COMMENTS: 24
6 Ways the Financial Bailout Scams Taxpayers, Subsidizes Wall Street, and Props Up Our Broken Financial System
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Economy headlines via email.
On October 3rd, as the spreading economic meltdown threatened to topple financial behemoths like American International Group (AIG) and Bank of America and plunged global markets into freefall, the U.S. government responded with the largest bailout in American history. The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, better known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), authorized the use of $700 billion to stabilize the nation's failing financial systems and restore the flow of credit in the economy.
The legislation's guidelines for crafting the rescue plan were clear: the TARP should protect home values and consumer savings, help citizens keep their homes, and create jobs. Above all, with the government poised to invest hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in various financial institutions, the legislation urged the bailout's architects to maximize returns to the American people.
That $700 billion bailout has since grown into a more than $12 trillion commitment by the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve. About $1.1 trillion of that is taxpayer money -- the TARP money and an additional $400 billion rescue of mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The TARP now includes 12 separate programs, and recipients range from megabanks like Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase to automakers Chrysler and General Motors.
Seven months in, the bailout's impact is unclear. The Treasury Department has used the recent "stress test" results it applied to 19 of the nation's largest banks to suggest that the worst might be over; yet the International Monetary Fund as well as economists like New York University professor and economist Nouriel Roubini and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman predict greater losses in U.S. markets, rising unemployment, and generally tougher economic times ahead.
What cannot be disputed, however, is the financial bailout's biggest loser: the American taxpayer. The U.S. government, led by the Treasury Department, has done little, if anything, to maximize returns on its trillion-dollar, taxpayer-funded investment. So far, the bailout has favored rescued financial institutions by subsidizing their losses to the tune of $356 billion, shying away from much-needed management changes and -- with the exception of the automakers -- letting companies take taxpayer money without a coherent plan for how they might return to viability.
The bailout's perks have been no less favorable for private investors who are now picking over the economy's still-smoking rubble at the taxpayers' expense. The newer bailout programs rolled out by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner give private equity firms, hedge funds, and other private investors significant leverage to buy "toxic" or distressed assets, while leaving taxpayers stuck with the lion's share of the risk and potential losses.
Given the lack of transparency and accountability, don't expect taxpayers to be able to object too much. After all, remarkably little is known about how TARP recipients have used the government aid received. Nonetheless, recent government reports, Congressional testimony, and commentaries offer those patient enough to pore over hundreds of pages of material glimpses of just how Wall Street friendly the bailout actually is. Here, then, based on the most definitive data and analyses available, are six of the most blatant and alarming ways taxpayers have been scammed by the government's $1.1-trillion, publicly-funded bailout.
1. By overpaying for its TARP investments, the Treasury Department provided bailout recipients with generous subsidies at the taxpayer's expense.
When the Treasury Department ditched its initial plan to buy up "toxic" assets and instead invest directly in financial institutions, then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Jr. assured Americans that they'd get a fair deal. "This is an investment, not an expenditure, and there is no reason to expect this program will cost taxpayers anything," he said in October 2008.
Yet the Congressional Oversight Panel (COP), a five-person group tasked with ensuring that the Treasury Department acts in the public's best interest, concluded in its monthly report for February that the department had significantly overpaid by tens of billions of dollars for its investments. For the 10 largest TARP investments made in 2008, totaling $184.2 billion, Treasury received on average only $66 worth of assets for every $100 invested. Based on that shortfall, the panel calculated that Treasury had received only $176 billion in assets for its $254 billion investment, leaving a $78 billion hole in taxpayer pockets.
Stay up to date with the latest Economy headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Perry Logan on May 27, 2009 2:45 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» What's English for...
Posted by: brunowe
» Nice volley
Posted by: leafsong1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Christian Southern Liberal on May 27, 2009 3:16 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The economic implosion hasn't created a system whereby our kids "owe" the debt. That debt is too large to ever be repaid. The system has to be entirely remade in order for it to function again.
Solutions: Each of us can "lobby" Congress to demand an extremely low mortgage. Giving a 5% mtg. rate is not boosting the economy, nor is it stopping foreclosures. Take Fannie and Freddie out of private hands. Demand that Fannie and Freddie offer VERY low rates even if the banks are bypassed in the process. A 2 1/2% rate would put money in peoples pockets and start the economic wheels churning again.
Demand that credit default swaps and hedge funds be made illegal. They are the real culprits in all of this mess.
Demand that enough money be printed to put people to work in the FDR style. The gov't hires people until the economy gets going again. I recommend trillions for that new green infrastructure and fast trains. What FDR did was the reason that the American economy lasted for the past 60 years, it can happen again but only if we support union labor and make the products for that infrastructure here in the USA.
