Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

how big was the wall street bailout? this big:

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 02:21 AM
Original message
how big was the wall street bailout? this big:



The collapse of the U.S. housing bubble led directly to the largest industry bailout in U.S. history. While it will be many years yet before we can put a hard number to the amount of taxpayer dollars actually lost in the bailout, the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) has developed an assessment of the dollars disbursed in the bailout that graphically illustrates the extraordinary lengths to which the federal government has gone to bail out the financial sector...

CMDs total for taxpayer dollars that have gone out the door to date: $4.7 trillion, with $2 trillion still outstanding as of June 2010.

This assessment of dollars disbursed demonstrates that the hotly contested $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (aka TARP) was only a small portion of the funds that the U.S. government rapidly deployed to aid the financial sector. Without Congressional discussion or debate, the Fed has provided the bulk of the money in the form of loans and purchases of toxic assets and other securities that mayor may notbe sellable, amounting to 80% of the $4.7 trillion.

And contrary to popular belief, the bailout continues unabated as the Fed pumps money into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, amounting to a $1.6 trillion stealth bailout. The full accounting for the various Fed programs is still murky, as the Fed has fought court battle after court battle to prevent the release of information regarding certain programs. Hopefully the unprecedented Federal Reserve audit provided for in the 2010 financial-reform package will finally shed light on these Secrets of the Temple.

http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2010/0710bottar...


To put that in perspective, the entire social security trust fund = $2.6 trillion, & that's 30 years plus worth of money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fogonthelake Donating Member (198 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 02:26 AM
Response to Original message
1. It is all so sickening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Make7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 02:31 AM
Response to Original message
2. Where does the money come from that the Federal Reserve loans out? ( n/t )
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. your labor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Make7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 03:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. Am I supposed to be sending them checks periodically?
By what mechanism is my labor turning into money for the Federal Reserve?
 
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Your labor makes enough goods and services that their increasing of the money supply...
...doesn't lead to a large amount of inflation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Make7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. Then why is the Consumer Price Index venturing into negative terrritory?
Shouldn't the substantial increase in the money supply be causing inflation? Or is there little to no inflation because the current production of goods and services have increased substantially to match the increase in money supply?
 
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. ...
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 04:00 PM by Hannah Bell
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #17
24. Because productivity has gone up way ahead of consumption
Simply having a bunch of rich people sitting on cash (which is what has happened) doesn't really do much to inflation. So we've had massive productivity increases lately with a pretty temperate money supply policy, and that money itself hasn't had any velocity lately (inflation is a function of money's "momentum", if you will, not just its amount).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #17
30. Because there hasn't been an increase in money supply
The "money multiplier" model is broken.

That should be everyone's first clue that the neo-classical, neo-liberal economic theory our government officials cling to is thoroughly flawed.

Money is created on the demand-side, not the supply-side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 06:12 AM
Response to Reply #30
40. Well...
If we literally handed everyone in the US a million dollars, it's hard to imagine there would be no inflation.

Or do you mean inflation doesn't occur on the goods and services supply-side? (I had read that as the "money supply-side".) Then again. maybe there's an intrinsic demand for money, and $1,000,000 exceeds it, so handing out money below that level isn't inflationary (I think there needs to be a lot more handing out of money than there is, in general).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. your labor = the future production that gives value to the expanded money supply.
you & all the other workers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Make7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #19
29. I guess I'm still not clear on the term "taxpayer dollars" as used in the OP.
That's why I asked the question in my first post.

In the opening post it states that "taxpayer dollars that have gone out the door to date: $4.7 trillion" yet "the Fed has provided the bulk of the money in the form of loans and purchases of toxic assets and other securities that may—or may not—be sellable, amounting to 80% of the $4.7 trillion."

When I hear the term "taxpayer dollars", it makes me think it is government money acquired through taxes. But the money that the Federal Reserve provided was not government funds from taxpayers, so it doesn't seem to make sense to say $4.7 trillion in taxpayer dollars if 80% of it isn't from taxpayers.

So I wondering how exactly that 80% that isn't taxpayer dollars personally costs me money. If for some reason I do not pay any Federal taxes, would any of the cost for this bailout money even affect me?
 
