Banks Earned $13 Billion on Secret Loans from the Fed

B

Bonestorm

Thrillhouse
Capitalism rocks!

The Federal Reserve and the big banks fought for more than two years to keep details of the largest bailout in U.S. history a secret. Now, the rest of the world can see what it was missing.

The Fed didn’t tell anyone which banks were in trouble so deep they required a combined $1.2 trillion on Dec. 5, 2008, their single neediest day. Bankers didn’t mention that they took tens of billions of dollars in emergency loans at the same time they were assuring investors their firms were healthy. And no one calculated until now that banks reaped an estimated $13 billion of income by taking advantage of the Fed’s below-market rates, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its January issue.

Saved by the bailout, bankers lobbied against government regulations, a job made easier by the Fed, which never disclosed the details of the rescue to lawmakers even as Congress doled out more money and debated new rules aimed at preventing the next collapse.

A fresh narrative of the financial crisis of 2007 to 2009 emerges from 29,000 pages of Fed documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and central bank records of more than 21,000 transactions. While Fed officials say that almost all of the loans were repaid and there have been no losses, details suggest taxpayers paid a price beyond dollars as the secret funding helped preserve a broken status quo and enabled the biggest banks to grow even bigger.
Click to expand...


Basically, the Fed is willing to take extraordinary measures to save the banksters but thinks three years of 9+% unemployment that is expected to continue for the foreseeable future doesn't warrant any meaningful response at all.

Anyone who claims that the system isn't rigged in favor of the 1% is either an idiot or a liar.


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html
 
Dungheap said:
Capitalism rocks!

Basically, the Fed is willing to take extraordinary measures to save the banksters but thinks three years of 9+% unemployment that is expected to continue for the foreseeable future doesn't warrant any meaningful response at all.

Anyone who claims that the system isn't rigged in favor of the 1% is either an idiot or a liar.


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html
Click to expand...

Speaking of liars.... you might want to address the thread title.... LIAR...
 
Emperor Septimius Severus said:
Anyways, this is a perfectly good reason to back Ron-anti FED-Paul.
Click to expand...


Thanks for making the change.

I disagree on the Ron Paul thing. The way I see it, the problem isn't that the FED made the loans, it's that (1) the FED didn't take an equity stake in those receiving the loans (and kicking the guys in charge of the institutions -- looking at you, Jamie Dimon -- out on their asses) and (2) the FED isn't doing anything meaningful to address the unemployment problem. In short, the problem isn't that the FED did anything, it's that the FED didn't do enough. Abolishing the FED doesn't solve that problem.

Also, the gold standard is stupid.
 
Dungheap said:
Thanks for making the change.

I disagree on the Ron Paul thing. The way I see it, the problem isn't that the FED made the loans, it's that (1) the FED didn't take an equity stake in those receiving the loans (and kicking the guys in charge of the institutions -- looking at you, Jamie Dimon -- out on their asses) and (2) the FED isn't doing anything meaningful to address the unemployment problem. In short, the problem isn't that the FED did anything, it's that the FED didn't do enough. Abolishing the FED doesn't solve that problem.

Also, the gold standard is stupid.
Click to expand...

Eh, I'm kinda wedged on the gold standard. I don't entirely agree with it, but I very much agree with ending the FED. The whole concept of it simply boggles the mind.
 
Eye said:
so now dunghole thinks 13 billion is alot of money

LOL
Click to expand...


$13 billion is a lot of money for banks that would otherwise have failed to make on virtually zero interest loans from the government.


By the way, it's hilarious that you once again have exactly nothing to say about the topic at hand and instead comment about other posters. Doesn't that get old? I suppose it's better than a "you know who else made a lot of money" post.
 
Dungheap said:
$13 billion is a lot of money for banks that would otherwise have failed to make on virtually zero interest loans from the government.


By the way, it's hilarious that you once again have exactly nothing to say about the topic at hand and instead comment about other posters. Doesn't that get old? I suppose it's better than a "you know who else made a lot of money" post.
Click to expand...

That is a crapload of loans that they would have to make considering it is nearly zero interest. I hate BS like this. And this is no form of "free market", the government picking winners and losers is not an example of any sort of free market. In a free market these banks would have failed and stronger institutions would have picked their bones.
 
Dungheap said:
$13 billion is a lot of money for banks that would otherwise have failed to make on virtually zero interest loans from the government.


By the way, it's hilarious that you once again have exactly nothing to say about the topic at hand and instead comment about other posters. Doesn't that get old? I suppose it's better than a "you know who else made a lot of money" post.
Click to expand...

dumbass....i commented expressly on the thread topic :pke:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top