What would have happened if the TARP bill had failed like Bernie wanted?

[hill2016]

#1 the auto industry would have collapsed
#2 the banking sector would have collapsed

But this doesn't matter to Bernie as long as he can express his ideological purity, consequences be damned!!!

[think]

1. Do you actually want to discuss the TARP bailout or do you just want to declare it a success?

There is a difference.

The too big to fail banks lied to congress, lied to their clients, violated US laws, and destroyed the lives of millions of Americans.

Too many Americans lost homes, their jobs, and/or their pensions due to the criminal and negligent actions of the criminal banks.

The TARP bailout saved the corrupt banks and let a great many Americans suffer great injustices.

Iceland on the other hand prosecuted criminal bankers & took over the banks that were in default. Their economy is solid. Ours is still dependent on too big to fail banks that are even larger than when they failed previously....

[onenote]

16. What happened in Iceland couldn't have happened here

and when you consider the details of it, most people here wouldn't have wanted it to, particularly the austerity measures and wage cuts that ended up being part of Iceland's recovery
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/17/the-miraculous-story-of-iceland/

[JaneyVee]

2. #3: Middle class wiped out.

[whatchamacallit]

7. Bullshit

I guarantee it will be wiped out for certain when the chickens come home to roost on the bad paper the banks have been amassing since their bailout.

[cherokeeprogressive]

14. Wow.

[whatchamacallit]

3. You are on the wrong site

... or maybe we are...

[NurseJackie]

4. Inflexibility has consequences.

[think]

6. Bailing out criminal bankers & letting millions of Americans lose everything has consequences also.

[tazkcmo]

5. Not nearly shallow enough.

Bernie stoopid!
Hillkary bril-yunt!

There ya go.

[My Good Babushka]

8. It makes very little sense to talk about what we wanted from TARP

at this point. A functioning government that properly regulated financial transactions would not have gotten itself into a position where it would have had to pass a TARP in the first place. It's like arguing about who wanted to put tape on a broken piece of shit that is going to break again in five minutes.

[EndElectoral]

9. This is a lie. The original TARP bill vote had nothing to do with Auto Bailout.

Your opinion that the banking sector woudl have collapsed is opinion. solvent banks would have done fine. Fraudulent ones may have suffered.

But the TARP bill lie has got to stop. There was no connection to the auto industry with the TARP Bill vote.

Suggest you read this.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkiley5/2016/03/07/clintons-charges-that-sanders-did-not-support-auto-rescue-is-wrong/#6e390a9a582b

During the debate in Flint, Michigan, a visibly tired Sanders did a poor job of explaining the confusion. I am not a Sanders supporter, but the truth is always important.

Secretary Clinton is chastising Sanders in the Motor State for not voting for the bill that created the funding for an auto bailout. Except, it wasn’t known that the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) bill, designed to bail out Wall Street banks from their subprime mortgage loan debacle that was crashing the economy, would be used to rescue the auto industry at the time Senators Sanders and Clinton voted on it. Clinton voted yay. Sanders voted nay. It was President Bush who signed the bill into law.

Later, in December 2008, the Senate took up a separate bill that would have provided rescue funds specifically for the auto industry. That bill failed to get the 60-vote filibuster-proof minimum when Republicans balked at saving General Motors GM -2.06%, Ford and Chrysler, in large part because they wanted to use the occasion to try and destroy the United Auto Workers union, which stood to benefit from a bailout by having their healthcare fund and pensions protected, and its interests prioritized over bond holders. Both Clinton and Sanders voted for this bill.

Tell the truth for goodness sake. Not more of her lies.

[Dawgs]

10. Right, because they wouldn't have done anything else if the TARP bill failed.

It was that or nothing.

Do you really think people are that stupid?

[SDJay]

11. Oil Prices Would've Skyrocketed!

Oh... wait... wrong thread.

[basselope]

12. If TARP had failed, they could have crafted a different bill with a different structure.

TARP was what the billionaire class WANTED.

If it failed, we could have accomplished the exact same goals with a different approach. (ie, sorry billionaires, we are going to have to have a one time wealth tax to close this gap, because we either do that or you LOSE everything and we are going to have to have a bottom up bailout, where people get to keep their homes and you get guaranteed payment on those bad loans holding you down).

There were MANY other options, but we only considered 1, because it is what the corporate masters wanted. OUR 700 Billion and the fed to print enough money so that it could get paid back in 6 years for a paltry 15B profit. (which based on inflation and interest on the debt over those years really amounts to a loss).

So No.. the banking sector wouldn't have collapsed... the auto industry wouldn't have collapsed. We just would have solved the problem differently.

[cherokeeprogressive]

13. A standalone bill would have been written for Detroit. Next question?

[hill2016]

15. there was already

a stand-alone auto bill that failed.

What next?

[cherokeeprogressive]

18. Bernie Sanders voted FOR that bill.

[randome]

19. And Congress said 'No'. What next?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[cherokeeprogressive]

21. I'm sure that at some point another stand-alone bill would have been floated and passed.

Partially sure. Almost completely positive. 100% absolutely certain one might have been anyway.

[randome]

23. And likely attached to yet another over-arching bill. Unfortunately, that's how Congress works.

A skilled politician knows when to cut her losses and swallow a dose of pride for the greater good. Whatever else you think of Clinton, she's a skilled politician. Sanders has great ideas and this country could certainly use a makeover but I don't see that it's going to happen relatively soon.

First and foremost we need to kill off the zombie GOP. Then we may have some maneuvering room.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[cherokeeprogressive]

24. With respect to the GOP I think Sanders and Clinton get treated the same way President Obama has.

Either one would face the same hurdles.

[taught_me_patience]

17. Complete and total devastation of the economy nt

[azurnoir]

20. wow I'm actually seeing "too big to fail" being promoted on DU

[lumberjack_jeff]

22. The fact that TARP mostly worked does not suggest a lack of better options.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/opinion/22krugman.html

But I’d urge Congress to pause for a minute, take a deep breath, and try to seriously rework the structure of the plan, making it a plan that addresses the real problem. Don’t let yourself be railroaded — if this plan goes through in anything like its current form, we’ll all be very sorry in the not-too-distant future.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/02/opinion/02krugman.html

Just to be clear, I’m not talking about the Obama administration’s plan to support jobs and output with a large, temporary rise in federal spending, which is very much the right thing to do. I’m talking, instead, about the administration’s plans for a banking system rescue — plans that are shaping up as a classic exercise in “lemon socialism”: taxpayers bear the cost if things go wrong, but stockholders and executives get the benefits if things go right.

When I read recent remarks on financial policy by top Obama administration officials, I feel as if I’ve entered a time warp — as if it’s still 2005, Alan Greenspan is still the Maestro, and bankers are still heroes of capitalism.

“We have a financial system that is run by private shareholders, managed by private institutions, and we’d like to do our best to preserve that system,” says Timothy Geithner, the Treasury secretary — as he prepares to put taxpayers on the hook for that system’s immense losses.

Meanwhile, a Washington Post report based on administration sources says that Mr. Geithner and Lawrence Summers, President Obama’s top economic adviser, “think governments make poor bank managers” — as opposed, presumably, to the private-sector geniuses who managed to lose more than a trillion dollars in the space of a few years.