Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bailouts could top $23 trillion yes, trillion.
ajc ^ | July 21, 2009 | Jim Wooten

Posted on 07/21/2009 1:03:03 PM PDT by Red Steel

Holy Toledo! More than the entire cost of all wars the U.S. has ever fought. More than the New Deal. More than the cost of sending a man to the moon. Almost twice the yearly gross domestic product of the entire United States of America.

That’s the possible cost of the 50 bailout programs to which the U.S. is now committed — $23.7 trillion — according to Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for the Trouble Asset Relief Program (TARP). The ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Darrell Issa of California, points out that spending a billion dollars a day back to the birth of Christ would have added up to only $1 trillion. Barofsky’s report is expected to be delivered today to the House oversight panel.

If Congress ever needed a bucket of cold water on its over-heated passion for spending, Barofsky’s warning should provide it. Some Democrats representing districts where people earn enough to feel threatened by President Obama’s massive new spending proposals

(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.ajc.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News
KEYWORDS: obama; socialism; socializedmedicine
And it's been only 6 months of the Obama administration. He ain't nowhere near done yet.

And you guys complained about Bush's spending. Small peanuts. Obama is showing you how it's really done.

1 posted on 07/21/2009 1:03:03 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

nope.... the spending and debt has just begun for the empty suit that is all about destroying America....


2 posted on 07/21/2009 1:04:03 PM PDT by bareford101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

3 posted on 07/21/2009 1:04:30 PM PDT by NMEwithin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

>>>And it’s been only 6 months of the Obama administration.

Most of the plans covered under this $24T estimate were started under GWB - TALF, Fannie and Freddie bailouts, etc.


4 posted on 07/21/2009 1:06:20 PM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
The ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Darrell Issa of California, points out that spending a billion dollars a day back to the birth of Christ would have added up to only $1 trillion.

I think he means "million".
5 posted on 07/21/2009 1:07:38 PM PDT by Deo volente (Help Wanted: End of Life Counselors...apply at Department of Health and Human Services.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NC28203
Most of the plans covered under this $24T estimate were started under GWB - TALF, Fannie and Freddie bailouts, etc.

Please do not introduce facts into a thread that has great potential.

6 posted on 07/21/2009 1:12:15 PM PDT by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

I caught that mistake too. A trillion is a thousand billion. There have been more than a thousand days since the time of Christ.


7 posted on 07/21/2009 1:14:11 PM PDT by TexasRepublic (BLOAT - Buy lots of ammo today)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

The Congress deals with US finances. The Dem lead Congress as of 2006. Bush not vetoing is bad yes. Blaming him outright is absurd. He’s been gone for six months.


8 posted on 07/21/2009 1:17:40 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NC28203
Most of the plans covered under this $24T estimate were started under GWB - TALF, Fannie and Freddie bailouts, etc

Yeah that's right and Obama and the Dems are such innocent creatures. /sarc

9 posted on 07/21/2009 1:18:35 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: allmost

Seven months and a day...


10 posted on 07/21/2009 1:18:40 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Yeah that’s right and Obama and the Dems are such innocent creatures. /sarc

I’m not letting Obama and Congress off of the hook, just providing a little clarity to comments such as “and he’s only been in power for 6 months”, which seem to place all of the blame $24T on Obama.


11 posted on 07/21/2009 1:21:50 PM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NC28203
You seem to be implying that all this obama and dem Congress spending is Bush's idea. I disagree with many things he did but WTF are you talking about?
12 posted on 07/21/2009 1:29:27 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

“Most of the plans covered under this $24T estimate were started under GWB - TALF, Fannie and Freddie bailouts, etc”

I’m sure the plans have been modified.

All I can remember under Bush was around $700B, half of which was deferred to BHO. A plan for $350B could be easily modified to $24T by Pelosi, Reid, and Obama.


13 posted on 07/21/2009 1:33:08 PM PDT by ChessExpert (The unemployment rate was 4.5% when Democrats took control of Congress. What is it today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

“Most of the plans covered under this $24T estimate were started under GWB - TALF, Fannie and Freddie bailouts, etc”

I’m sure the plans have been modified.

