Really? And you know the exact purpose for which TARP was created how, exactly? And I have to ask - although I really don't want to know - how "dipsh1ts" like me are the reason for the existence of toxic assets? There's some "special" logic at work here, clearly. Whatever you say, dear...
You can read the bill that was passed to allocate TARP if you want to know what it was intended to be used for. That is public information. The results of these programs are quite evident in that they didn't help anyone outside of wall st - incidently, investment banks and big law firms were also obama's top campaign contributors by industry so nothing really surprising here. The fundamental flaw with QE and similar attempts, aka Bernanke's earlier "credit easing", is that you are not going to stimulate the economy by giving big banks more money. Banks do not drive the economy any more than government does. Even after slashing interest rates, giving "loans" to banks by "investing" in them using taxpayer money and finally resorting to monthly QE life support infusions, the US economy is still as bad now as it has been since the obama admin came into power. To date, QE represents close to $4 trillion in printed-from-thin-air money that is inflating the stock market, driving up cost-of-living for most Americans and is priming the US economy for a major crash. It's not going to end well.
I have read the TARP bill, while you, clearly, haven't. It appears that your assertion regarding the use of TARP funds is about as accurate as your claim about the chronology of it. For your guide, let me quote you the relevant part of the TARP legislation (H.R. 1424, Sec. 113): The Secretary may not purchase, or make any commitment to purchase, any troubled asset under the authority of this Act, unless the Secretary receives from the financial institution from which such assets are to be purchasedâ (A)in the case of a financial institution, the securities of which are traded on a national securities exchange, a warrant giving the right to the Secretary to receive nonvoting common stock or preferred stock in such financial institution, or voting stock with respect to which, the Secretary agrees not to exercise voting power, as the Secretary determines appropriate... You have no clue what you're talking about and, yet again, you insist on bringing politics into it. I am not going to argue with you about Obama and Bush, since it's totally irrelevant. However, to state that the US economy is as bad now as it was in 2009 is so utterly absurd and in such contradiction to reality, it's not even worth discussing. Your other claims are similarly not worth wasting time over. Yet again, I suggest to you that you've gone "full retard". Never go "full retard", man.
Assuming there wouldn´t have been TARP monies and QE - according to the logic of anti-QE and anti-TARP proponents the US economy would have healed based on which thesis? On the thesis of Wall Street being totally diminished and some majr municipal banks and regional banks going under as well? On the thesis that unemployment would have risen to over 30%? On the thesis that a major credit crisis/funding crisis would have occurred? IMHO, QE I was ncessay, QE II questionable and QE III absolutely unnecessary based on the development of company profits. To wit: APPLE has generated record cash flows in the last 3 years and the FED is moving on printing. Major other multi-national companies headquartered in the US are reaping in RECORD COMPANY PROFITS yet the FED is continuing QE? There is ONE MAJOR FLAW in the FED´s policy: you cannot print NEW JOBS! YOU CANNOT PRINT THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE DOWN (not consistently). When QE ends, the real healing process will start - which means "structural reforms".
i think there will be pain before the healing. i do think the fed did the right thing to start but got to cocky with QE 2 and 3. the flaw is not that the fed can't print new jobs. its the idea that they are unwilling to see companies do whats best for top executives and share owners only not the country. there is no benefit for them to do anything because the fed told them if you don't do it we will force more money on you. the idea of lowering taxes does not matter either because again if businesses thought there was money to be made they would move forward. also whatever there tax rate is does not matter compared to what the fed gave them already.
Structural reforms, I might add, that are a long time overdue. Until those occur, the same ol' will just keep same ol'ing.
Analysis: Surfing central banks in a benign 'QE trap' http://finance.yahoo.com/news/analysis-surfing-central-banks-benign-065454319.html?l=1
Us treasury rates have been discussed on this thread. Pretty big move in 10s and 20+ today with rates rising out there and falling close in. Tightening recently on taper anticipation and good economic news but i cant follow things now so i dont know whats behind this. Off to work.