Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Bailout: TARP Failing, Next Step Unclear

Posted by Paul Kiel, ProPublica at 4:23 PM on January 22, 2009.


The TARP hasn't saved the nation's major banks. So what's next?
flushmoney150a

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) hasn't saved the nation's major banks, and the Obama administration doesn't know what to do to save them.

That is the unusually sober takeaway in the morning's major papers following yesterday's sharp decline for banks in the stock markets. Bank stocks have been sliding all month: "The common stock of the major banks tracked by the Dow Jones Wilshire U.S. Banks Index has fallen roughly $287 billion in value since Jan. 2, a 43 percent decline in just over two weeks," reports the Wall Street Journal.

Not surprisingly, "fear" and "nationalization" are the words that crop up the most -- as in investors' fear of being wiped out by a government takeover. The Journal says, "The fact that nationalization is considered by some to be possible and is roiling markets, reflects the failures of repeated government interventions to stem a widening crisis of confidence in the banking system."

So far, the Treasury Department has spent roughly $230 billion pumping money into the nation's banks (billions more have gone to the auto companies and AIG). But, the Washington Post notes, that money "did not succeed in stabilizing the industry," and according to unnamed Obama administration officials, it's increasingly likely that the remainder of the $700 billion in bailout money won't do the trick either.

So what next?

The New York Times, Post and Journal all juggle a variety of alternative solutions: They range from the apparently leading contender of creating a "bad bank" to house the banks' toxic assets to nationalization.

The underlying choice there is whether to protect shareholders or taxpayers. The "bad bank" model would involve the government buying and holding the banks' bad assets -- but there are worries the government would overpay. In another case of unusual bluntness, the Times reports:

If policymakers were even remotely honest, [financial industry] analysts said, they would force banks to take huge write-downs and insist on a high price in return for taking bailout money. For practical purposes, that could mean nationalization or partial nationalization for many banks.

But as the chorus of calls for nationalization grows, the Journal notes a reluctance among U.S. officials to take "the most extreme step -- nationalizing banks altogether -- worried about the government's ability to run them. The challenges of running Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two large mortgage-finance firms the government took over last fall, are seen as evidence of that."

Digg!

Tagged as: obama, banks, taxpayers, shareholders, tarp


After Conceding, Then Unconceding, Then Conceding, Then Unconceding, NY Conservative Concedes
Doug Hoffman today issued a statement in which he admitted Bill Owens won the NY-23 special election.
Post by Amanda Terkel. November 24, 2009.
China on Reducing Its Carbon Footprint: Why Should We Have to?
They've got a point. Per capita, China only produces 20 percent of America's carbon emissions.
Post by Robert Dreyfuss. November 24, 2009.
Supremes to Decide if Idle Rich's Scenic Ocean Views More Important than Public Beaches, the Environment
A popular coastal reclamation program is being threatened by short-sighted scumbags.
Post by Joshua Holland. November 24, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac
Posted by: asjogren on Jan 22, 2009 6:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problems with these two happened AFTER privatization if I remember correctly. And there was an implicit understanding that the Federal Government would not allow these two to fail.

How many times do we need to see this pattern?
- Deregulate financial institutions
- Heaps of private money made quickly
- Collapse
- Taxpayer bailout

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not True ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Jan 22, 2009 9:07 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The challenges of running Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two large mortgage-finance firms the government took over last fall, are seen as evidence of that.""

~~~~

Fannie and Freddie have been forced to buy iffy loans from the banks creating losses. The banks losses have been spread around the system from Fannie and Freddie to the Federal Home Loan Boards to the Federal Reserve. Hundreds of billions in losses have been removed from the banks balance sheets to the tax payers backs, and the banks are still going down.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

all i can say is "duh"!
Posted by: undrgrndgirl on Jan 23, 2009 12:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
most of us regular folks knew the bail out wouldn't work...that's why some 80-90% of us asked our "leaders" to say "NO", but did they listen...even our NEW "leader" voted FOR it...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bailout is a crass sham perpetrated by criminals!
Posted by: chance garden on Jan 23, 2009 12:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How DARE this congress keep up this charade against the american people...Congress should be truthful or resign...I'm sick of these goons lying to us about everything...

If congress, et al, was so concerned about the people and the economy crashing, they should have already made plans to ship food and other vital materials out to the people who will need it, and USE the bailout funds, and the other TRILLIONS of dollars FOR the real economy instead of gifting this parasitic sector of financial kleptocrats with untold and unaccounted billions of dollars...

...We have all been scammed by these sharpies, and congress and the courts has utterly failed the american people...We are in BIG TROUBLE america...We can't let these crooks win!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Continuing Saga...
Posted by: adp3d on Jan 23, 2009 7:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...of the Bush legacy. Giving bankers billions of taxpayer money with no accountability required or even expected...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There was no "money back guarantee"?
Posted by: AlterEg0 on Jan 24, 2009 9:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How funny. There should have been, and if there were such a guarantee, we could have received our money back.

As it is, all we can do is arrest thieving bastards (including Paulson and Bernanke), and confiscate their assets.

If we go from CEO to CEO doing above, we will recover ALL the money, plus interest. And of course the financial institutions who were so eager to get bailed out, since they've proven they cannot exist as business entities, must be nationalized.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

jeanruss
Posted by: jeanruss on Jan 24, 2009 1:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think Obama was forced to adopt Clinton's team for his administration. Larry Summers is an idiot. Obama has the same people who caused the crisis supposedly to fix the crisis they helped create. It seems they are gatekeepers to keep us from knowing what really happened. At www.worldreports.com/news, there is an interesting article to the back story about this (I think) engineered crisis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]