What about inflation? Take all of the money being paid back to Fannie and Freddie back out of the system.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: otto on May 27, 2009 6:03 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» otto is very silly
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: otto is very silly
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ABetterFuture on May 27, 2009 7:08 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now, instead of private enterprises failing and having others pop up to serve their customers better, the U.S. taxpayer--those of use who still pay federal income taxes anyway--are on the hook for financing (not correcting, mind you) this impending disaster.
the TARP should protect home values and consumer savings
Funny thing--homes were grossly and still are overvalued. The buying power of the dollar should go up and tangible assets adjust to their nominal value. This democrat-republican establishment debacle was done with one thing in mind: maintain the status quo.
Meh. It's odd. There were billions in taxpayer give-aways to banks, but very little to help our neighbors, for whom a bit of help might have made the difference between keeping a home and losing it. My wife and I are receiving our Chinese backed income tax rebate check of $8,000 because we're buying a home this year, which will almost negate our Federal Income Tax Liability. So, Congress is going to the Chinese instead of the people to fund this "initiative". In the sense that we're going in to the foreclosed property with at least 20% down and then paying cash to build a garage and do some renovations, we don't really "need" that rebate check, whereas we do "need" at least a marginally viable economy to continue to prosper enough to continue to save money and enjoy life. But we'll still take our money back if they're giving it, I suppose. It was our money, after all, and unlike the boob governors who said no to the stimulus funds, we're joining the folks who said OK.
P.S. It is a REFUNDABLE tax credit, meaning if you buy a home and didn't owe a dime in federal income taxes in 2009, you still get your "rebate", in this case a Chinese-backed welfare check. Strange way to stimulate the economy (remember the Bush welfare checks of 2000 and 2008) but if we're going to be on the hook for $12,000,000,000,000, at least my neighbors will get a piece of the pie that has so far gone exclusively to big banks and insurance companies.
I wonder though, whether giving $8,000 as an incentive to everyone, including folks with very low incomes, to buy a home in 2009 will help or exacerbate the situation brought about by folks who lack the means to pay for a home and banks who didn't bother making sure they were making good loans, and corporations who didn't make sure they were buying secure securities. As long as the banks that are left do diligent means testing, hopefully so. If not, the next house we buy will be even cheaper, I suppose.
Regardless, folks who pay federal income tax will be on the hook to pay it all back, with interest, in what amounts to true patriotic "charge it!" (and never, ever, ever be out of debt) fashion. Going donw this road, I think we should rename our country the United Consumers Union and rename the rest of the world our MastersCard.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leafsong1 on May 27, 2009 8:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hah! Does anyone pay any attention to legislative guidlines? Surely you realize that these things are just outs to allow legislators to vote against the interests of their consituents with impunity? Remember the legislative guidelines on the Iraq AUMF?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leafsong1 on May 27, 2009 8:38 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: alexandra_hamilton on May 27, 2009 8:51 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The authorization was only for buying and insuring.
If that view is correct, than Paulson has acted ultra vires (outside of his powers) in "investing" in those companies.
But, seriously, who cares at this point. Fraud and theft are now legal.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pawheel on May 27, 2009 9:12 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tim Geithner; He was in charge of the New York Federal Reserve Bank when all this crap was hitting the fan in the last couple of years. He was in one of the best positions in the country to see what was coming. He is now in charge of the treasury I think. Please re-read the Manson comment, it applies here too.
Is there anyone out there besides the writers for this site that thinks Obama is a good idea?
If so, why? 95% of his decisions would most likely have been made by a Republican.
On one of the Sunday morning political talk shows a few months ago, Obama said "...you can't hold someone accountable for the promises made during a campaign." I SWEAR I heard and watched him say that. And NO ONE in the press, not even the Right wing, picked up on it.
Obama tells everyone what to do EXCEPT the banks and the military. He seems afraid of them. Why? because he KNOWS he owes where he is to the financial industry in this country.
Read Naomi Kleins book The Shock Doctrine. Aply it to what is happening to the citizens of the U.S. who DON'T work on Wall street or in big bank boardrooms. FINALLY the Conservatives have figured out how to destroy unions and most of the other gains for the average working person in this country since the depression. Our loss is the rich man's gain, don't be fooled. This is a full financial assault on the average working persons life. They are breaking the backs of the unions in this country while reaping money from the pensions that were promised to us for themselves.
Arriana Huffington wrote a book years ago call "Pigs at the trough". That is exactly what EVERYONE in Washington DC is. Pigs unconcerned about the American citizens, except for how they can get more money from us, and from the lobbyists.
Why is socialism good for banks but bad for citizens?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Socialism for banks, scraps for citizens.
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lbrookx on May 27, 2009 10:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: willymack on May 27, 2009 10:33 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Inflict pain as only enforced integrity can.
