They want more bank bail outs
By lilwonders
@lilwonders456 (8214)
United States
January 13, 2009 11:20am CST
Let me get this right. THey gave money to the banks so they could lend it to people and help with the credit crisis. THey gave the money to them with no strings attached so the banks horded the money or used it to buy out other companies and banks that were in trouble instead, not helping the ecomony at all.
Now they want to give the banks more bails outs. Does this make sense to you? Should we be giving the banks anymore money?
2 responses
@Arkie69 (2156)
• United States
13 Jan 09
It doesn't make any sense to me. You know what happened on that deal don't you? The banks loaned all that money on real estate loans. Now they are loaded with foreclosed homes. The government replaced all the money they lost. The banks now have all these notes on these foreclosed houses. This means the banks now have the homes and their money. They have the homes free and clear and anything they sell them for is clear profit.
They only made one mistake. The money they lost belonged to investors. When the government replaced the money in the banks the investors grabbed their money and ran. That money is not even in those banks now. Would you give someone a second chance to loose your money after they had already lost it once? I wouldn't and neither will the investors. That's why they won't tell where the money went to. The banks still own the houses and no doubt dumping them as quickly as they can. The only ones that lost anything is the American people. And they want to do the same thing all over again? I sure hope they are smarter than that.
Art
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
14 Jan 09
It does not look like they are smart enough not to do it again. There are people in congress screaming for it.
@Arkie69 (2156)
• United States
14 Jan 09
The only thing that makes any sense to me about that whole deal is there must have been a bunch of money passed under the table back to the ones that approved that deal. If that wasn't the case I don't believe they would have done it. When you are dealing with hundreds of billions of dollars it is real easy for a few million to go missing.
Art
@Isabellas2007 (192)
• United States
13 Jan 09
I feel that giving the banks the money was a mistake the begin with. If you think about giving the banks money with no strings attached that gives them free reign with our tax money! If your a bank that just got several billions of dollars I would keep that in my coffers or use it to purchase other companies that I can use to expand my bottom line. However, if you wanted to truly free up the credit crunch should the money not have been given to the American people? I know that it would have been alot of money coming from the government, but wouldnt people use that money to pay off debts to stave off foreclosure, credit card issues and such? I think that would have helped the credit problem worse.
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
14 Jan 09
I have to say I do not understand this one. The first bail out of hte banks did not work to help our ecomony....so why would throw more money at them?