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

Skip to comments.

Audit of the Federal Reserve Reveals $16 Trillion in Secret Bailouts
unelected.org ^ | unelected.org

Posted on 12/27/2011 6:08:43 PM PST by Iam1ru1-2

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-129 last
To: Toddsterpatriot

You seem to be the expert here, so who else got the billions and trillions Todd?


101 posted on 12/28/2011 8:23:42 PM PST by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

Be sure to let me know when you find out. LOL!


102 posted on 12/28/2011 8:27:59 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

It was your comment. If ya don’t want to say what it is, no problem.


103 posted on 12/28/2011 8:46:19 PM PST by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
my paycheck didn't get reduced to pay for the money the Fed created when they made these loans.

Everyone else around here sees that you have fallen into the same fallacy as crack whores who think that if the government would just print a bunch of money and spread it around we would all be rich.

This is not ignorance, since it has been pointed out before. It is just plain old-fashioned stupidity, no, it is worse. It is wanton.

104 posted on 12/28/2011 11:42:13 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

I’m trying to discern your motive. It’s as if you supported TARP. Then you reconcile it with, they all paid it back.

Well, that’s wonderful. Imagine if any one of us could accept a few billion for a few months/years, and what we might do with it. I figure with a few choice investments, I could pay the govt back while making a mill or two. Do you think this is what they did?

Nevermind, they would never do that.
This is why they penalized their executives, and no bonuses were given to any of them./s


105 posted on 12/28/2011 11:48:45 PM PST by takenoprisoner (Constitutional Conservatism is Americanism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner
I think it is time we profiled our Toddster. Here is what we know about him:

1. We know that Todd has a lot of detailed knowledge about some things going on in the financial industry, peculiar technical things about trading financial securities so he has access to or instruction by the financial services "industry."

2. He is salaried. If this were not enough we would have guessed based on his inability to pick up on substantive clues that make a difference about things that he is not a trader, or at least not a very good one. He could be doing back office work. He is too egomaniacal and lacks the smoothness to be very good at anything involving relations with others. Perhaps he does clerical work at the FED, an institution he cannot bring himself to say one bad word about. In fact, he more than anyone around here defends everything the FED does. He could be a gofer for one of the FED governors.

3. He has very limited knowledge about basic economic principles, you know like printing money steals from those who engage in productive enterprise.

4. He is basically immoral.

5. Despite his ignorance about fundamental economics he has an unshakable faith in his sense of intellectual self-superiority. He must have studied a soft subject like sociology at an ivy league institution to combine such arrogance and ignorance in one package.

6. He obviously gets angry and defensive when you call him a shill, but he continues to shill anyway. Someone must be paying him for this.

106 posted on 12/29/2011 6:13:17 AM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2
I'll never ever forget these bailouts, which started under Bush...

And Toddster here was defending them then as he is now. This is not ignorance. It is the arrogance of a corrupt organization that believes you can do nothing to shake them as they grasp for more and more. We "need" them. Funny how things worked just fine when every good parent took their little boys and girls to the local S&L (remember when we used to have S&Ls back before a bunch of folks including a Bush took down the S&L industry) to deposit their savings (remember when we used to have savings) in a savings account (back before people had money market accounts), and back before Arthure Burns and Jimmy Carter made a cruel joke of saving (actually Carter gets a bit of a bum rap for this since it was LBJ's Great Society and Nixon who really got going the business of spending more than we had). And remember when the local S&L manager made mortgage loans to homebuyers which were sound investments for the bank because with 20% downpayments and a good employment record and clear knowledge of local conditions, the mortgage was secure.

Sure, we need banks. The world has always had banks, even back when it was Jewish bankers sitting on a bench in teh public square. But we don't need these kinds of banks, an entire financial services industry consuming an ever bigger portion of the world's economic output while they ruin everyone else (boy is that an old song too, part of the collapse of the Roman empire and Greek city states among other things).

107 posted on 12/29/2011 6:25:34 AM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson
if the government would just print a bunch of money and spread it around we would all be rich.

Who said that? Where?

This is not ignorance, since it has been pointed out before.

Please explain how $16 trillion loaned and paid back, with interest, reduces my paycheck or causes inflation or harms me in any way.

108 posted on 12/29/2011 8:58:31 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner
I’m trying to discern your motive.

Motive for what? Trying to reduce the ignorance on these subjects?

It’s as if you supported TARP.

I did.

Then you reconcile it with, they all paid it back.