Posted by: weathered
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxsmart on May 27, 2009 11:52 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: foius on May 27, 2009 2:24 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: abusedbypenguins on May 27, 2009 7:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: halg on May 28, 2009 12:11 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hello, the rest of us figured this out a while ago. Those who have been breathing, anyway.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: grosspointblank1986 on May 28, 2009 2:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Imagine what would happen to this country, Mortgages could be paid down then refinanced or just paid off.
Everyone is talking about homes that are underwater because families have mortgages that are bigger than the homes worth.
My Idea is that someone with a $200,000 Mortgage and a house now worth $100,000.
This idea would allow for the mortgage to realign.
Of course, If the family is a married couple, then each would get the $100,000 a piece there by completely freeing them to pay off their mortgage.
This would eliminate a lot of the so called toxic assets. It would also stimulate the economy by encouraging new home purchases by first time buyers, because the money could be used as a down payment or outright purchase of a distressed home.
If the mortgage is in good shape then the money could go to paying down credit card or other debts, Helping Students with college, or just spend on some big ticket items Cars, appliances, home repairs.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What we need is an American Bail out!!!!
Posted by: kelethian
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Tony D on May 29, 2009 2:08 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jcalhoun on May 30, 2009 5:36 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only way to live with any dignity for us at the bottom now is to (1) earn and pay only cash/trade/barter; (2) create self sufficient systems, like home energy gen and food, and (3) don't declare any income/pay any taxes to the US. How else can we bring down those that are stealing from us?
And they keep waiting for the "US Consumer" to bring back consumption so they can "profit"? and what do we pay for that with?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Perry Logan on May 27, 2009 2:45 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» What's English for...
Posted by: brunowe
» Nice volley
Posted by: leafsong1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Christian Southern Liberal on May 27, 2009 3:16 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The economic implosion hasn't created a system whereby our kids "owe" the debt. That debt is too large to ever be repaid. The system has to be entirely remade in order for it to function again.
Solutions: Each of us can "lobby" Congress to demand an extremely low mortgage. Giving a 5% mtg. rate is not boosting the economy, nor is it stopping foreclosures. Take Fannie and Freddie out of private hands. Demand that Fannie and Freddie offer VERY low rates even if the banks are bypassed in the process. A 2 1/2% rate would put money in peoples pockets and start the economic wheels churning again.
Demand that credit default swaps and hedge funds be made illegal. They are the real culprits in all of this mess.
Demand that enough money be printed to put people to work in the FDR style. The gov't hires people until the economy gets going again. I recommend trillions for that new green infrastructure and fast trains. What FDR did was the reason that the American economy lasted for the past 60 years, it can happen again but only if we support union labor and make the products for that infrastructure here in the USA.
What about inflation? Take all of the money being paid back to Fannie and Freddie back out of the system.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: otto on May 27, 2009 6:03 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» otto is very silly
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: otto is very silly
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ABetterFuture on May 27, 2009 7:08 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now, instead of private enterprises failing and having others pop up to serve their customers better, the U.S. taxpayer--those of use who still pay federal income taxes anyway--are on the hook for financing (not correcting, mind you) this impending disaster.
the TARP should protect home values and consumer savings
Funny thing--homes were grossly and still are overvalued. The buying power of the dollar should go up and tangible assets adjust to their nominal value. This democrat-republican establishment debacle was done with one thing in mind: maintain the status quo.
Meh. It's odd. There were billions in taxpayer give-aways to banks, but very little to help our neighbors, for whom a bit of help might have made the difference between keeping a home and losing it. My wife and I are receiving our Chinese backed income tax rebate check of $8,000 because we're buying a home this year, which will almost negate our Federal Income Tax Liability. So, Congress is going to the Chinese instead of the people to fund this "initiative". In the sense that we're going in to the foreclosed property with at least 20% down and then paying cash to build a garage and do some renovations, we don't really "need" that rebate check, whereas we do "need" at least a marginally viable economy to continue to prosper enough to continue to save money and enjoy life. But we'll still take our money back if they're giving it, I suppose. It was our money, after all, and unlike the boob governors who said no to the stimulus funds, we're joining the folks who said OK.
P.S. It is a REFUNDABLE tax credit, meaning if you buy a home and didn't owe a dime in federal income taxes in 2009, you still get your "rebate", in this case a Chinese-backed welfare check. Strange way to stimulate the economy (remember the Bush welfare checks of 2000 and 2008) but if we're going to be on the hook for $12,000,000,000,000, at least my neighbors will get a piece of the pie that has so far gone exclusively to big banks and insurance companies.
