Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-04-2009, 09:10 AM
 
3,393 posts, read 4,011,117 times
Reputation: 9310

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bill545 View Post
"Pledging" to pay it back and doing so are 2 diff things and since we gave it to them for a very specific purpose (saving their butts), yeah, it absolutely should be our business. Although really I fault the gov't for not putting some kind of restrictions on this.
Oh don't get me wrong, I was against the bailout the whole time, and I agree with you, there should have been restrictions. But this whole thread is about closing the barn door when the horses are 5 miles down the road.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-04-2009, 10:17 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas NV
42 posts, read 128,464 times
Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup View Post
Something tells me they probably spent this money a long time ago. Also do you expect all banks to simply stop all marketing? What else should be cut? Should they close all their brick and mortar stores? Shut down their online banking? Cut healthcare? Stop paying employees? What is "acceptable" to you?
Wheelsup, you're being ridiculous. Of course they shouldn't shut off the mandatory things that make sense. But being at a corporate suite at the Super Bowl and then partying it afterwards? Oh yes. That needs to be cut. Especially when it's yours, mine, and everyone else's money saving their butts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 10:19 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas NV
42 posts, read 128,464 times
Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Book Lover 21 View Post
The bailout money to lenders isn't really a 'giveaway'. They are required to pay it back with interest.

With that in mind, how would you like to get a home equity loan and then have the bank come into your house and say, "Gosh, a big screen TV?? You took a $20,000 loan from us. Did you spend part of the money on this?? And what's with the new rug? Wasn't the old one still good?"

If the banks pledge to pay back the money, it shouldn't be our business how they spend it.
Book Lover, NO it was a not a loan. It was a grant so to speak. And lastly, even it was a loan, it'd be no different than a friend of yours begging you for some help with their gasoline this month so you oblige. Then you find out he took a vacation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 11:17 AM
 
3,393 posts, read 4,011,117 times
Reputation: 9310
Terms of the TARP agreement require banks to pay back 5% annually in dividends for the first five years, and 9% after that if taxpayers haven’t been repaid. The warrants expire in 10 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 03:12 PM
 
Location: Houston, TX
17,029 posts, read 30,922,581 times
Reputation: 16265
I posted in investing that BAC was only paying 0.85% on preferred savings accounts. If they are going to party they better boost that up. I am seriously considering taking my money out of BAC and putting it into some utility stock. The teller at my local BAC was embarrassed by the rates, and apologized.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Denver
690 posts, read 2,108,220 times
Reputation: 356
I'm kind of proud of my bank...it refused to accept any bailout money. I'm not sure how much they were offered, it may not have been much, but the CEO of my company (I actually work for a company that is affiliated with my bank) keeps reminding us about how they said no, because we don't need it. Of course, it's a local bank, in the south (which wasn't hit as hard by the mortgage crisis), but I'm still happy to be working for a company that I don't consider sleazy.

Anyway, I also wanted to say that I am really thrilled that the media is harping on all this wasteful spending finally. That kind of spending by the ultrarich has been going on for awhile and I'm glad the masses finally gets to see just how disgustingly out-of-touch these people really are. Yeah, the money is a loan and yeah, loans are usually spent however the borrower sees fit, but they borrowed OUR money! Last time I checked, the general public is flat broke already, and letting incompetent bankers borrow another $700 billion or so is a really big deal to broke people. If they make more of the same bad decisions, they will eventually fail (assuming they don't get MORE bailout money) and won't be able to repay the loan.

By the way, I was watching AC360 tonight and they reported that the CEO of Goldman Sachs was paid $70 million last year. Holy crap. Who can even spend that much money? And Goldman Sachs also received a lot of bailout money, so apparently they weren't doing so well. What in the world did this guy do to deserve $70 million in one year?? I had a big portion of my 401k invested with them...thankfully, the financial advisors of my company replaced them with somebody else. It's so sad...up until six months ago, I was always hearing about how Goldman Sachs was the cream of the crop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2009, 11:22 PM
 
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
6,588 posts, read 17,549,639 times
Reputation: 9463
To be fair, B of A had probably planned this event for quite some time and even paid for it a long time ago. Even to cancel an event of that magnitude would incur some hefty fees, I'd imagine. However, is this bad PR and kind of an "execs fiddle while TARP money burns"? Absolutely!!!

By the way, I have a new name for TARP -

Cash
Retention
Attempt
Program

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 01:35 AM
 
19,969 posts, read 30,217,900 times
Reputation: 40041
Quote:
Originally Posted by Book Lover 21 View Post
The bailout money to lenders isn't really a 'giveaway'. They are required to pay it back with interest.

With that in mind, how would you like to get a home equity loan and then have the bank come into your house and say, "Gosh, a big screen TV?? You took a $20,000 loan from us. Did you spend part of the money on this?? And what's with the new rug? Wasn't the old one still good?"

If the banks pledge to pay back the money, it shouldn't be our business how they spend it.

if it was there monies,,,,you are right, not our business,,,but this is OUR taxpaying monies....




bail outs punish achievement,,,,to the industries that get no bail-out,,

adaptability is the key to survival,,, not handouts,,,,
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 09:20 PM
 
Location: Socialist Republik of Amerika
6,205 posts, read 12,861,717 times
Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaindow View Post
Then putting your money where? What are the better alternatives?
A cabin in the woods with water supply, food storage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2009, 09:22 PM
 
Location: Socialist Republik of Amerika
6,205 posts, read 12,861,717 times
Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjohnson4381 View Post
I'm kind of proud of my bank...it refused to accept any bailout money. I'm not sure how much they were offered, it may not have been much, but the CEO of my company (I actually work for a company that is affiliated with my bank) keeps reminding us about how they said no, because we don't need it. Of course, it's a local bank, in the south (which wasn't hit as hard by the mortgage crisis), but I'm still happy to be working for a company that I don't consider sleazy.

Anyway, I also wanted to say that I am really thrilled that the media is harping on all this wasteful spending finally. That kind of spending by the ultrarich has been going on for awhile and I'm glad the masses finally gets to see just how disgustingly out-of-touch these people really are. Yeah, the money is a loan and yeah, loans are usually spent however the borrower sees fit, but they borrowed OUR money! Last time I checked, the general public is flat broke already, and letting incompetent bankers borrow another $700 billion or so is a really big deal to broke people. If they make more of the same bad decisions, they will eventually fail (assuming they don't get MORE bailout money) and won't be able to repay the loan.

By the way, I was watching AC360 tonight and they reported that the CEO of Goldman Sachs was paid $70 million last year. Holy crap. Who can even spend that much money? And Goldman Sachs also received a lot of bailout money, so apparently they weren't doing so well. What in the world did this guy do to deserve $70 million in one year?? I had a big portion of my 401k invested with them...thankfully, the financial advisors of my company replaced them with somebody else. It's so sad...up until six months ago, I was always hearing about how Goldman Sachs was the cream of the crop.

It's good to be a Frat lover of Paulson's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top