Dirty socialists extract profits from failing private sector
- Thread starter JollyRoger
- Start date
A million jobs saved directly, trillions of dollars saved by the taxpayer, and we didn't have a decade of 20% unemployment. What ever the costs, it was utterly trivial in comparison.
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
But it cost ten quadrillion dollars in GDP and maybe as many as 400 billion jobs.
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
True, you copied something someone else made up.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
A "It doesn't work!"
B "It actually does."
A "Well, it doesn't work as well as my hypothetical!"
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Instead of linking to it in your sig.
Ayatollah So
the spoof'll set you free
Well gosh, if Timothy Geithner says it, it must be true
TARP is just a small part of the federal government's response to the Great Recession. According to one calculation, the taxpayers had a total potential commitment of $12.8 trillion. A lot of that was "just" guarantees, not actually lent or spent, but here we have taxpayers facing the risk and Wall Streeters reaping the rewards. Yes, the government is doing it wrong.
And no, it wasn't a choice between doing absolutely nothing or giving away the candy store. Creditors should have taken more losses; Treasury and Fed, fewer.
Only correct remark I read. The fact it turned a profit is not proof it was a good investment. If you invest 1 trillion dollars to get 1 billion in profits per year that's a terrible investment.
While it's good that TARP and other bailouts are turning a profit, that's not at all proof they were the best destinations for the resources spent.
Friedman units my friend, Friedman units.
It's just funny that the Federal government could turn a profit where the so-called private sector wizards were losing their shirts.
G-Max
Deity
- Joined
- May 20, 2006
- Messages
- 2,556
Indeed. I say we start by eliminating all of the government interference in the private sector that makes it so unstable.
If you read that liberal rag The Wall Street Journal during the height of the crisis in September/October 2008, you would realize what was going to cause the most chaos without intervention was the one thing the government really hadn't been regulating at all - derivatives. The most free market game in town was not only going to take down a Casino, it was going to take down the entire town.
They turned a profit just by lending money to the private sector "wizards" who had bankrupted their companies, though.
Thus proving they are better lenders than the private sector lenders. I mean, the private sector lenders couldn't even lend to solvent borrowers without screwing it up.
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
Links are there for anyone who's interested in Austrian economics or libertarianism.
So even though the private sector caused the crisis, your idea is to let the private sector destroy capitalism altogether?
So you also believe that every window should be broken to make new ones?
So what is the balance sheet of these brilliant government lenders? They must be owed a lot of money given how good they are, and can't possibly be in 15 trillion dollars of debt.
Spoiler :
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
How much debt did non-government put you in?
edit: Oh wait, I forgot. It was the be-a-bastard clause in the government regulations that forced a particular portion of non-government to be a bastard.
My bad.
edit: Jesus H Chrysler
edit: Oh wait, I forgot. It was the be-a-bastard clause in the government regulations that forced a particular portion of non-government to be a bastard.
My bad.
edit: Jesus H Chrysler
