Bailout could exceed $23.7 TRILLION

jimpeel

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
Better get some larger, higher speed motors for those printing presses.

SOURCE

Watchdog: Financial Bailout Support Could Reach $23.7 Trillion
The total price tag for federal support stemming from the financial crisis could reach $23.7 trillion in the long run, the government's top bailout watchdog says in a new report to Congress.

FOXNews.com

Monday, July 20, 2009

The total price tag for federal support stemming from the financial crisis could reach $23.7 trillion in the long run, the government's top bailout watchdog says in a new report to Congress.

Neil Barofsky, the inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, plans to deliver his report Tuesday to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The $23.7 trillion figure is admittedly a high-ball number and reflects the total potential gross exposure, but Barofsky in his prepared testimony notes that the TARP -- which started as a $700 billion bailout -- has expanded well beyond that.

"TARP has evolved into a program of unprecedented scope, scale and complexity. Moreover, TARP does not function in a vacuum but is rather part of the broader government efforts to stabilize the financial system," the report says.

"The total potential federal government support could reach up to $23.7 trillion," the report estimates, factoring in commitments from "dozens of programs" implemented throughout the federal government since 2007.

In supporting documentation obtained by FOXNews.com, the inspector general's office explains that the $23.7 trillion spans about 50 "initiatives or programs" created by federal agencies in the wake of the economic crisis.

The estimate covers commitments that could come from programs at the Federal Reserve, Treasury Department, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Federal Housing Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs and other agencies.

It notes that the total "financial exposure" of TARP and related programs alone could reach $3 trillion.

While not a firm or official figure, the estimate has the potential to send lawmakers into sticker shock.

"The potential financial commitment the American taxpayers could be responsible for is of a size and scope that isn't even imaginable," Rep. Darrell Issa, ranking Republican on the oversight committee, said in a written statement. "If you spent a million dollars a day going back to the birth of Christ, that wouldn't even come close to just $1 trillion -- $23.7 trillion is a staggering figure."

In the report, Barofsky also says that the Treasury Department has "repeatedly failed" to adopt recommendations that his office believes will bring more transparency and accountability to the execution of the bailout.
Click to expand...
 
One man & his pet democrats spent more in one sitting than all other Presidents/Congress' combined.
 
"If you spent a million dollars a day going back to the birth of Christ, that wouldn't even come close to just $1 trillion
Click to expand...

$733,285,000,000 to be exact. Not even 3/4 of a trillion.
 
I'm glad that you at least bolded the part that dozens of these programs date back to LONG before President Obama cam into power.
 
I counted NINE TIMES, just in that little quoted snippet where it said "could" or "estimated" or "is a highball number". I am not going to say the situation isn't grave, but this is more of the same republican scare tactics, and not totally reality based.
 
Jim, that's incorrect. Obama is serious about saving money, that's why he's cutting our defense budget.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/22/business/22defense.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&src=igw

Now the number is down to $23,698,250,000,000. Everyone talking about excessive government spending, shame on you. Look how much he cut the budget by! We shouldn't be wasting money on our military, when there's jobs to be "saved or created" at private corporations.

I guess Boeing and Lockheed Martin didn't hire as good lobbyists as UAW did.
 
He didn't cut the budget, Altron... he just stated that they can have their budget as long as they don't buy those particular planes.

Frankly, at $250Million per plane..it makes sense not to.
 
It's hypocritical that he's throwing all this money at the car companies, the banks, state and local governments, but then cuts some planes from the military budgets. If you're going to be slinging the dough around to "jump start the economy" then do it fairly across the board, don't just do it to the specific companies that bribe you the most. Billions have gone into developing these aircraft, and they're halting the production after 187 of them. But I guess Boeing and Lockheed Martin are fiscally responsible, so they get punished for it.

If they wanted govt money, they should have pissed all their earnings away on bullshit then gone into massive debt. Who do they think they are, developing a product for a customer, then managing their finances correctly to avoid bankruptcy, then their only customer cancels the order? Like it or not, Obama seems more interested in rewarding failing companies than supporting successful ones. What personal grudge does he have against the F-22? It's completely insane for the president to say "You can spend as much as you want, as long as you don't buy any F-22s". That's not effective leadership.
 