The banks paid back their portion, at a profit to the Treasury.

I figure with a few choice investments, I could pay the govt back while making a mill or two.

Which choice investments would you have made?

109 posted on 12/29/2011 9:02:03 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

LOL!


110 posted on 12/29/2011 9:04:00 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Please explain how $16 trillion loaned and paid back, with interest, reduces my paycheck or causes inflation or harms me in any way.

Ever heard of free market enterprise, where businesses compete against each other, for their share of the market?

For all I know, you may work for the govt. In that case, what I am about to say, will be alien, to you.

In a free market economy, the fed.gov is not Constitutionally authorized to pick and choose winners. I saw where you admitted you supported TARP.

What? You can't support a free market economy-capitalism, and support the fed.gov picking winners, and losers, with taxpayer money.

No, you personally may not have been harmed. And investors in those failing corps, which were "bailed out," may have suffered less. But my FRiend, that's socialism. I'm a free market capitalist. Where the market picks winners, and losers. Not the fed.gov.

If I make a bad investment, and I have, the fed.gov will not loan me the money, to give me a chance to recover my losses. Since I am NOT "too big to fail." But it does, and has, for others. You admittedly support this socialism. I support capitalism, and am vehemently opposed to socialism/communism.

111 posted on 12/29/2011 10:32:59 AM PST by takenoprisoner (Constitutional Conservatism is Americanism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner
Ever heard of free market enterprise, where businesses compete against each other, for their share of the market?

I have heard of free market enterprise.

Does that have anything to do with you avoiding the explanation I asked for?

For all I know, you may work for the govt.

I don't.

I saw where you admitted you supported TARP.

Yes.

What? You can't support a free market economy-capitalism, and support the fed.gov picking winners, and losers, with taxpayer money.

The government was supporting the banking system. To prevent a repeat of the massive wave of bank failures we suffered during the Great Depression.

112 posted on 12/29/2011 11:23:19 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner
Todd's crony capitalist sympathies are all too clear.

He defends bailing out bankers by the societal need to bail out banks, as if the two are the same. Had strict oversight of failing banks been established, had bonuses been eliminated for a reasonable time (5 years) at any rescued institution (and that includes Goldman Sachs who were bailed out by bailing out AIG), and base salaries set at reasonable levels, had the federal government taken and maintained substantial equity positions in the bailed out institutions, we could have some sympathy for the position that the banking system needed to be saved.

Of course folks will whine that the government cannot competently run and own banks. Well, OK, but, it turns out the bankers who were entrusted with running the banking system were just as incompetent, and worse, racked off fortunes in the process. Greenspan admitted that his mistake was to believe that so-called private enterprise would not do what private enterprise had already been doing before everyone's eyes, including his own.

113 posted on 12/30/2011 6:34:03 AM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot; takenoprisoner
The government was supporting the banking system

This semantic distortion is what I mean by your dishonest and transparent shilling. The government was not supporting the "banking system." The Federal Reserve was supporting a small number of very large banks. The former is the excuse. As we have been learning ever more and more, the point of the exercies, the purchase of congressional votes, the stuffing of cabinet agencies was all done for a few banks. If others got a few crumbs, well it is an old trading rule that you leave some profit on the table for the other guy.

You, and those for whom you are a shill, try to portray this as a win-win. But as the enormity of the cost of all of this becomes apparent, it is obvious that the American public have lost, big time. My initial reaction to Paulson's ploy to get TARP remains. Give us $700 B (it turned out to be a lot more than that as we have seen), or we will take down the US economy.

Your defense of a bunch of high priced looters is immoral.

114 posted on 12/30/2011 6:42:06 AM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson
The government was supporting the banking system. They supported large and small banks alike. Enormity of the cost? The bank portion of TARP was repaid, at a profit. The Fed short term loans were repaid, with interest. The only loss from TARP will be from the auto portion, the mortgage modification (giveaway) portion, and the money used to prop up Fannie and Freddie.

Paulson claimed "we will take down the US economy"? LOL!

The only thing funnier than your ignorance is your poor memory.

115 posted on 12/30/2011 9:08:34 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

The arrogance with which you shill for your lords and masters is just astonishing. The facts simply do not support your claims.


116 posted on 12/30/2011 5:38:30 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

Which of my claims is incorrect?


117 posted on 12/30/2011 6:58:30 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

By my standard, anyone who supported TARP is a socialist. It was unconstitutional, and corrupted.


