Community | August 31, 2009 | 22 comments

U.S. Sees a Profit As Big Banks Repay Bailout Money

Image
jh64487
I don't think some people ever understood that the 1/3 of the bailouts given to companies was going to be returned to the US government. 1/3 is for infrastructure and job creation (which is necessary) and 1/3 is a tax cut for you (which is why i'm perplexed by the right being so apoplectic). honestly, i don't fully understand economics and it's not time to be skipping to our individual loo's. that said, we are starting to see glimmers (and pretty darn quickly too).

so...yay!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nearly a year after the federal rescue of the nation’s biggest banks, taxpayers have begun seeing profits from the hundreds of billions of dollars in aid that many critics thought might never be seen again.

The profits, collected from eight of the biggest banks that have fully repaid their obligations to the government, come to about $4 billion, or the equivalent of about 15 percent annually, according to calculations compiled for The New York Times.

These early returns are by no means a full accounting of the huge financial rescue undertaken by the federal government last year to stabilize teetering banks and other companies.

The government still faces potentially huge long-term losses from its bailouts of the insurance giant American International Group, the mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the automakers General Motors and Chrysler. The Treasury Department could also take a hit from its guarantees on billions of dollars of toxic mortgages.

But the mere hint of bailout profits for the nearly year-old Troubled Asset Relief Program has been received as a welcome surprise. It has also spurred hopes that the government could soon get out of the banking business.

“The taxpayers want their money back and they want the government out of our banking system,” Representative Jeb Hensarling, a Texas Republican and a member of the Congressional Oversight Panel examining the relief program, said in an interview.

Profits were hardly high on the list of government priorities last October, when a financial panic was in full swing and the Treasury Department started spending roughly $240 billion to buy preferred shares from hundreds of banks that were facing huge potential losses from troubled mortgages. Bank stocks began teetering after Lehman Brothers collapsed and the government rescued A.I.G., and fear gripped the financial industry around the world.
  1. groups:
    Community,   US Politics,   Greatest Depression,   YWR,   2 more
  2. tags:
    Economy Obama US News Bailout 2 more
  3.     
    |

22 comments // U.S. Sees a Profit As Big Banks Repay Bailout Money

  • JohnA
  • kennymotown
  • stephenk29111
    • 0
      stephenk29111  
    • the funny thing is, after we bailed out the banks what did they do? jacked up interest rates, have now people are defaulting on their credit card debt because they can't pay the new rates in time, and are stuck making just interest only payments, For example, on the Daily Show, John Stewart even pointed out that 1 such company (Bank of America) had jacked up their interest rates by over 300% on credit card holders. That's insane and shouldn't be allowed to happen. But as expected the government allowed these companies to run free and didn't have enough oversight to stop things like this. Also again bank of America, this was another story on current awhile ago, refuses to pay back 4million or so, due to the paperwork not being properly signed by the government. That's just pure lunacy.

    • 3 years ago
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  
    • Hilarious. This is incredibly good news, and all the right wing can do is bitch and politicize it while coming up with NO solutions to the problems we still face.

      If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem, and probably need to fuck off.

    • 3 years ago
  • WakeUpPeople
    • 0
      WakeUpPeople  
    • Funny that people are mad when the govt bails out these institutions, and then they are mad when the money is paid back with interest. (That's money that goes toward paying off the deficit. That means less money for you and I to have to pay in the end.) It's the same as being mad that you gave someone $5 and they turned around and gave you $7. I can hear it now, "I shouldn't have had to pay you $5 in the first place. :( *whimper." These are the same people that - if we hadn't done the bailouts - would be whining that the govt didn't do anything to prevent the 2nd great depression. You can't win with some people.

    • 3 years ago
  • libertyforall
  • WakeUpPeople
    • 0
      WakeUpPeople  
    • WakeUpPeople:

      You mean the ones that haven't paid their debt back YET? And according to this article there are 9 that have paid the loan back and 4 that have not. So you appear to be skewing the facts to fit YOUR agenda. A 9 to 4 ratio is nothing close to 1 to 5. I will however submit that the largest recipients of the loans have yet to repay, but it seems to make sense that the larger loans would take more time to repay. Luckily for all of us, their debt will not just disappear.

    • 3 years ago
  • libertyforall
    • 0
      libertyforall  
    • You have to love the spin from the MSM who are in Obama's pocket.

