I guess Bank of America is going to be begging for a taxpayer funded bailout after they give all these mortgages to people who can't afford to pay...

Really? Just handed them dollars?
Yep. They made bad loans, should have been let to fail, now you got the government in bed with Bank of America and playing the landlord and housing game, too. That's a decent part of why housing prices are so high now. What the government should have done is semi-bailed out people with mortgages and totally bailed out Bank of America depositors and liquidated the rest, paying employees off from the bottom up.

 
Last edited:
Yep. They made bad loans, should have been let to fail, now you got the government in bed with Bank of America and playing the landlord and housing game, too. That's a decent part of why housing prices are so high now. What the government should have done is semi-bailed out people with mortgages and totally bailed out Bank of America depositors and liquidated the rest, paying employees off from the bottom up.

You obviously did not read my post, dumbass! Most of the taxpayer dollars were paid back by the banks!

Post #114 I stated:

"You do realize that the money used to bail out the financial institutions that 295 billion out of 313 billion were repaid to the federal government."
 
Yep. They made bad loans, should have been let to fail, now you got the government in bed with Bank of America and playing the landlord and housing game, too. That's a decent part of why housing prices are so high now. What the government should have done is semi-bailed out people with mortgages and totally bailed out Bank of America depositors and liquidated the rest, paying employees off from the bottom up.


They made bad loans, should have been let to fail

That could have cost trillions in FDIC bailouts.

What the government should have done is semi-bailed out people with mortgages and totally bailed out Bank of America depositors and liquidated the rest,

That would have been much more expensive than $45 billion in loans that made the Treasury $4.5 billion in profits.
 
To be honest, what did the banks stand to lose?
The banks probably had enough assets to hedge against the loans.
I am truly interested in how this works.

To be honest, what did the banks stand to lose?

The banks lost hundreds of billions in 2007-2010.
 
Last edited:
You obviously did not read my post, dumbass! Most of the taxpayer dollars were paid back by the banks!

Post #114 I stated:

"You do realize that the money used to bail out the financial institutions that 295 billion out of 313 billion were repaid to the federal government."
What happened to the other $18 billion. Last I checked, something isn't repaid until it is ALL repaid. I wonder what would happen if I just paid back 94% of what I borrowed---LOL. I guess that other six percent wasn't really tax payer money, eh?
 
Wrong. Those lenders were bailed out by the tax payers. Some of them even got to double dip. They got tax payer money and was able to get the properties back on foreclosures.

Just ask Trumps treasury secretary banker Steve Munchin that did exactly that.

Those lenders were bailed out by the tax payers.

The TARP loans that they repaid? At a huge profit to the US Treasury?

Just ask Trumps treasury secretary banker Steve Munchin that did exactly that.

His bank foreclosed on people who defaulted on their mortgages.
When the market recovered, they made big bucks. What about it?
 
Wrong. What happened in 2008 was the result of repeal of banking regulations allowing the loans to be made, and the ensuing debt sold.

That Democrats have tried to undo, and Tepublicans have blocked at every turn.

But no doubt, with that reply, you are in full agreement with all of the regulations, including the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall right?

I mean there’s no way anyone could be so big of a hypocrite, they would make a statement like you just made, and not support the return of those regulations? Am I right?

What happened in 2008 was the result of repeal of banking regulations allowing the loans to be made, and the ensuing debt sold.

Banks have always been able to write and sell mortgages.

But no doubt, with that reply, you are in full agreement with all of the regulations, including the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall right?

Glass-Steagall wouldn't have prevented banks from writing and buying crappy mortgages.
 
What happened to the other $18 billion. Last I checked, something isn't repaid until it is ALL repaid. I wonder what would happen if I just paid back 94% of what I borrowed---LOL. I guess that other six percent wasn't really tax payer money, eh?

With interest, dividends and preferred stock sales, the US Treasury made a huge profiit.
 
What happened in 2008 was the result of repeal of banking regulations allowing the loans to be made, and the ensuing debt sold.

Banks have always been able to write and sell mortgages.

But no doubt, with that reply, you are in full agreement with all of the regulations, including the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall right?

Glass-Steagall wouldn't have prevented banks from writing and buying crappy mortgages.
These race based loans that are doomed to fail are just the democrat's latest attempt to dismantle the US economy and relegate this once-great nation to third world status.
 

Forum List

Back
Top