Sunday, January 18, 2009

Stop TARP reported At the Palm Beach Ritz-Carlton last November, John C. Hope III, the chairman of Whitney National Bank in New Orleans, stood before a ballroom full of Wall Street analysts and explained how his bank intended to use its $300 million in federal bailout money. bank intended to use its $300 million in federal bailout money. “Make more loans?” Mr. Hope said. “We’re not going to change our business model or our credit policies to accommodate the needs of the public sector as they see it to have us make more loans.”
In other words the Government was stupid enough to give us this money, but we have no intention of using it for what they hoped we would do, i.e. make more loans.
.... many banks that have received bailout money so far are reluctant to lend, worrying that if new loans go bad, they will be in worse shape if the economy deteriorates.
I've got a clue for them. Only loan it to people with good credit.
... A review of investor presentations and conference calls by executives of some two dozen banks around the country found that few cited lending as a priority.
Which is the reason they were given the money.
An overwhelming majority saw the bailout program as a no-strings-attached windfall that could be used to pay down debt, acquire other businesses or invest for the future.
They should be prosecuted for taking the money under false pretenses.
Speaking at the FBR Capital Markets conference in New York in December, Walter M. Pressey, president of Boston Private Wealth Management, a healthy bank with a mostly affluent clientele, said there were no immediate plans to do much with the $154 million it received from the Treasury.
Then give it back.
“With that capital in hand, not only do we feel comfortable that we can ride out the recession,” he said, “but we also feel that we’ll be in a position to take advantage of opportunities that present themselves once this recession is sorted out.”
That is not the reason you were given the money.
.... The Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., said in October that banks should “deploy, not hoard” the money to build confidence and increase lending. He added: “We expect all participating banks to continue to strengthen their efforts to help struggling homeowners who can afford their homes avoid foreclosure.”
Then why didn't he make sure Congress included penalties in the law if banks hoarded the money, and why was Congress not smart enough to insist on those provisions.
But a Congressional oversight panel reported on Jan. 9 that it found no evidence the bailout program had been used to prevent foreclosures, raising questions about whether the Treasury has complied with the law’s requirement that it develop a “plan that seeks to maximize assistance for homeowners.”
Arrest Paulson, and some of the bank CEOs, and let the courts decide.
The report concluded that the Treasury’s top priority seemed to be to “stabilize financial markets” by simply giving healthy banks more money and letting them decide how best to use it. The report also said it was not clear how giving billions to banks “advances both the goal of financial stability and the well-being of taxpayers, including homeowners threatened by foreclosure, people losing their jobs, and families unable to pay their credit cards.”
Just giving free money to anyone is stupid.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

How dare the car companies ask for money. Let them become a monopoly like Bell telephone was. And now the big cars are going out, and I mean out of business. Who wants a car that eats gasoline faster than fast food. Ma Bell was more reliable that what we have going on now. You can take Verizon and shove it. Besides, I hate all the phone commercials. The make me sick....ANON