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.

 

Obama to banks: `We want our money back'

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by surfer_soul
Hold on a minute, am I missing something here?
Surely getting the money back that was used to bail out these massive financial institutions is a good thing?? As these big companys that were on the brink of collapse (without the tax payers money to bail them out) start to show huge profits again, and pay out big bonuses to their already very well paid senior staff, shoudn't atleast a portion of these profits be used to pay back the tax payer, and ease the countrys finacial deficit?
Where does it say anything about taxing the middle class? This is about the big corps being made to pay back the money they gladly borowed!
I hope the UK and the rest of the countrys that bailed out big buisness do the same thing!


ooops sorry I see now my answer has already been posted by someone.

[edit on 14-1-2010 by habfan1968]




posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


Yeah, but in the end, the fed only wound up spending the original $700B, and has gotten a lot of that back.

To put it into perspective, when the Obama admin put requirements on the loans preventing the bank execs from giving themselves huge bonuses, they found other sources to borrow the money in order to pay back the Fed Gov.

No doubt they are paying higher interests, and will pass that on to their customers in order to insure their clearly undeserved bonuses.

Here is a story that is up to date.

www.reuters.com...


U.S. Treasury officials expect TARP losses to be much lower than that sum, and over the course of years the fee will pay back any costs of the $700 billion taxpayer bailout, the administration official said.


All the people telling you Obama bailed out the banks and gave away huge amounts of government money is either badly informed, or a big, fat liar. Probably a drug addicted talk show host.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by apacheman
 


That looks like what the Obama admin is after, get back from the banks what they took from us. Obama is actually doing something for us, the working class, the middle class, and small businesses, all people can do is gripe.

If the banks try passing the costs on to their customers, join a credit union, that is where the smart money goes anyway.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


Been using a credit union for years.

I don't deal with banks if I can at all avoid them. I remember BoA service charging my account for not having enough money in it (not meeting their minimum requirement, that is), causing my few checks to bounce, then charging me overdrafts, ultimately claiming that I owed them twice what I deposited after they'd taken most of it anyway.

[edit on 14-1-2010 by apacheman]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Here is what I wonder, where the hell is our dividend check?

Isn't that what this bailout was supposed to be, a investment? So as investors aren't we entitled to our share of the profits? Just seems fair to me. I mean if the banks do well, then those who invested in those banks should do well too. And from what I understand the majority shareholder or near to the majority shareholder is now the US Government with taxpayer's money. So instead of getting the money back right away, why not get our share of the profits? Doesn't a return on our investment sound right?



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Sounds right, especially since the government gave them all emergency loans. If we were to go to a bank for an emergency loan, they would take us for every nickel they could get, why shouldn't we do the same to them.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   
What we're seeing here is the obama panic. The Banks that took the bailout money are paying back their loans to the government in record time to get out from under BO's thumb. And this "We want our money back" is simply a show for the people to give the impression he's a tough guy.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe


Man behind the mask has fooled you suckers.

I knew he was good, but Damn he is smoken!

Who pays taxes? Hmmmmmm?

Do corporations or banks pay taxes? I need some help with this one people, I just cannot put my finger on it. There is something wrong but I just don't know. MMMMkk.

Well, even if the direct tax is put on the banks, what are the banks going to do in response? Increase the consumer's cost to use their "services" of course. Yeah, the People will be paying that tax, it's just that the banks will be nothing more than the "middle man" to pass on the increase.


Originally posted by thebulldog
While I agree the banks should be held accountable I still find it likely that the banks will simply pass the debt to be paid down to us through interest rates and fees.

Darn right they should be held accountable...Since Federal Reserve Notes are not Constitutional "money" in the first place (Nixon nulled the Constitutional link to gold/silver), Congress has the Power "To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States." So, Congress merely has to shut them down, indict the bank owners & officers under charges & confiscate all of it...A nice, convenient way to "discharge the debt" & keep the taxpayers out of it, hmmmm?



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


If obama was looking out for us we'd have the trasparent government he promised before elected, he wouldn't be shoving national health care down our throats, or the up an coming cap & tax.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   
The audacity of Obama.
What the hell gives him the right to even think of using such a pronoun as "WE"?



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Chance321
 


Most people in the U.S. support national healthcare. By supporting a national healthcare plan Obama is doing what the people want him to to.

www.nytimes.com...

I guess you don't care about democracy.

I don' t know what you mean by cap & tax is, sounds like some nonsensical phrase created by that drug addict Rush.

Considering that the big tax cut for the super rich GW got passed, leading to another financial crisis and economic crash, I think we should crank up the taxes on the super rich until the money borrowed by the GW admin gets paid back.

It is sad how many people remain brainwashed.

The GW admin essentially doubled our national debt, and the icing on the cake was the last dirty deal of bailing out the crooks on Wallstreet who literally got away with robbing the U.S. public under the GW admin, and you people want to blame all this on Obama.

At what point in tome do you people realize how badly you have been used and abused by the republicans who supported GW and his partners in crime?



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by MidnightDStroyer
 


A better idea is to forget taxing the banks, and go directly after the wealth stolen by the bankers in the first place.

What we really need to do is get the senate rules re-written, that allow a minority to rule over the majority in the U.S.. The current situation where the Senate rules allow a small minority to overthrow democracy needs to end.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


This is what I mean about cap & tax. www.washingtonpost.com... It'll be the worse thing for this country.
As far as democracy? I'm all for it but that's bot what we got, not with obama's closed door sessions with the democrates and the bribes to push this bill through.
This doesn't look like most people want national health care.www.rasmussenreports.com...
[edit on 15-1-2010 by Chance321]

[edit on 15-1-2010 by Chance321]



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Chance321
 


This is off topic, but

You Rassmussen poll is over a year old, and typically errs about 5% in favor of republican ideology. The other polls disagree with Rassmussen, which hasn't been a very accurate poll.

Cap & trade as they are calling this regulation would create far more jobs than would be loss, and increase our nations energy dependence. Renewable energy sources are more likely to be smaller sized businesses. Of course big business hates the idea, it threatens their control of our nations energy supplies.



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
I don't like much of anything obama has done...very little.

I DO support this. The banks are nothing but leaches taking our money anyway they can get it...through high interest rates or by taking taxpayer money.

I dare the Republicans to block this...the same ones that were supposedly against the TARP bill which was hugely unpopular.

Yeah....Republicans are going to take seats...and then defend the entire financial industry.

F the banks.

Some will just attack Obama at any angle and every thing he does. Would it be better to do NOTHING about it at all?

IF he really wanted to make himself look "populist" he would denounce Bernanke's re-appointment and demand that the Federal Reserve open it's books to the public.

Eventually Obama is going to have to realize that he cannot continue doing things the way he has the last year. He is going to have to be far more populist if he wants to turn his Presidency around.



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by surfer_soul
Hold on a minute, am I missing something here?
Surely getting the money back that was used to bail out these massive financial institutions is a good thing?? As these big companys that were on the brink of collapse (without the tax payers money to bail them out) start to show huge profits again, and pay out big bonuses to their already very well paid senior staff, shoudn't atleast a portion of these profits be used to pay back the tax payer, and ease the countrys finacial deficit?
Where does it say anything about taxing the middle class? This is about the big corps being made to pay back the money they gladly borowed!
I hope the UK and the rest of the countrys that bailed out big buisness do the same thing!


Yes, you are.

Maybe you missed a couple of points:

1. The largest "bailout banks" have ALREADY paid back 100% of the TARP money, PLUS interest;

2. Many of the TARP recipients were FORCED to participate and did not want any government involvement in their business; and,

3. Any additional "cost of doing business" (i.e., "overhead") WILL be passed along to any consumers doing business with the institutions assessed the fee.

You may want to ask yourself and the gov't why the largest beneficiaries of government bailouts will NOT be assessed a "fee" and will be given MORE taxpayer money to keep them alive to waste more of our money?

AIG, FannieMae, FreddieMac, GM, GMAC, Chrysler, SEIU, IAW, AFL-CIO and AFSCME are ALL going to receive billions of tax dollars in funds, exemptions and credits under agreements with the Obama administration and Congress.

Those named above who received, and continue to receive, bailout money (AIG, Fannie, Freddie, GM, GMAC and Chrysler) will NOT be asked to pay any of these "fees" themselves.

Obama is trying to portray himself as a populist by picking on the easiest available targets, banks, while catering to the biggest sponges of the corporate welfare giveaways.

Why? Ask yourself: "Who OWNS the biggest sponges?"

Answer: The Obama administration and the unions he owes (and who own HIM) are majority owners of the biggest losers.

Of course, the "Fed" and Federal Reserve banks will not be subject to these fees either, despite having orchestrated the Treasury's continuing bailouts and secret support agreements.

deny ignorance

jw



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
I guess you don't care about democracy.

No, I don't care about Democracry:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Every elected & appointed government officer must swear/affirm an Oath of Office to this effect. The reason that the Founding Forefathers didn't want a Democracy is because it's essentially "mob rule." 51% of voters can negate the Rights & liberties of the ohter 49%. Democracy is not Rule of Law in America; It is, in fact, illegal & constitutes acting in Breech of Oath.

Thomas Jefferson:
All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.

Bold emphasis in both quotes above are mine.


Originally posted by poet1b
A better idea is to forget taxing the banks, and go directly after the wealth stolen by the bankers in the first place.

What we really need to do is get the senate rules re-written, that allow a minority to rule over the majority in the U.S.

I never said that I agree with a tax on banks...I said that Congress better start exercising their Constitutionally-granted Powers & back off from what they have been doing...Ignoring their Constitutional limitations. In fact, every government officer should really be paying closer attention to the Constitution than they do...After all, they're all bound by an Oath to defend & uphold it! The rules don't need to be re-written...The rules need to be obeyed.

[edit on 16-1-2010 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Make no mistake, this isn't worrying the banks one bit... They will simply pass along these costs to their customers... YOU will pay for this.

Behind closed doors somewhere bankers and administration insiders are having a good laugh as they discuss other ways to tax the people and businesses without actually creating new taxes on them directly.

So far their plans are working and are both impressive and rather brilliant.

Now if they could just get that damned health care reform passed.




posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by skunknuts
 

TARP was Bush's program. Obama's administration has put some caps on bonuses, but when he tried to do more, there was an uproar about him hating American capitalism by the sheeple who worship Rush et.al..


"Obama's administration" and Chris Dodd snuck in EXEMPTIONS to the "bonus caps."

Dodd: Administration Sought Bonus Cap Revision

Amid AIG Furor, Dodd tries to un-do bonus protections he put in

Many of the original TARP recipients were forced to accept the gov't interference and most have already repaid with interest.

The real sheeple are the ones who don't know, ignore or refuse to see the truth.

I guess your and Obama's vision of "Capitalism" is labor union ownership of manufacturing; government ownership and control of manufacturing, healthcare, energy, insurance and lending.

deny ignorance

jw



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Chance321
 


Most people in the U.S. support national healthcare. By supporting a national healthcare plan Obama is doing what the people want him to to.


No, they do not. RCP, ABC, CBS, NBC, Quinnipiac Gallup and Rasmussen confirm that Americns are opposed to the current PLAN, even if they favor REFORM. You just do not want to see the truth, do you?


I don' t know what you mean by cap & tax is, sounds like some nonsensical phrase created by that drug addict Rush.
How 'bout the power mad narcissist at 1600 PA Ave.?

His plans for CO2 regulation have been a complete disasiter in the UK and EU. It does not work, and the Democrat-led Senate will kill it. The plan itself calls for thew US to return to CO2 level not seen since the turn of the 20th century.


Considering that the big tax cut for the super rich GW got passed, leading to another financial crisis and economic crash, I think we should crank up the taxes on the super rich until the money borrowed by the GW admin gets paid back.


You have no idea what you are saying. No GW tax cut led to any "financial crisis and economic crash."


It is sad how many people remain brainwashed.


Not as sad as it is when they, like you, don't even realize it. Instead, they parrot propaganda or idiotic assumptions that have no basis in fact.


The GW admin essentially doubled our national debt, and the icing on the cake was the last dirty deal of bailing out the crooks on Wallstreet who literally got away with robbing the U.S. public under the GW admin, and you people want to blame all this on Obama.


The biggest increase to the GW debt was the creation of prescription drug benefits for elderly. You want that to go away?


The next biggest were the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama has increased both amounts. Got a problem with that?


At what point in tome do you people realize how badly you have been used and abused by the republicans who supported GW and his partners in crime?


The real question is when will people like you grow up, get some basic understanding of domestic and foreign events and history, and think for themselves?

Answer: It's too easy to just do what you're told.

deny ignorance

jw



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join