It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Banks with political ties got bailouts, study shows

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Banks with political ties got bailouts, study shows


news.yahoo.com

NEW YORK (Reuters) – U.S. banks that spent more money on lobbying were more likely to get government bailout money, according to a study released on Monday.

Banks whose executives served on Federal Reserve boards were more likely to receive government bailout funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, according to the study from Ran Duchin and Denis Sosyura, professors at the University of Michigan's Ross School of Business.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Surprise, surprise. Is there any end to corruption and political influence in the US?


Banks with headquarters in the district of a U.S. House of Representatives member who serves on a committee or subcommittee relating to TARP also received more funds.

Political influence was most helpful for poorly performing banks, the study found.

"Political connections play an important role in a firm's access to capital," Sosyura, a University of Michigan assistant professor of finance, said in a statement.

Banks with an executive who sat on the board of a Federal Reserve Bank were 31 percent more likely to get bailouts through TARP's Capital Purchase Program, the study showed. Banks with ties to a finance committee member were 26 percent more likely to get capital purchase program funds.

As of late September, nearly 700 financial institutions had received bailouts of $205 billion under the capital purchase program, the study said.

The banking industry has long been criticized for using political influence to obtain bailouts.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 05:29 PM
link   
This isnt new news* Why do you think the top big companys are still in buiseness, its a no brainer* its not necessarliy because they whored miliions n billions of $$$ in todays buisnes world, its WHO you know, not hwat yuo can do*



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   
Part of it just comes down to networking , its like sayings it wrong for somebody to be more likely to get a job because they are friends a person who knows the guy hiring. The rest is just corrupt though and to be expected out of the Gov these days.



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by whoshotJR
Part of it just comes down to networking , its like sayings it wrong for somebody to be more likely to get a job because they are friends a person who knows the guy hiring.

Except they aren't paying the guy who's hiring.



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Well duhh...

I hope this was a million dollar research effort.

Next scientific study, 'do males like boobs?'



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by add alone
Well duhh...

I hope this was a million dollar research effort.

Next scientific study, 'do males like boobs?'


:face palm:

I mean, thank God for the whole "no earmarks" thing.



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by add alone
Well duhh...

I hope this was a million dollar research effort.

Next scientific study, 'do males like boobs?'



Its this type of smoke and mirrors that really grinds my gears
so I decided to dig a little deeper and clear the air.

I found a similiar study by Mercatus Center at George Mason University reviewing the distribution of $157 billion in stimulus dollars.


Report: Democratic districts received nearly twice the amount of stimulus funds as GOP districts.

A new analysis of the $157 billion distributed by the American Reinvestment and Recovery act, popularly known as the stimulus bill, shows that the funds were distributed without regard for what states were most in need of jobs.

“You would think that if the stimulus money was actually spent to create jobs, there would be more stimulus money spent in high unemployment states,” said Veronique de Rugy, a scholar at the Mercatus Center who produced the analysis. "But we don't find any correlation."

The Mercatus Center at George Mason University in Virginia is one of the nation's most respected economic and regulatory think tanks and has a Nobel prize-winning economist on staff. The econometric analysis was done using data provided by Recovery.gov -- the government website devoted to tracking the stimulus data -- as well as a host of other government databases...



...The Mercatus Center analysis also found that Democratic congressional districts received on average almost double the funding of Republican congressional districts. Republican congressional districts received on average $232 million in stimulus funds while Democratic districts received $439 million on average.

“We found that there is a correlation [relating to the partisanship of congressional districts],” de Rugy said. Her regression analysis found that stimulus funds are expected to decrease by 24.19 percent if a district is represented by a Republican.

“During the appropriations process, you're not surprised to see the Democrats are getting more money, but in this case a lot of the money we're looking at is going through HUD [Department of Housing and Urban Development], or Department of Education, Department of Transportation etc. and they're following a formula,” she said. “But the correlation exists, and not only does it exist -- when you look at how much money we're talking about, it's a pretty big deal.”


www.washingtonexaminer.com...


I didn't major in economics, but I thought you stimulate the economy by investing in small businesses, especially where unemployment is high.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join