On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:57:08 +0000, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money back
along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

So, I guess they didn't need the money after all. Either that, or their
greed is unabated.

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 07:14:10 -0600, thunder
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:57:08 +0000, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


Interesting side bar - Goldman Sachs is preparing to give the money back
along with BOA, Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks.

So, I guess they didn't need the money after all. Either that, or their
greed is unabated.

Six of the nine "big" banks originally balked at taking TARP funds if
you remember - they didn't ask for it. They were forced into it. They
didn't expect that to happen - they expected the original purpose of
TARP which was the purchase of trouble assets - You know, like it's
name - Troubled Asset Relief Program?

Remember the "locked room" meeting with Geithner and Paulson when this
all happened a few months ago? They were basically told you wll take
the money.

Well, they did and now they want to give it back because they didn't
need it in the first place, didn't want it and were given it anyway.

You guys need to stop watching CNN and watch CNBC. :)


--

Chaos! Panic! Disaster! (My work here is done)

On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:22:01 GMT, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:



Well, they did and now they want to give it back because they didn't
need it in the first place, didn't want it and were given it anyway.

You guys need to stop watching CNN and watch CNBC. :)

Oh, poor wittle bankers were "forced" to the gov titty.
But oddly enough,
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...toM&refer=home
"Declined Government Funds
More than 30 banks refused to sell preferred shares and warrants to
the government under TARP. Joe Conners, chief financial officer of
Philadelphia-based Beneficial Mutual Bancorp Inc., said his bank
declined TARP money in part because of the amendment."

The reality appears to be that no bank was "forced" to take money.
That's bank PR to keeps share prices up.
But it ain't working too good.
They took the money because they are in trouble with toxic assets.
Those toxic assets are now OUR problem.
Easy solution anyway for the whining banks.
QUIT WHINING AND PAY THE F**KING MONEY BACK.
I got no problem with that.
But they won't/can't.
All the lying and whining by the money crowd attached to the gov titty
is shrill to the ears. Very unbecoming.
The whole TARP idea just was just another Wall Street scam anyway,
whatever its original intended method to bail out the banks.
They should have been left to fail, and solvent, honest, conservative
lenders would have filled in, with gov funds if liquidity was needed
to keep things from getting bad faster than they already have.
Credit was never frozen because of lack of capital.
Good borrowers were gone - and still are - because EVERYBODY HAS
TAPPED OUT THEIR CREDIT.
The borrowers are TAPPED OUT.
Oh, there are some qualified borrowers, but not nearly enough to
maintain the fantasy money bubble.
I won't even get into consumer debt - anybody can google to find out
what a hole the U.S. population is in.
I think it's close to $3 trillion, and that doesn't include mortgages.
Paulson is a f**king idiot, which makes him an ideal representative
for Wall Street. Can't even identify its holdings.
The money party is over, my friend.
Time to pay the piper.
The chickens have come home to roost.
What goes around comes around.
The U.S. is now officially a welfare state.
Socialism is here.
But, you can blame it on Canada.
Of course I may be all wrong here.
So there's still hope!

--Vic

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...


The U.S. is now officially a welfare state.
Socialism is here.
But, you can blame it on Canada.
Of course I may be all wrong here.
So there's still hope!


Keep the faith. Some are trying desperately hard to prevent the final nail
from being driven.

Eisboch