It's about putting the money where it's needed. He's not punishing Boeing and Lockheed Martin, he's just not buying stuff from them that we don't need.
 
spike said:
It's about putting the money where it's needed. He's not punishing Boeing and Lockheed Martin, he's just not buying stuff from them that we don't need.
Click to expand...

The Constitution mandates that the government must provide a military force to defend the country. It does not mandate that the government bail out corporations who mismanaged their money and drove themselves into bankruptcy. We don't need to bail out the banks or auto industry either. It's blatantly hypocritical that he's tossing all this money around as fast as he can print it, but then declares an embargo on products from two major American companies.

If Obama wants to reduce government spending, he can slash TARP first. All 'estimated' $23.7 trillion. If, once that's done, he still wants to reduce government spending, then he can get started on the Military.

It's completely misguided that he's re-allocating money from the national defense to hand out to the car companies and the banks.
 
As opposed to all those shares in Gm and Chrysler he bought, .... and gave to the unions.


I'll say it once .... if you've got money, spend it now while it's still worth something. This can't help but rebound in a way that's gonna make post war Germany and Zimbabwe look like a summer picnic. But long term storable food, buy household goods, buy inflation-proof commodities ... anything that can preserve it's value. Don't keep your wealth in a product that's just exponentially multiplied in quantity, with absolutely no increase in backing. That's like the biggest stock split in history, by a company that's already filed chapter 11.
 
Are you saying that buying those F-22s isn't needed to stimulate the economy supported by the aerospace industry?
 
spike said:
It's about putting the money where it's needed.
Click to expand...

Considering that the blue counties in the country got twice(?) the amount of money that was given to red counties, I'd have to assume that Obama felt that the demonicrat party needed the money the most.
 
Employees:

GM has 244,000 employees.
Chrysler has 58,000 employees.
Ford has 88,000 employees.
Total employed by auto industry - 390,000

Boeing has 166,000
Lockheed Martin has 146,000
Northrop Grumman has 124,000
General Dynamics has 93,000
Total employed by defense industry - 529,000

Bailout Money:
GM - $13.4 Billion
Chrysler - $4 Billion
Ford - $0

Boeing - $0
Lockheed Martin - $0
Northrop Grumman - $0
General Dynamics - $0

Hmmm, so the defense industry employs 39% more Americans than the auto industry. The $1.75 Billion for the F-22s would be 10% of the money the auto industry has already recieved. That $17.4 billion dollars has bought us lots of empty promises. That $1.75 billion dollars could have bought us state-of-the-air equipment to keep America safe from terrorism at home and abroad, but it was too much money to spend.

You're right, spike. Why do we need a military, when that money could have been spent buying stocks in bankrupt corporations? Good thing Obama thwarted a right-wing conspiracy to get A MILITARY FORCE THAT PROTECTS US.
 
No biggie. Give our pilots old planes with outdated hardware & maneuverablity. It's ok.
 
Frodo said:
Considering that the blue counties in the country got twice(?) the amount of money that was given to red counties, I'd have to assume that Obama felt that the demonicrat party needed the money the most.
Click to expand...

Got a link to Obama deciding which counties throughout the country get stimulus? :laugh:

Or did some retardlicans say that and you didn't check it?
 
Altron said:
You're right, spike. Why do we need a military, when that money could have been spent buying stocks in bankrupt corporations? Good thing Obama thwarted a right-wing conspiracy to get A MILITARY FORCE THAT PROTECTS US.
Click to expand...

ZOMG WE DON"T HAVE A MILITARY FORCE TO PROTECT US ANYMORE WITHOUT MORE OF THOSE F-22s!!!!^#^!

I think the idea is pretty simple. Companies that were failing due to Bush's economic disaster needed money to stay afloat. We don't need more F-22s.

Kind of an apple/oranges thing.
 
spike said:
Nope, I'm saying there might be more useful ways to spend the money than buying F-22s.
Click to expand...

What, then, is more useful than National defense? Certainly not bailouts.

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress
Click to expand...

Ok, so we can buy F-22s

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.
Click to expand...

But we can't just throw money at whatever companies we want? But... but... :mope::crying5: THAT'S NOT FAIR TO OUR LOBBYISTS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top