Scott Hammer TOXIC
Well-Known Member
First and formost, I don't want this to turn political. Obama is our President and he has proposed a plan that we all have to try and make work like it or not, agree with it or not. We all know that I close banks. Track record with the $$ from the TARP fund is not good to say the least. The Treasury Department has done an absolutely piss poor job of explaining this, and it reflects all the zigzagging. I think they've lost some of their nerve and tap danced around the purpose, saying, "well, we want to see increased lending." That's bull****. Bank capital is not loaned out directly. Most bank lending is funded through deposits and borrowings. I think that a very legitimate use for the TARP capital is for stronger banks to basically take out the weak players, particularly so they can get a realistic write-down of the problem assets in the acquired institution and feel confident that the merged institution is well capitalized. There was a problem in the RTC with a tax glitch called "goodwill" that we would need to avoid and it involved tax laws. There is a risk growing banks "to big to fail" and that is another problem. I'm leaving AIG out of this discussion for a reason, they are a topic in and of themselves and I don't want to get into that. I was then and still am now against the $$ going to the banks, this is not a problem that you can buy your way out of it is a market problem that the market has to correct. It did it with no invested $$ in the 80's and early 90's when the RTC alone closed more than 1,000 S&L's. I was involved with that as well. I did a lot of banks back then also. The market corrected itself and the the "Business Cycle" has repeated itself albeit on a different scale today. If my predictions are right, the infusion of $$ into a sick market is not healing the market, it is only postponing the agony of what has to take place. The problem in the 80's was very self-contained compared to today. It was a question of what to do with the institutions. The RTC was basically an undertaker. It didn