Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Monkey
Do they not need it, or are the executives willing to risk the bank's stability in order to get themselves bonuses?
|
lol - you are more pessimistic than me. Many did not need it and only took the money because they were literally forced to by the administration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redux
I dont think it is that simple.
Many of the banks that took TARP money but didnt need it to stay afloat have said the that those funds gave them additional capitol to make loans they would not have otherwise made in a recessionary economy.
|
Some - not sure if it many though. Either way it doesn't matter - those that no longer want it and have not used it, as in the real life example above, should be able to give it back.
Additionally I would think that the administration would want to get their money back as soon as prudently possible. As a taxpayer I recognize that getting the money that is not needed back sooner saves not only that money, but the interest on it as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Monkey
And unfortunately, the "after the fact" legislation is a result primarily of the public outcry that cant distinguish between banks and other financial institutions (like AIG).
|
Since you brought it up, while everyone is bitching and complaining about AIG, Fannie and Freddie paid out more than 200 million in bonuses. Why was that not splashed all over the media for weeks on end? Where is all the outrage from Congress? Where are the special hearings and and and and? Why no outcry over them?