Fed to Inject $1.5 Trillion in Bid to Prevent ‘Unusual Disruptions’ in Markets

[Low Hanging Fruit]

This pretty much means we are in 2008 territory right? I mean it is pretty much a repeat of the program used there.

[transipithal]

and money it had on hand from revenue sources not tax payer related....or even govt related.

The Federal Reserve board is appointed by the president and the senate.

- - - Updated - - -

This pretty much means we are in 2008 territory right? I mean it is pretty much a repeat of the program used there.

Far worse than that. There was a reasonable expectation that the banks would be profitable going forward. No one was going to do sub-prime right after the crash.

The coronavirus is not of the past. It is expected to get worse.

[Theodarzna]

This pretty much means we are in 2008 territory right? I mean it is pretty much a repeat of the program used there.

Worse, as someone else said, Coronavirus is just popping off, and the real impact hasn't even hit yet. Imagine what will go down if the infection rate in America is like what Angela Merkle publicly said might happen in Germany; Basically 2/3rds infected. Even if only like 100K drop dead from it its bad enough to knock even healthy people on their ass. Weeks with a big chunk of the population unable to work, a fuck ton of deaths, debt defaults, its all bad.

Also this bailout really just proves that the Stock Market has zero relationship to actual economic activity. I mean the worse that can happen is the government will save everyone's investment portfolio.

[transipithal]

Obama got criticized but wasn't it Bush that did the bailouts and stimulus?

Technically it was Bush but he was a lame duck president. Obama led the negotiations as president elect and de facto president.

This wasn't a really situation where either party can claim credit. Both were extremely willing to give useless bankers money for failing. and none of them see any problem with it to this day. Both of them will defend the decision.

- - - Updated - - -

Worse, as someone else said, Coronavirus is just popping off, and the real impact hasn't even hit yet. Imagine what will go down if the infection rate in America is like what Angela Merkle publicly said might happen in Germany; Basically 2/3rds infected. Even if only like 100K drop dead from it its bad enough to knock even healthy people on their ass. Weeks with a big chunk of the population unable to work, a fuck ton of deaths, debt defaults, its all bad.

Also this bailout really just proves that the Stock Market has zero relationship to actual economic activity. I mean the worse that can happen is the government will save everyone's investment portfolio.

It is just the government trying to bail out its friends.

If Merkel's prediction is correct then society basically collapses. Something people are not talking about: law and order will break down completely. There won't be enough police or even soldiers keep the streets safe. You are talking about extended martial law.

[Theodarzna]

It is just the government trying to bail out its friends.

If Merkel's prediction is correct then society basically collapses. Something people are not talking about: law and order will break down completely. There won't be enough police or even soldiers keep the streets safe. You are talking about extended martial law.

Society won't collapse, but the entire economy will grind to a halt. Which this will be America's first economic crisis that I know of caused by a disease event.

Actually I can't recall a disease event shutting the worlds economy down in the last century anyway. I guess this one is the first as diseases start to outstrip out technical ability to deal with them.

[Grapemask]

Corporations may be people, but things like this really make me wish people were corporations.

[jonnysensible]

I need to quickly go and get The Great Leveler from the library before it closes.

[Zan15]

Obama got criticized but wasn't it Bush that did the bailouts and stimulus?

Most but Obama kept the ball rolling and extended the program and added stimulus'

- - - Updated - - -

I refer you to my comment above:

(at this point will come in and unhelpfully muddle the issue for the benefit of the government and financiers by using a lot of financial jargon. They are either clueless or lying to you)

I repeat: your money is being stolen.

\

I think the word you were looking for is "facts" not "long smokescreen of jargon from dick-sucking corporatist"

repeat your nonsense all you want it still nonsense.

Simple question: The US is $23 trillion dollars in debt. If the Federal Reserve has money on hand, why is it not being used to pay down debt?

You don't know, do you?

Again you don't know how the Fed works. And at this point why should we attempt to even explain it to you since its just "long smokescreen of jargon from dick-sucking corporatist"

You also don't understand the very basic fundamentals of investments and money. You don't understand what exactly the Fed has on hand. You don't know much about anything except trolling some bullshit.

- - - Updated - - -

The Federal Reserve board is appointed by the president and the senate.

==.

What does that have to do with the fact that you claimed our money was being stolen?

[transipithal]

You also don't understand the very basic fundamentals of investments and money.

This is how all you people talk. You have some amazing wisdom that you can't share with us, for reasons. Of course the Fed is doing this out of the generosity of their sweet little hearts. Yet somehow ordinary people get fucked every time this happens.

[transipithal]

You also don't understand the very basic fundamentals of investments and money.

This is how all you people talk. You have some amazing wisdom that you can't share with us, for reasons. Of course the Fed is doing this out of the generosity of their sweet little hearts. Yet somehow ordinary people get fucked every time this happens.

