OK, help me out here. Hasn't most of the bailout money been paid back?

[peggygirl]

Why is this still a negative issue if even some of the money has already been paid back? And didn't some institutions refuse the money? So, shouldn't there be money left to help the jobs situation?

[customerserviceguy]

1. The banksters have pretty much paid it back

It's the auto industry that's still in hock. I don't think we're going to get much of that back.

[Hannah Bell]

3. no, the banksters haven't "pretty much paid it back".

Figures as of November 16, 2009 = about 1/4 of TARP repaid.

http://money.cnn.com/news/storysupplement/economy/bailouttracker/index.html#TARP

[customerserviceguy]

4. Aren't those old figures?

I thought that many of the banksters paid it back prior to the end of 2009 so they could hand out fat year-end bonuses.

[Hannah Bell]

7. *some* - mainly the biggest banks.

[customerserviceguy]

8. If I recall, they borrowed the most

Look, TARP was a stupid idea, I'm not defending it, but when they expanded it to cover lousy risks, there was no way they were getting it back. At this point in time, that includes Chrysler and General Motors.

[Hannah Bell]

10. there's still plenty of tarp money outstanding. and they're still loaning it out.

FEBRUARY 11, 2010.TARP Stake In CIT Group Is Wiped Out

WASHINGTON—U.S. taxpayers' $2.3 billion stake in CIT Group Inc. has officially been wiped out, according to a Treasury report released Wednesday.

The Treasury provided the commercial lender with funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, in December 2008, but CIT Group still ended up undergoing a bankruptcy reorganization by the end of 2009.

Despite the CIT Group loss, which was expected, and other likely taxpayer losses, the Treasury expects the cost of TARP will continue to fall from the current level, of just under $120 billion...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703455804575057803874107176.html


The Treasury estimates total bank repayments and proceeds from sales of its common stock in banks should exceed $185bn by the end of 2010, cutting total taxpayer exposure to the banks by three-quarters

http://www.housingwire.com/2010/02/11/pnc-repays-tarp-funds/



TARP Funds Used For Small Business Loans Will Be Repaid, Contends Treasury Official
February 26, 2010

Assistant Treasury Secretary for Financial Stability Herbert Allison said that the $30 billion in TARP funds proposed to help small banks make loans to small businesses is an investment and will be ‘repaid.’

http://talkradionews.com/2010/02/tarp-funds-used-for-small-business-loans-will-be-repaid-contends-treasury-official/


TARP losses, gains.

The Treasury officially recognized the loss of its $2.3B investment in CIT Group (CIT) yesterday.

Despite the loss, the Treasury expects the cost of TARP to continue to fall and expects to turn a profit on aid provided directly to the banking sector.

To that end, PNC (PNC) announced yesterday that it had completed its TARP payment by redeeming $7.6B of preferred government shares, and Fifth Third Bancorp (FITB) will "most likely" repay its $3.4B of TARP funds in the second half of the year.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100210-719446.html

[Hannah Bell]

2. No. Only a few of the big-name banks have. TARP funds only.

http://money.cnn.com/news/storysupplement/economy/bailouttracker/index.html


Figures as of November 16, 2009

[readmoreoften]

5. The banks thank you for your concern!

Someone needs to think of all the misunderstood bankers, thanks for your sensitivity.

[sendero]

6. The problem is..

.. there is a lot more going on here than TARP. It's way way complicated but a summary would include the statement "the banks are never going to pay that back".

As long as interest rates are near zero we are bailing out the banksters.

[Hannah Bell]

11. yes. that's the sleight of hand.

[keep_it_real]

9. Wall Street's Bailout Hustle

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/32255149/wall_streets_bailout_hustle

Goldman Sachs and other big banks aren't just pocketing the trillions we gave them to rescue the economy - they're re-creating the conditions for another crash


When Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley got their federal bank charters, they joined Bank of America, Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase and the other banking titans who could go to the Fed and borrow massive amounts of money at interest rates that, thanks to the aggressive rate-cutting policies of Fed chief Ben Bernanke during the crisis, soon sank to zero percent. The ability to go to the Fed and borrow big at next to no interest was what saved Goldman, Morgan Stanley and other banks from death in the fall of 2008. "They had no other way to raise capital at that moment, meaning they were on the brink of insolvency," says Nomi Prins, a former managing director at Goldman Sachs. "The Fed was the only shot."

In fact, the Fed became not just a source of emergency borrowing that enabled Goldman and Morgan Stanley to stave off disaster — it became a source of long-term guaranteed income. Borrowing at zero percent interest, banks like Goldman now had virtually infinite ways to make money. In one of the most common maneuvers, they simply took the money they borrowed from the government at zero percent and lent it back to the government by buying Treasury bills that paid interest of three or four percent. It was basically a license to print money — no different than attaching an ATM to the side of the Federal Reserve.

"You're borrowing at zero, putting it out there at two or three percent, with hundreds of billions of dollars — man, you can make a lot of money that way," says the manager of one prominent hedge fund. "It's free money." Which goes a long way to explaining Goldman's enormous profits last year. But all that free money was amplified by another scam:

CON #3 THE PIG IN THE POKE