15 Mar 13
Originally posted by Metal BrainIceland stood up for themselves.
Could it have worked in the USA?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-20/icelandic-anger-brings-record-debt-relief-in-best-crisis-recovery-story.html
Did Americans let their banks screw them over needlessly?
15 Mar 13
1 edit
Originally posted by joe beyserYes, and Americans did a little complaining but quickly assumed the position when Tim Geithner wanted them to.
Iceland stood up for themselves.
http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/2013/01/the-illegal-geithner-leak-that-cost-normal-people-millions-but-saved-his-banker-buddies/
Bush, Obama and Geithner should be hung as traitors and all the people who defended the big banks bailout should be outed for being the idiots that they are.
15 Mar 13
Originally posted by FMFThey are working against the interests of the American people by stealing their money and giving it to banks that are buying them off. In short "corruption".
"Traitors"? What definition of "traitor" are you using?
The implication that giving American's money to bankers that caused the crisis would rescue the economy was a lie. This was all based on the false assertion that once the banks got the money they would lend it to the public.
The banks knew they had no intention of lending the money. They just wanted to save themselves and let the money supply contract. This forced the Federal Reserve System to increase the money supply to avoid a depression. There was no need to keep the banks from failing because the money supply would contract either way.
15 Mar 13
Originally posted by Metal BrainYou used the word "traitor". What definition are you using?
They are working against the interests of the American people by stealing their money and giving it to banks that are buying them off. In short "corruption".
The implication that giving American's money to bankers that caused the crisis would rescue the economy was a lie. This was all based on the false assertion that once the banks got the money they ...[text shortened]... as no need to keep the banks from failing because the money supply would contract either way.
15 Mar 13
Originally posted by Metal BrainI don't think the problem was the bailout itself, but more the failure to extract, as a condition for the bailout, specific concessions on money supply policies.
They are working against the interests of the American people by stealing their money and giving it to banks that are buying them off. In short "corruption".
The implication that giving American's money to bankers that caused the crisis would rescue the economy was a lie. This was all based on the false assertion that once the banks got the money they ...[text shortened]... as no need to keep the banks from failing because the money supply would contract either way.
15 Mar 13
Originally posted by sh76The bank bailout was not necessary. Iceland held their bankers accountable while here in the USA they were rewarded.
I don't think the problem was the bailout itself, but more the failure to extract, as a condition for the bailout, specific concessions on money supply policies.
http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/iceland-jails-bankers-for-fraud/
You seem to be an apologist for failed policies you once supported.
15 Mar 13
Originally posted by Metal BrainYes, MB, everyone that half-disagrees with anything you say must be an "apologist" because you can point to a website called "darkgovernment.com."
The bank bailout was not necessary. Iceland held their bankers accountable while here in the USA they were rewarded.
http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/iceland-jails-bankers-for-fraud/
You seem to be an apologist for failed policies you once supported.
🙄🙄🙄
15 Mar 13
Originally posted by EladarMeanwhile Republicans in the US are determined to make the citizenry suck corporate cock.
A huge chunck of the money the US pumped into its banks was transfered to European banks anyhow. So Iceland just let the US do the job for them, they were smart and did like Europe usually does, just suck the US's tit.
15 Mar 13
Originally posted by Metal Brain
Did Americans let their banks screw them over needlessly?
While it was once feared the government would be holding companies like GM, AIG and Citigroup for several years, it was reported in April of 2010 that those companies are preparing to buy back the Treasury's stake and emerge from TARP within a year.[2] Of the $245 billion handed to U.S. and foreign banks, over $169 billion has been paid back, including $13.7 billion in dividends, interest and other income, along with $4 billion in warrant proceeds as of April 2010. AIG is considered "on track" to pay back $51 billion from divestitures of two units and another $32 billion in securities.[2] As of December 31, 2012, the Treasury had received over $405 billion in total cash back on TARP investments, equaling nearly 97 percent of the $418 billion disbursed under the program.[3]