[Zan15]

Technically it was Bush but he was a lame duck president. Obama led the negotiations as president elect and de facto president.

This wasn't a really situation where either party can claim credit. Both were extremely willing to give useless bankers money for failing. and none of them see any problem with it to this day. Both of them will defend the decision.
.

why would you have a problem with a program of loans that made taxpayers over 100 billion dollars in profits that more are being collected every quarter?

they got loans, they repaid...taxpayers turned a profit.

how hard is that to understand?

[transipithal]

I need to quickly go and get .

You found a library that isn't closed in the UK?

[Zan15]

This is how all you people talk. You have some amazing wisdom that you can't share with us, for reasons. Of course the Fed is doing this out of the generosity of their sweet little hearts. Yet somehow ordinary people get fucked every time this happens.

so far you have provided no proof.
You have also shown ZERO knowledge of how the FED actually works.

nothing but conspiracy and misinformation.


I already shared some very basic information and you said

""long smokescreen of jargon from dick-sucking corporatist""


So go away.

[transipithal]

why would you have a problem with a program of loans that made taxpayers over 100 billion dollars in profits that more are being collected every quarter?

they got loans, they repaid...taxpayers turned a profit.

how hard is that to understand?

Here is the flaw in your logic.

Say, instead of giving 100 billion dollars to bankers we spend it on welfare programs.

Many of those recipients go on to have useful jobs and/or start businesses. They create 200 million in tax receipts for the government.

No one, and I mean absolutely no one, says they repaid their welfare and what a good scheme welfare is.

Yet when we talk about bankers then people like you crawl out of the woodwork and go on about how marvelous they are. It is a complete double-standard.

[transipithal]

why would you have a problem with a program of loans that made taxpayers over 100 billion dollars in profits that more are being collected every quarter?

they got loans, they repaid...taxpayers turned a profit.

how hard is that to understand?

Here is the flaw in your logic.

Say, instead of giving 100 billion dollars to bankers we spend it on welfare programs.

Many of those recipients go on to have useful jobs and/or start businesses. They create 200 billion in tax receipts for the government.

No one, and I mean absolutely no one, says they repaid their welfare and what a good scheme welfare is.

Yet when we talk about bankers then people like you crawl out of the woodwork and go on about how marvelous they are. It is a complete double-standard.

[Themius]

why would you have a problem with a program of loans that made taxpayers over 100 billion dollars in profits that more are being collected every quarter?

they got loans, they repaid...taxpayers turned a profit.

how hard is that to understand?

Did it though? Where did this extra money go? Did each taxpayer get an extra check of roughly $700 for their part of these profits?

Was there a "return on loan interest" check that was being cut? Did we expand social programs directly citing how many of those dollars went towards the program?

[Beefhammer]

Yes. My snark was not clear enough so my fault.

If you ask right winger, who especially watches Fox, they have Obama giving all the bailouts.

No, I was asking. I know TARP and the stimulus were two different things, one was Obama and the other was Bush. I just forget which was which.

- - - Updated - - -

Technically it was Bush but he was a lame duck president. Obama led the negotiations as president elect and de facto president.

This wasn't a really situation where either party can claim credit. Both were extremely willing to give useless bankers money for failing. and none of them see any problem with it to this day. Both of them will defend the decision.

- - - Updated - - -



It is just the government trying to bail out its friends.

If Merkel's prediction is correct then society basically collapses. Something people are not talking about: law and order will break down completely. There won't be enough police or even soldiers keep the streets safe. You are talking about extended martial law.

I would have ker the banks fail ensuring chaos. Maybe it would have woken people up to this BS.

[NM 156]

I do giggle at the fact that trillions for wall street is a good thing, but helping the bottom quintile and/or relieving some student loan debt sets a "bad precedent" that will allow people to continue to "behave irresponsibly." The redistribution of wealth is real, and it's been shifted upwards.

[Beefhammer]

"The markets and companies are the drivers of this economy!"

Meanwhile, consumer spending actually drives 70% of our economy.

Conservatives/Republicans obsession with the completely farcical and thoroughly debunked supply-side economic theories have ruined state economies and they refuse to learn from their mistakes.

No shit. It's been proven time and time again that giving money to the the working class is the best way to drive an economy and tax cuts for the rich and corporations is the best way to shrink it. Yet conservatives love to shit themselves telling us how the rich and big corporations are the job creators and trickle down works.

It's fucking documented that direct stimulus has the greatest ROI for government spending and tax cuts for the rich is the biggest deficit creator.

[Spectral]

Yeah this is called Welfare, I was raised on it, so yeah, but I have no problem with it, I work I am taxed, I do NOT want others to suffer needlessly because of a temporary of possibly permanent impairment.

I'd be OK with Bloomberg and Buffett and Exxon "suffering" a hit to their portfolios that they wouldn't notice outside of status circlejerking.