118 posted on 12/30/2011 7:26:32 PM PST by takenoprisoner (Constitutional Conservatism is Americanism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Re. That book is full of stupid, silly errors.

Creature from Jekyll Island? Enlighten me. I can check the chapter and verse if you'll spell it out.

119 posted on 01/03/2012 1:38:59 PM PST by GWConservative ( No PACs electstephens.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GWConservative

He thinks banks create money out of thin air.

He thinks banks don’t want you to repay your loan.

He thinks that when you default on a loan, the bank doesn’t care, because they created the money out of thin air.

He thinks a bank with a $100 deposit can make a $900 loan.


120 posted on 01/03/2012 6:08:48 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

You haven’t read the book.


121 posted on 01/03/2012 9:11:34 PM PST by GWConservative ( No PACs electstephens.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: GWConservative

I did.
OMG, it was awful.


122 posted on 01/03/2012 9:46:38 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: upchuck
I question why there hasn't been any yelling and screaming about this.

Is it because a Republican, Bush, was just as guilty or maybe more so than Obama? Or maybe he is hardly as responsible but is made to look like it so that equal blame is spread around and Obama doesn't take the brunt of it. Or maybe both individuals were puppets of a master and both are equally culpable. Whatever happened we need to find out the breakdown of who was responsible for what and each party needs to be held accountable, whether Bush or Obama. When hands are in the pot from both parties things can get awfully hushed up in a hurry. This game has got to stop being played as it is far, far too expensive.

One can imagine the actual corruption involved and has to also wonder whose individual pockets from all of these organizations is filled with our money. Like the old song, "Where has all our money gone?".

123 posted on 01/04/2012 7:08:04 PM PST by Bellflower
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
How is money that the Fed loaned out, that has been repaid, with interest, add to the debt that taxpayers are "accountable for"?

I think that you may be confusing the loans that were made to USA banks and companies that have in part been paid back. This is different. These are secret loans to foreign banks etc. that apparently were made at 0% interest, and have not been paid back. These were loans made without our knowledge. Sure USA banks and companies are suppose to have paid back loans, it is the foreigners that don't have to worry about giving us trillions back. This Country almost always bends over way backwards for foreigners who don't pay our taxes. Nothing is too much to give to them.

124 posted on 01/04/2012 7:35:01 PM PST by Bellflower
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Bellflower
I think that you may be confusing the loans that were made to USA banks and companies that have in part been paid back.

You mean TARP? Loans from the Treasury? The bank portion of which has been repaid at a profit to the Treasury?

This is different. These are secret loans to foreign banks etc

Secret? They were included in the Fed balance sheet which is released weekly.

that apparently were made at 0% interest

According to who?

and have not been paid back.

Except for this idiot, I've never seen that claim. You have a real source?

it is the foreigners that don't have to worry about giving us trillions back.

Us? Who do you think made these loans? How do you think they worked? Spell it out please.

125 posted on 01/04/2012 9:06:27 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Thank you for offering specificity here.

I just read on email [yeah, almost a year later] that tried to make it seem that we are out 16 trillion in unpaid debt to Europe, the assumption being tax money.

You said that the Fed creates trillions. Simply from interest despite defaults? Is that linked with quantitative easing? Or do they order the printing of money? I’m baffled by the Fed Reserve to be honest.


126 posted on 09/12/2012 4:22:18 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (George Washington: [Government] is a dangerous servant and a terrible master.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: GWConservative

I received an email recently that mirrors this January report. I know that QE2 was related to a European bailout. They keep the loans secrect. You read a book about this? What’s the title/author?


127 posted on 09/12/2012 4:52:39 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (George Washington: [Government] is a dangerous servant and a terrible master.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
that tried to make it seem that we are out 16 trillion in unpaid debt to Europe,

Nope.

the assumption being tax money.

No, the Fed creates money out of thin air, no need to take it from taxpayers.

You said that the Fed creates trillions. Simply from interest despite defaults?

Interest and defaults have nothing to do with it. Central banks can simply create money from thin air.

Is that linked with quantitative easing?

Yes, when the Fed creates money and uses it to buy bonds in huge quantities, that is quantitative easing.

Or do they order the printing of money?

Most of the money they created recently was electronic, no ink or paper needed.

128 posted on 09/12/2012 4:57:26 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Thank you for the info. So we now have QE3....


129 posted on 09/13/2012 11:11:50 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (George Washington: [Government] is a dangerous servant and a terrible master.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-129 last

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