All I can remember under Bush was around $700B, half of which was deferred to BHO. A plan for $350B could be easily modified to $24T by Pelosi, Reid, and Obama.


14 posted on 07/21/2009 1:33:08 PM PDT by ChessExpert (The unemployment rate was 4.5% when Democrats took control of Congress. What is it today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: allmost

hope people are storing food and water!


15 posted on 07/21/2009 1:37:02 PM PDT by remaxagnt (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: remaxagnt

Combustible material’s not a bad idea either. Modern people need heat. If for no other reason that to sterilize the water.


16 posted on 07/21/2009 1:40:38 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

FM/FM were taken over by the Federal Reserve. TALF is also a FR program.

GWB wasn’t responsible.

TARP was his, but only 330 billion of it is being used. By the way, his proposal was three pages, what he got back from the Dems was 1400 pages.

Obama and the Dems own this mess.


17 posted on 07/21/2009 1:47:05 PM PDT by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TexasRepublic
I caught that mistake too. A trillion is a thousand billion.

Ah, yes. And what if Carl Sagan were to be on the Tonight Show today, would he have to change his "billions and billions" to "trillions and trillions"?

18 posted on 07/21/2009 1:49:34 PM PDT by mc5cents (Show me just what Mohammd brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

So what? We’ve got plenty of paper and ink, ain’t we??!!


19 posted on 07/21/2009 1:52:25 PM PDT by Oldpuppymax (AGENDA OF THE LEFT EXPOSED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Again, we sit convinced “our side” had nothing to do with it, and “our side” can fix it. We are well and truly screwed.

Here’s what I know: For my entire lifetime only the Republicans and Democrats have been in charge, and it’s been downhill no matter which one was in the majority.


20 posted on 07/21/2009 1:52:25 PM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmost

>>> You seem to be implying that all this obama and dem Congress spending is Bush’s idea. I disagree with many things he did but WTF are you talking about?

I’m talking about things like:

Fannie and Freddie Bailouts:
September 7, 2008 - The director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), James B. Lockhart III, announced his decision to place two Government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association) and Freddie Mac (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation), into conservatorship run by the FHFA.

TALF:
November 25, 2008- The Federal Reserve announced the Term Asset Liquidity Facility to support the issuance of asset-backed securities (ABS) collateralized by student loans, auto loans, credit card loans, and loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration (SBA). Under the TALF, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) will lend up to $1 trillion (originally $200 billion) on a non-recourse basis to holders of certain AAA-rated ABS backed by newly and recently originated consumer and small business loans. As TALF money does not originate from the US Treasury, the program does not require congressional approval to disburse funds.

CAP:
October 14, 2008 - Treasury announces TARP Capital Purchase Program to ensure the continued ability of U.S. financial institutions to lend to creditworthy borrowers in the face of a weaker than expected economic environment and
larger than expected potential losses.


21 posted on 07/21/2009 1:53:26 PM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel; All

Photobucket

22 posted on 07/21/2009 1:56:15 PM PDT by backhoe (All across America, the Lights are going out...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

Your own statement says no more than $200 billion. What do want to add?


23 posted on 07/21/2009 1:58:03 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun

>>>FM/FM were taken over by the Federal Reserve. TALF is also a FR program.

Ok, but the IG’s report includes these in the $24T number. Are you suggesting that they should be excluded? And if you are letting GWB off the hook because these are Federal Reserve programs, how does this then become Obama’s responsibility?


24 posted on 07/21/2009 1:58:36 PM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: allmost

What do you want to add? 200 billion and 23+ trillion are a long ways off.


25 posted on 07/21/2009 2:01:43 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

For starters, 24T is the max the assorted programs COULD spend. The current total is about 3T IIRC.

2nd, I’m not hanging it all on Obama, but it is his mess now...not GWB’s. Obama’s policiies have worsened the situation, not helped. Quit giving Dems cover by trying to lay blame on George W, especially undeserved.

3rd, if all 24T were spent, no one is going to be worrying about it...they will be too busy trying to find some food.


26 posted on 07/21/2009 2:07:20 PM PDT by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: allmost

>>>What do you want to add? 200 billion and 23+ trillion are a long ways off.

TARP is $3T potential, FDIC actions are another $2.3T.
The Federal Reserve’s $2 trillion balance sheet (which grew from approximately $900 billion prior to the financial crisis to a peak of nearly $2.3 trillion in December 2008),however, does not reflect the true potential amount of support the Federal Reserve has provided to those programs,which is estimated to be at least $6.8T.

The newly created Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”) — under whose auspices fall the Government-Sponsored Enterprises(“GSEs”) such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Federal Home Loan Banks(“FHLBs”) — has effectively provided more than $6 trillion in gross potential
support.

Meanwhile, Treasury itself has programs outside of those authorized under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (“EESA”), and has supplied potential support beyond TARP of approximately $4.4 trillion.


27 posted on 07/21/2009 2:13:32 PM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

Your looking at 12 trillion. Your numbers. Not double. Half of which is FHA. They don’t seem to be guaranteeing too many loans these days.


28 posted on 07/21/2009 2:20:06 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun

>>>For starters, 24T is the max the assorted programs COULD spend. The current total is about 3T IIRC.

As is stated clearly in the IG’s report. Of course that doesn’t make as nice a headline and the $3T number doesn’t even show up in the original blog posting.

>>>I’m not hanging it all on Obama, but it is his mess now...not GWB’s. Obama’s policiies have worsened the situation, not helped. Quit giving Dems cover by trying to lay blame on George W, especially undeserved.

I agree it is his mess now, but we started down this road long before 1/20/09.

>>>3rd, if all 24T were spent, no one is going to be worrying about it...they will be too busy trying to find some food.

Agreed. If all of the collateral goes to zero, then it’s over. But then why does everyone put so much emphasis on the $23T, as opposed to $3T? It’s not like $3T is chump change.


29 posted on 07/21/2009 2:22:58 PM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

How can you morally defend these numbers?


30 posted on 07/21/2009 2:24:26 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: allmost

>>>Your looking at 12 trillion. Your numbers. Not double. Half of which is FHA. They don’t seem to be guaranteeing too many loans these days.

You apprarently missed some numbers:
Federal Reserve - $6.8T
FDIC - $2.3T
TARP - $3.0T
Treasury — Non-TARP - $4.4T
Other: FHFA, NCUA, GNMA, FHA, VA - $7.2T
Total: $23.7T


31 posted on 07/21/2009 2:26:51 PM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: allmost

>>>How can you morally defend these numbers?

Which numbers?


32 posted on 07/21/2009 2:27:46 PM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: NC28203
The 23 trillion you blamed on Bush. You haven't peeped a word of disagreeance through the entire thread.
33 posted on 07/21/2009 2:30:01 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

You haven’t disagreed with the spending at all, as anyone who can scroll through the thread can attest to.


34 posted on 07/21/2009 2:32:00 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: allmost

>>>You haven’t peeped a word of disagreeance through the entire thread.

No I haven’t peeped a word of disagreeance. Nor have I in any way defended them. I merely have been pointing out the fact that many of these programs were in place prior ro 1/20/09 and that the actual dollars allocated to date are $3T. Several of these programs have been successful in returning liquidity to the market - Commercial Paper Funding Facility, Money Market Funding Facility are examples.


35 posted on 07/21/2009 2:38:28 PM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

The programs have changed, you have ignored that. The taxpayer cost you seem to care nothing about. I’ll divert to post #34 for clarification.


36 posted on 07/21/2009 2:42:35 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

Agreed, 3T certainly isn’t chump change...it is staggering.

As for the 24T number, it’s just like unfunded federal liabilities in general(I believe the mid 50T’s is the latest estimate). Great for a headline, but really means nothing.


37 posted on 07/21/2009 2:45:05 PM PDT by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun

It’s a typical low estimate IMO.


38 posted on 07/21/2009 2:49:52 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: NC28203; allmost
I think Bush has a share of the blame. Obama is starting new evil programs now though.

We have a good deal of comfort about the capital cushions at these firms at the moment.” — Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, March 11, 2008

Bear Stearns etc.

I took all my money out of the markets in 2005. I think the casino is still crooked.

39 posted on 07/21/2009 2:50:21 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Obama's multi- trillion dollar agenda would be a "man caused disaster")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas

That’s a fair view. Additional information helps.


40 posted on 07/21/2009 2:52:18 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: allmost

Probably so.


41 posted on 07/21/2009 3:02:10 PM PDT by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
“Again, we sit convinced “our side” had nothing to do with it, and “our side” can fix it. We are well and truly screwed.”

Republicans did have something to do with it, but not as much as the Democrats. The problem is socialism, government control of the economy. The tendency for this is stronger in the Democratic party. There are some conservative Democrats in the south, but they don't control the party. There are some “moderate” (liberal) Republicans sprinkled about (most strongly in the North East), but they don't control the party.

“Here’s what I know: For my entire lifetime only the Republicans and Democrats have been in charge, and it’s been downhill no matter which one was in the majority.”

It's not too hard to track if you focus on socialism, vs. free market. Or simpler yet, on taxes. Harding and Coolidge, both Republicans, cut taxes and kept their hands off the economy in the 1920s and the economy soared. Hoover, Republican unfortunately, signed the Smoot-Hawley tarrif and otherwise interfered with the economy (socialism). That gave us the great Depression. FDR interfered (socialism) more and the Depression continued.

More recently, Kennedy cut taxes and the economy did well. After that it was tax hikes and increased regulation and a deteriorating economy until Reagan turned things around. Clinton could not do too much harm once Newt Gingrich became Speaker of the House. Don't let the press fool you, Bush inherited a recession and turned things around. Unfortunately, there was still a lot of regulation (Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac, CRA, etc.). That the Democrats took control of the House and Senate in 2006 could not have helped. Now they control the White House and it's really not so surprising that unemployment is nearing 10%.

Socialism just does not work well. Europeans are more socialistic and double digit unemployment is just a way of life in Europe. An even starker difference can be seen with communism, where the government owns the means of production. I hope you can see the difference between a per capita income of $1,700, North Korea, and a per capita income of $26,000, South Korea.

42 posted on 07/21/2009 4:07:24 PM PDT by ChessExpert (The unemployment rate was 4.5% when Democrats took control of Congress. What is it today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
http://i28.tinypic.com/tag6dj.jpg
43 posted on 07/21/2009 4:11:00 PM PDT by dennisw (Free Republic is an island in a sea of zombies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NC28203
“And if you are letting GWB off the hook because these are Federal Reserve programs, how does this then become Obama’s responsibility?”

The President has considerable influence upon the Federal Reserve. Since our current President is Obama, he is the one who currently has considerable influence on the Fed.

The Fed was created by Congress. It can be abolished or altered by Congress. If anyone has influence on current actions by the Fed, it's the Democrats. They control both the White House and the Congress.

44 posted on 07/21/2009 4:13:22 PM PDT by ChessExpert (The unemployment rate was 4.5% when Democrats took control of Congress. What is it today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: NC28203
All the things you mentioned occurred with a Democratic Congress. The Democratic Congress provided oversight and set the goalposts on what was politically feasible and what was not politically feasible. And let's not forget that Democrats have the press. Even when Democrats are in the minority, they have additional influence because of the way the news is reported.

Our problems are due to government meddling in the economy. I have no doubt as to which party has been more socialistic in the past, and is more socialistic today.

Nor does Obama’s influence start the day he assumed office. As a community organizer he sucessfully sued to force lenders to issue more sub-prime loans.

Can I blame Bush for the fact that the Government now owns 66% of GM? No. Let's stop giving Democrats cover. They are America's socialist worker party and they are the ones responsible for the mess we are in.

45 posted on 07/21/2009 4:30:01 PM PDT by ChessExpert (The unemployment rate was 4.5% when Democrats took control of Congress. What is it today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson