The second 350B in TARP has been blocked

Discussion in 'Economics' started by Aaron Copland, Jan 22, 2009.

  1. The are holding the vote open ....scum bags
     
  2. is there a link,AC?
     
  3. They are scumbags because they blocked it or because they are holding a vote on it and may pass it?
     
  4. They'll probably do like they did last time...the market will tank like hell again...then they will draft another bill, only this time with more pork and perks...and then it will pass.
     
  5. It's just political posturing. It takes both the House and the Senate to block, and the Senate already voted against.
     
  6. sprstpd

    sprstpd

    Flush the bad banks down the toilet. Don't allow more TARP money.
     
  7. Mouse21

    Mouse21

    It doesn't matter. It was symbolic. Both houses had to approve a block. THe Senate already voted to release the funds so this vote was erroneous. All it does is provide a platform for political pandering and grandstanding for representatives to recall at election time. They'll conveniently forget to mention that they voted for it with pork in the first place when it actually counted. Anyone who voted for a sitting representative right now that voted in favor of the TARP can keep your mouth shut now and forever.
     
  8. itsame

    itsame

    They will eventually pass the TARP money through.

    The guest yesterday on Fast Money said it the best.

    The people who don't want these banks to get money

    1. Have never been a banker or part of the financial world and they don't know how banks actually work

    2. Have no idea about economics

    3. Saying no because of politics

    TARP money will get doled out..Banks will be on solid footing...the public will trust them again and Obama will get his money back the way he wanted in the first place. Higher taxes.
     
  9. sprstpd

    sprstpd

    Actually, the people who want the banks to get the TARP money:

    1. Like socialism/communism

    2. Don't believe in free markets

    3. Believe in rewarding failure
     

  10. Exactly.
     
    #10     Jan 22, 2009