      Claiming they saw a profit is absolutely hilarious. If I paid 5 people $5, and one person gave me $6 in return, that doesn't mean I made a profit. What about the other 4 people who still have to pay me back their money.

      Let's say they did make a profit. Where is that money going? Back into the government coffers so they can waste it on another useless program.

      Anything for the statists to defend the illegal Federal Reserve and the government's wasteful spending.

    • 3 years ago
  • masterzip
  • Ares
  • s0uthc0ast
    • 0
      s0uthc0ast  
    • Yup, BIG government, making BIG profits from BIG campaign contributors.
      So, where's the (feigned) outrage?

      Indeed laugh out loud funny watching the hypocrites profit from what they criticized.

      This is hope and change?

    • 3 years ago
  • InformedTexan
    • 0
      InformedTexan  
    • "A Congressional oversight panel concluded in February that the Treasury paid an average of 34 percent more than the estimated fair value of the assets it received."

      That in itself is disconcerting as the government can't act as a good member of a economic market when all of the members aren't necessarily profit-seeking. This dead-weight loss will be felt on the tax-payers. Hopefully such actions will end up beneficial in the long run, otherwise, the government will merely have wasted (again).

    • 3 years ago
  • outtheinside
    • 0
      outtheinside  
    • InformedTexan:

      I'd like to see you try and measure the dead-weight loss here. Seeing as the overpayment was on purpose to prop up the financial system and stop it's collapse, the dead-weight loss is non-existent.
      Moreover, prices on loans have nothing to do with dead-weight loss. If you wanted to argue that all the government spending would lead to later losses in taxpayer wealth, I couldn't really disagree with you - yet; however, to say calculated overpayments for loans to prop up the entire financial system have led to a dead-weight loss after repayment and profit taking by the taxpayers is incorrect.

    • 3 years ago
  • outtheinside
    • 0
      outtheinside  
    • Even though it's preliminary, it's still better than expected. I'm just happy to know that the government's hands are steadily creeping back out of the system. I'm also glad it worked and will be using this information against anyone who says the government shouldn't have stepped into the system or were trying to permanently take it over (wack-o's). It's obvious it was needed and evident that it was correct. Now let's just be hopeful for the rest of the banks and auto industry. And also, does anyone know how much the total amount is that we spent bailing out the auto-industry? I'm wondering right now what the net would be if we completely lost that investment (which i'm hoping and almost positive we haven't) after the $4B gain.

    • 3 years ago
  • kurthsb27
  • MotherForTruth
  • jkudurog
    • 0
      jkudurog  
    • I personally think there is a bigger problem. Half of these companies needed bailout money because they are crappy companies. We are capitalists only when we are winning and when we are losing.... well we give our gimp car companies and banks all the money they need to keep doing the same shitty job.

      This may be working.... it better be with all the money they spent... but it didn't fix the problem. Ford, GM and Chevy are all still making overpriced shit. We will have a worse economic downturn when this money runs out. I hope I'm wrong but you just can't create money from thin air and then expect everything to go along as it was.

      We will all be paying for this in the form of tax increases in the future. Also, inflation in the US over the next 10 years will be unreal. We need to stop being so shortsighted and stop rewarding failure. It's OK to tell someone they did a shitty job if it's shitty.

    • 3 years ago
  • jh64487
  • Pedroptz
  • outtheinside
    • 0
      outtheinside  
    • jkudurog:

      Even the best economists in the world aren't purporting to know what inflation will be like in 10 years. They all have theories and it's obvious that if they thought it would be unreal, they would be taking steps today to change it. I really dislike when people put forth information - especially on inflation due it's only short-term predictability - that they can't know.

    • 3 years ago
  • jh64487
    • 0
      jh64487  
    • I can't remember, is japan in the same recession that was called the "lost decade" or is this a new recession they're in? maybe we'll only have to call it a "lost year or two"

      here's hopin

    • 3 years ago
  • outtheinside
    • 0
      outtheinside  
    • jh64487:

      Argentina and many other Latin American countries were involved in what is known as the lost decade in the 1980's. Japan had a deep recession starting late 1980's to about '94 and it was just considered a really deep and contagious recession with years of stagnation. It's brought up because it was a financial/banking problem similar to ours, but our situation is nothing compared to the lost decade which had to do with protectionism and hyperinflation. Just an fyi.

    • 3 years ago
more from Community:

top videos