First, the sources in the article are almost entirely from the left political spectrum:
Barry Ritholtz, for instance, thinks that GM bailout was orderly and a "single best decision of the bailout era" (essentially a takeover by the Government via "prepackaged bankruptcy") but the banks' "bailout" was bad and messy, and his prescription for "solving" that was the "GM treatment" for the banking industry - a government takeover of the banks via "prepackaged bankruptcy"... see Ritholtz: Too Bad Banks Missed Out On the GM Treatment...
Anybody else who thinks like that, except maybe Nobel Prize for economics winner PhD Paul Krugman? Krugman, unfortunately, was not quoted in the article (leftist bias would be too obvious?) but the leftist "PhD economists John Hussman and Dean Baker" (of "progressive" Center for Economic and Policy Research) and Clinton's economic advisor, another Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz did.
Second, the BIG banks have either already paid back TARP loans (with exorbitant interest) or have been delayed from doing it by the Treasury or FDIC Chair Sheila Bear, for supposed "capital reserves ratio maintenance" reasons... What has not been paid is coming mostly from smaller banks (BTW, "FDIC Friday's takeovers" have quieted down substantially), GM / Chrysler debacle, and some AIG assets that have not yet been sold or IPO'd.
BofA says it has satisfied TARP exit condition - Reuters / CNBC, 2010 December 05 Bank of America has told regulators that it has met the final condition in repaying the government's $45 billion bail-out funding, according to the Financial Times on Sunday. The bank was able to meet the required $3 billion in capital raised through the scaling back and disposition of certain assets, said the media report. BofA was given until the end of this year to record the gains. ..... < snip >
After Citigroup and GM, Treasury Turns to AIG - CNBC, by David Faber, 2010 December 07 The U.S. Treasury can claim victory in its bailout of Citigroup with the huge “cleanup” trade completed Monday that took Treasury out of its remaining 2.4 billion shares at $4.35 a piece. It was a well orchestrated deal that removed the overhang in Citi shares and gave the government an average of $4.15 for the 7.7 billion shares of Citi it began selling last spring. ..... < snip > ..... Most likely: a road show next year in which AIG re-introduces itself to the investing public, paving the way for the first in what will be another series of offerings from Treasury of its shares.
Fed Critics Run Risk Their Attacks Will Backfire - Financial Times / CNBC, 2010 December 06
Fed Bernanke's been right - NYP, by Terry Keenan, 2010 December 06
So it looks like Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke may have been right all along. After enduring a month of unprecedented criticism, beginning with an open revolt against his easy-money policies by some notable and not-so-notable economists, a YouTube satire that went viral, and a full assault on the central bank's independence by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, this weekend Bernanke's extraordinary measures to fire up the economy don't appear so laughable. ..... < snip >
Third, private proprietary trading for their own accounts (mostly they do it for their customers who were paying for risk) was never a big source of income even for the investment banks, relative to their other operations. And GS, JPM and other U.S. banks have either shut down or sold their PT operations after FinReg has passed - not worth the trouble, they will make the money off their good customers (that's you and me) by charging them more in fees on formerly cheap or free services. Yes, the traders (or other professionals) are getting paid millions when they create tens or hundreds of millions in profits, that's the nature of compensation in the capitalist world - high return = high risk. When there is manipulation or insider trading, prove it and stop the individuals doing it.
Fourth, on this: Because the US government is lending money to the big banks at near-zero interest rates. And the banks are then turning around and lending that money back to the US government at 3%-4% interest rates, making 3%+ on the spread.
That's just a stupid statement from someone claiming to understand economics or banking industry... Banks have always lived off of "real rates" spreads - by getting short-term loans at smaller rate of interest (short end of the interest curve) from the Fed or other banks and taking the "rate" risk of lending them long-term (10-30 years), obviously at higher rate of return, to customers such as businesses, commercial or residential real estate... or the Treasury. That's, partially, what liquidity crisis was about - the value of long term assets on balance sheets could not be determined at the time because, in deflation, the "normal" market rules and valuations no longer applied or worked. TARP almost immediately stabilized the financial industry, without which the economy couldn't function properly.
Where do they think the banks would get the money to pay back the short-term loan if they just loaned the sum for 30 years? If you think riding a short-long term spread is "easy money" - try starting a bank... after all, you have nothing to worry about, the Fed / government / taxpayers will "bail you out" if rates or bad loan defaults rise.
We don't need to deny that the economy has a lot of problems or that "progressive" policies of the government (both Democrats and Republicans) piled up debts and unfunded mandates is not a problem, but pointing out the obvious doesn't mean we should join the leftists in misinforming and misdirecting what the sources of these problems are (a BIG government "progressive" policies) and helping them to make government even bigger by destroying private industries. Have Barney Frank and Bernie Sanders and the "Wall Street crusaders" Spitzer and Cuomo, and the newly installed unaccountable "consumer czar" Elizabeth Warren, among others, not been doing enough damage and cost good banking customers enough grief and money?
There is plenty to be mad about, but that's no reason to join hands with Bernie Sanders and Barney Frank in their "solutions" to misidentified "problems". Let's not be their dupes yet again (see Paul Kangor's just published book "DUPES: How America's Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century") and then wonder how people lose their freedoms (like Germans wondered about how they let Hitler and fascism happen... only after WWII).
Just because we are mad, we don't have to lose our minds.
Very thoughtful post worthy of consideration. I think everyone knows we have serious problems. The tricky part will be finding solutions that are equitable...