TARP's actual costs: $66 billion (not $700 billion)

[scheming daemons]

The Obama administration is set to lower its estimate of the cost of the troubled asset relief programme when it celebrates the end of the bail-out effort next week, senior administration officials say.

Many in the administration have become exasperated that the $700 billion scope of the programme is often used in describing it and that it is widely seen as a Democratic initiative when it was created by the Bush administration and backed by almost half of House Republicans.

The Congressional Budget Office now pegs the actual cost at $66 billion but the Treasury is expected to produce a lower estimate next week. Some officials and executives whose companies still owe Tarp money believe the final tally could see the government make a profit, depending on the initial public offering of General Motors and eventual sale of shares in AIG.

.
.
.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/39325160



If you think about it honestly, $66 billion is a pretty small price to pay for avoiding a catastrophic Great Depression II.

The "Thank God it passed!" folks turned out to be 100% correct.

Without TARP, we'd be at 25% unemployment and a society in ruins and probably in the middle of a bloody civil war.

Remember... Democrats supported it at higher levels than Republicans.



There are those that are upset that TARP worked, because they didn't want capitalism "saved"... and that's an understandable sentiment.

But a hybrid socialist/capitalist system (like we have, no matter how much people won't admit it) CAN (and does) work. We just need to balance it properly, like many European nations do and like we did from 1932 to 1980, between regulation and free market. Too far in either direction fails.



In any case, the bottom line is this. Nobody wants to talk about it, but TARP has been a tremendous success story. And decades from now, the history books will reflect that reality. For now, the wounds of the collapse of 2008 are too fresh (and in many cases, still bleeding).

[chimpymustgo]

1. Yeah, right. Whatever. I don't believe anything they say about this.

[NNN0LHI]

2. That just a gut feeling or do you have any evidence to back up your statement?

[scheming daemons]

3. Don't believe anything WHO says? The White House or the CBO?

The CBO numbers are there for everyone to see.

The CBO is non-partisan.


If you start throwing out verifiable facts, then there's no argument that will every convince you about any subject matter.

[young but wise]

5. I believe it.

[RaleighNCDUer]

11. Consider, if TARP was not successful why would Republicans oppose it?

They ONLY support failed policies and ONLY oppose beneficial ones.

Ergo, TARP must be working.

[dkofos]

4. That $66 BILLION were profits to the banks.

[scheming daemons]

6. No... that's what is still outstanding on AIG and GM/Chrysler.... a lot of THAT will go away when...

...the GM stock offering happens.

In the end, TARP will turn a profit for the US Government.

[Dawgs]

7. Yes, and it probably also saved millions of jobs.

What is your point?

[hayu_lol]

10. TARP was so successful that the big banks...

are raising CC interest to 29.9% interest just to get by(sarcasm).

[dkofos]

14. I thought they did that out of GREED.

What do I know.

[taught_me_patience]

8. And, of course, ignore the $100's of billions

poured into AIG, Fannie, and Freddie that will never be recouperated. That's where the real bailout happened.

[metapunditedgy]

12. Actually, the money was gobbled up by their creditors.

A "stealth" bailout, or gift, to the banksters who bet and lost, but got a "free do-over" from US taxpayers.

[Greyhound]

9. As long as you accept the frame...

Preying on the ignorance of what was done and understanding of how it works.

Hey, nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

The $700B is simply a smoke screen to hide the $12T - $15T that "our" leaders put us on the hook for. This is simply a backdoor to monetizing the debt and will echo for decades, if the economy survives it.

[AnArmyVeteran]

13. If the banks can make $634 billion in 2 years THEY ARE MAKING TOO MUCH!!!

Okay, if all but 66 billion has been paid back in less than 2 years don't you think banks are being allowed to make too much??? Since they dont produce anything with a tangible value then just how do they make so much money? I know most of what they do is a financial shell game where they take from the real producers in this country like parasites feeding off of their hosts. When are we going to just stop their manipulations and outright thefts of other peoples' money?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. I hope you're expecting this to fall on deaf ears.

I guess we'll never establish the validity of the "let all the banks fail" approach to economic recovery.