/2012 8:17:38 PM

I don't know what the original argument was, I didn't read the first two pages, I read your comment and responded to it. You could try to actually defend it unstead of saying that I must be wrong because I am off topic or something.

5/3/2012 3:15:53 PM

the fuck? I need to defend my assertion that you don't know what Shrike was originally saying? Didn't you just get done saying you didn't read any of the thread? And yet you are gonna say you know better than I what the fuck this thread is about? That's pack_bryan levels of stupidity there

5/3/2012 9:28:19 PM

Quote :

"but TARP was at least not as big of a loss as it was originally planned to be, so I think that's the part of the "myth" that was originally being brought up in the first post."

Kris, I was here. We've been told from the very beginning that TARP was going to turn a profit. Shrike said in the very first post seven months ago that TARP was turning the profit it was predicted to turn. So I don't know how you can now come in saying it was predicted to lose their shirts. Certainly not by the people that were trying to sell it to the American people at the time.

5/4/2012 1:39:37 AM

Quote :

"a report out today, as reported by NPR, says that TARP is still 118B in the hole, and is not projected to make all of it back. so much for your "mythbusting." Even the gov't is now saying we got hosed."

This is the quote I am referring to.

Quote :

"We've been told from the very beginning that TARP was going to turn a profit."

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/22076

Quote :

"Certainly not by the people that were trying to sell it to the American people at the time."

I don't know who "the people trying to sell it" are or were. I go off of CBO estimates alone.

5/4/2012 12:07:44 PM

Quote :

"This is the quote I am referring to."

ahhh. and what "myth" do you think I was referring to? maybe the "myth" mentioned in the thread title and specifically detailed by Shrike? or the one you made up after you realized you talked out your ass after not reading a single damned thing in the thread?

5/4/2012 10:14:29 PM

^^ If only Shrike had ever read a CBO estimate, he would not have started this thread and you wouldn't have needed to come in here and put him straight once and for all. Fine. One more person who thinks Shrike was mistaken. Big whop.

5/5/2012 1:50:25 AM

Quote :

"ahhh. and what "myth" do you think I was referring to"

I don't know, you just said we got hosed, I just pointed out that we didn't really.

5/7/2012 12:16:57 PM

It's really been hilarious watching you idiots reference my OP while simultaneously re-interpreting it to fit your intellectually lazy conclusions. Revisionist history is basically the only way you can make the bailouts look bad at this point, so I don't really blame you. Let's recap.

I said:

Quote :

"Other than global warming, there isn't a better example of how the facts on the ground don't match the political discourse than the continued debate over the bailouts, specially the TARP money paid to banks in 2008. "

Key word there is BANKS. That's all I was originally talking about before the discussion derailed by irrelevant bullshit. Now, let's see how that statement held up.



So the entire financial system was saved and a great depression averted all while generating a profit of ~$20 billion for the treasury. Hence, TARP bad = myth.

Now, TARP invested in more than just banks. It was also used to save the US auto industry (doing great) and AIG (doing well enough for the government to start recouping it's investment http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1570.aspx). That's where aaronburro's $118b figure is coming from.

5/7/2012 1:29:42 PM

Are you familiar at all with risk adjusted returns? Even if we eventually make a tiny profit it will still be horrible based on the enormous amount of risk taken. Also are we discounting the cash flows or are we just being lazy/intentionally fudging the numbers ?

5/7/2012 8:22:57 PM

Quote :

"Key word there is BANKS. That's all I was originally talking about before the discussion derailed by irrelevant bullshit. "

which is what is funny. The bailouts were about more than banks. they were about more than TARP. Basically, you came in and gave one broad statement, then tried to say that it was really this one narrow narrow thing. Which is akin to me saying "hey, if you ignore all the little holes in the Titanic, she totally wasn't taking on any water". And, of course, all of this COMPLETELY ignores the whole "Toxic Asset" part of TARP. You know, the shit that we bought dollar for dollar from the banks that you aren't even including in your assessment. You know, the shit that brought the banks to their knees in the first place. The shit that you want to insist should be valued at exactly what the banks had its value at, despite the fact those those assets were hemorrhaging money from those assets. But, of course, the moment the gov't bought that assets, hell, they were worth exactly what we paid!

[Edited on May 7, 2012 at 9:41 PM. Reason : ]

5/7/2012 9:38:35 PM

Oooo. Shrike and Kris at odds. Fight!

5/8/2012 12:39:12 AM

Quote :

"U.S. taxpayers no longer own any of automaker General Motors. The Treasury sold the last of its remaining 31.1 million GM shares today. The taxpayer loss on the GM bailout finishes at $10.5 billion. The Treasury department said it recovered $39 billion from selling its GM stock, and had put $49.5 billion of taxpayer money into the GM bailout...."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/12/09/government-treasury-gm-general-motors-tarp-bailout-exit-sale/3925515/

[Edited on December 9, 2013 at 11:49 PM. Reason : .,.]

12/9/2013 11:48:25 PM