I wonder though, whether giving $8,000 as an incentive to everyone, including folks with very low incomes, to buy a home in 2009 will help or exacerbate the situation brought about by folks who lack the means to pay for a home and banks who didn't bother making sure they were making good loans, and corporations who didn't make sure they were buying secure securities. As long as the banks that are left do diligent means testing, hopefully so. If not, the next house we buy will be even cheaper, I suppose.
Regardless, folks who pay federal income tax will be on the hook to pay it all back, with interest, in what amounts to true patriotic "charge it!" (and never, ever, ever be out of debt) fashion. Going donw this road, I think we should rename our country the United Consumers Union and rename the rest of the world our MastersCard.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leafsong1 on May 27, 2009 8:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hah! Does anyone pay any attention to legislative guidlines? Surely you realize that these things are just outs to allow legislators to vote against the interests of their consituents with impunity? Remember the legislative guidelines on the Iraq AUMF?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leafsong1 on May 27, 2009 8:38 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: alexandra_hamilton on May 27, 2009 8:51 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The authorization was only for buying and insuring.
If that view is correct, than Paulson has acted ultra vires (outside of his powers) in "investing" in those companies.
But, seriously, who cares at this point. Fraud and theft are now legal.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pawheel on May 27, 2009 9:12 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tim Geithner; He was in charge of the New York Federal Reserve Bank when all this crap was hitting the fan in the last couple of years. He was in one of the best positions in the country to see what was coming. He is now in charge of the treasury I think. Please re-read the Manson comment, it applies here too.
Is there anyone out there besides the writers for this site that thinks Obama is a good idea?
If so, why? 95% of his decisions would most likely have been made by a Republican.
On one of the Sunday morning political talk shows a few months ago, Obama said "...you can't hold someone accountable for the promises made during a campaign." I SWEAR I heard and watched him say that. And NO ONE in the press, not even the Right wing, picked up on it.
Obama tells everyone what to do EXCEPT the banks and the military. He seems afraid of them. Why? because he KNOWS he owes where he is to the financial industry in this country.
Read Naomi Kleins book The Shock Doctrine. Aply it to what is happening to the citizens of the U.S. who DON'T work on Wall street or in big bank boardrooms. FINALLY the Conservatives have figured out how to destroy unions and most of the other gains for the average working person in this country since the depression. Our loss is the rich man's gain, don't be fooled. This is a full financial assault on the average working persons life. They are breaking the backs of the unions in this country while reaping money from the pensions that were promised to us for themselves.
Arriana Huffington wrote a book years ago call "Pigs at the trough". That is exactly what EVERYONE in Washington DC is. Pigs unconcerned about the American citizens, except for how they can get more money from us, and from the lobbyists.
Why is socialism good for banks but bad for citizens?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Socialism for banks, scraps for citizens.
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lbrookx on May 27, 2009 10:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: willymack on May 27, 2009 10:33 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Inflict pain as only enforced integrity can.
Posted by: weathered
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxsmart on May 27, 2009 11:52 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: foius on May 27, 2009 2:24 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: abusedbypenguins on May 27, 2009 7:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: halg on May 28, 2009 12:11 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hello, the rest of us figured this out a while ago. Those who have been breathing, anyway.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: grosspointblank1986 on May 28, 2009 2:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Imagine what would happen to this country, Mortgages could be paid down then refinanced or just paid off.
Everyone is talking about homes that are underwater because families have mortgages that are bigger than the homes worth.
My Idea is that someone with a $200,000 Mortgage and a house now worth $100,000.
This idea would allow for the mortgage to realign.
Of course, If the family is a married couple, then each would get the $100,000 a piece there by completely freeing them to pay off their mortgage.
This would eliminate a lot of the so called toxic assets. It would also stimulate the economy by encouraging new home purchases by first time buyers, because the money could be used as a down payment or outright purchase of a distressed home.
If the mortgage is in good shape then the money could go to paying down credit card or other debts, Helping Students with college, or just spend on some big ticket items Cars, appliances, home repairs.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What we need is an American Bail out!!!!
Posted by: kelethian
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Tony D on May 29, 2009 2:08 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jcalhoun on May 30, 2009 5:36 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only way to live with any dignity for us at the bottom now is to (1) earn and pay only cash/trade/barter; (2) create self sufficient systems, like home energy gen and food, and (3) don't declare any income/pay any taxes to the US. How else can we bring down those that are stealing from us?
And they keep waiting for the "US Consumer" to bring back consumption so they can "profit"? and what do we pay for that with?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Tax the Corporations and the Rich or Take Draconian Cuts -- the Decision Is Ours
Home Underwater? Walk Away from Geithner's Perverse 'Homeowner Relief' Plan
Fury at Wall St. Banks Fuels Public Action for Move Your Money Campaign