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 02:04 AM
Response to Reply #29
32. Taxes don't actually fund spending at the federal level.
Taxes primarily serve to prevent widespread inflation by increasing demand for our fiat currency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hydra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 02:37 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. The same place the derivitives came from
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 02:37 AM by Hydra
As Hannah said, you labor- or rather, your PROJECTED labor. They spin money out of nothing and expect you to pay it back later after you've earned it from them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. yes, *projected*. important addition, thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lagomorph Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 06:09 AM
Response to Reply #2
39. A lot of it simply disappears...
...when they buy negative assets. They don't actually print up all that money and send it out, it's numbers that get moved around. The bank gets a positive number, the tax payers get a negative one. The books are balanced, but the taxpayers have a lot of IOU's to pay off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turborama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 02:35 AM
Response to Original message
4. K&R Thanks for the very informative graphic & info
I wonder how long it will take to recover the remaining $2 trillion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 02:45 AM
Response to Original message
7. Bush and Rove engineered this one to be a big fat GOP slush fund,.
Note how no one at DU is paying attention to the big story about how banksters are spending bailout money on Republicans.

Once the fuss dies down in a day or two, I am going to ressurect this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 03:06 AM
Response to Original message
8. Kick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 03:15 AM
Response to Original message
10. And the administration is frustrated with "the left"...
tough shit. I just hope the election turns out better than it looks right now.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalla Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 03:22 AM
Response to Original message
11. Wow. I'm going to save this for tomorrow when I'm more awake.
:wow: Thanks for posting this...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynzM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
13. This is Crazy looking...
It manages to make the war funds look *small*.... oy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blindpig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
14. The Business of America is Business

It sure as hell ain't the welfare of it's citizens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
15. Robert Reich recently wrote why TARP was a failure, so did Dean Baker
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
16. kr
remember when the cat food commission makes its recs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
20. How can Tim Geithner sleep at night?
Especially when corruption in public office is treason. Guess that's when Holder would say serving as chair of the NY Fed is really a private sector job. Sure seems to pay like one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. Good thing we don't actually prosecute treason anymore.
Well, not for the important people, of course!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
21. Austerity my ass.
Jesus, if they'd pumped that into schools, communities and other things in the commons...I don't even want to think about it. This makes me sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
22. But remember; they'll pay it back. 0.66 cents worth of stock on every dollar!
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 05:29 PM by Lorien
What a deal!!! :sarcasm: < (as if it were needed).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
23. Okay, so its pretty clear that we are all SUCKERS.
We've also shown we'll take just about anything.

I predict much more pain. MUCH more.
The criminals are running our government, and NO ONE will stop them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maryf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
26. K&Rnt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
27. $7.2 trillion, according to this:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 11:37 PM
Response to Original message
28. Makes me ill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snazzy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 02:03 AM
Response to Original message
31. good thing we held someone accountable
oh wait...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 02:09 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. What? You don't think Fabulous Fabrizio Tourre..
was the sole brain behind the entire operation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snazzy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 02:40 AM
Response to Reply #33
35. so odd that I had to look him up


"He served excellent liquor", per:

http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/topic/65634 /

----

No more Campbell Apartment martinis for me. Damn, I thought I was tuned in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 04:41 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. He was small time..
Edited on Thu Aug-12-10 04:42 AM by girl gone mad
but this is probably the biggest fish we'll see fried.

eta: well, not even fried, really. Steamed? Sashimi-ed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snazzy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 05:42 AM
Response to Reply #37
38. gently poached in a fine vintage
I could really take the whole fish thing and run with it, probably should. I'm losing the class war quick.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 02:11 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. Yeah, remember all those trials with the fatcat banksters & hedgies being frogmarched into court
snarling and spitting at the cameras and judge? That was a raw spectacle for the nation to witness, and little tawdry on all sides. But hopefully the next generation, and the one still in power, all learned from it that crime doesn't pay.

Oh right, that's something that happened in one of my dreams.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snazzy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 02:59 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. wow same dream
Weird weird weird.

And so wrong. I feel guilty for even dreaming it--let us send a little more tax-payer funded assistance so they don't feel "dirty" and know that they have our unconditional love. I got the mighty Schum's on speed-dial, so just hit my pay pal if you're with me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 06:19 AM
Response to Original message
41. That is a ridiculous misrepresentation of the size of the bailouts.
Edited on Thu Aug-12-10 06:21 AM by BzaDem
You are counting loans and purchases of toxic assets as part of the bailout, dollar per dollar. That doesn't even remotely resemble reality.

If you were actually interested in an accurate count, you would only be able to count the money the Fed LOSES on loans (not ALL loans), and the amount the toxic asset purchases were overvalued (not the ENTIRE pool of toxic asset purchase prices).

You are essentially assuming all loans will fail and all toxic assets are valued at 0, and that is an assumption completely divorced from reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 07:35 AM
Response to Reply #41
42. Of course it is.
But facts and common sense don't matter to the "in crowd."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-12-10 07:39 AM
Response to Original message
43. Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jul 24th 2014, 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC