U.S. Treasury Said to Invest in Nine Major U.S. Banks, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times
Topic started on 13-10-2008 @ 07:57 PM by anachryon

U.S. Treasury Said to Invest in Nine Major U.S. Banks


www.bloomberg.com
The Bush administration will announce a plan to rescue frozen credit markets that includes spending about half of a total of $250 billion for preferred shares of nine major banks, people briefed on the matter said.

The companies are Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan Stanley, State Street Corp., and Bank of New York Mellon Corp., the people said.
(visit the link for the full news article)


reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 08:37 PM by anachryon
reply to post by HimWhoHathAnEar



Oh, I forgot. It's not just INVESTING, it's FORCED INVESTING. Remember, "None of banks getting government money was given a choice about it."

If I didn't laugh at this, I would be sick.


reply posted on 14-10-2008 @ 03:37 AM by undermind
Why Not Just Meltdown ALL the Banks NOW while we have the chance

Essentially banks make their money by borrowing from the government (the Federal Reserve) at wholesale (2%), or from foreign banks that the USdollar is stronger than, and retailing that money as loans to business and as home loans, car loans and credit cards at higher interest .

They justify the higher interest by saying that they the banks are the ones taking the risk if these retail loan buyers don't pay.

Now we have a situation where the Bush executive government - a Republican administration - has stepped in with taxpayer dollars to the tune of about 1 trillion ($1,000,000,000,000) - the largest single act of socialism in the history of mankind - to buy the failed part of that risk that the banks insist they have been taking.

There is a problem here.

Not so much IMO that it adds a trillion to the bill that taxpayers and their grandchildren's grandchildren will have to pay - though that is bad enough.

The problem is it sets a precedent. They will do it again, it's structural, and they know that the government will again step in and taxpayers will flip for the bill. Next time, they won't be so cautious. Next time, it will be even bigger. Next time, they will want the treasury to step in earlier to prevent financial stocks from lead ballooning.

Banks justify retailing money on the basis of risk. Their executive calculates the risk is acceptable. They - the owners of the bank - take the fall if the loan turns bad.

Now there's no risk, what need is there of banks? If they're to be rescued by the taxpayer when they fail, why not save the taxpayer trillions over generations, and simply make federal reserve funds available to the ordinary citizen, small business or company?

Everyone; homeowners, entreprenuers, small business, credit card, car loans... to re-finance their debts through the Fed at a wholesale price of 2% interest!



reply posted on 23-10-2008 @ 10:14 PM by anachryon
Bloomberg
Banks getting $125 billion from U.S. taxpayers to unlock the credit crunch are saying they'd rather hoard the money than use it for loans, the head of the largest independent mortgage company said.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is injecting capital into institutions including Bank of America Corp., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Citigroup Inc. on the expectation they would step up lending and investing to prevent the economic slowdown from getting worse. That isn't happening, said Lee Farkas, chairman of Ocala, Florida-based Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp.


Are you surprised?

More importantly, are you angry yet?
Pages:     ^^TOP^^