RSSRemember the $700 Billion TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) … Its Now $3.7 Trillion
Because politicianswould never lie as to how much a program would actually cost tax payer, now would they? Welcome to Obamanomics.
The Troubled Asset Relief Program, TARP, that was told to America that would cost $700 billion is now estimated to cost $3.7 trillion. Yes you heard that correct, trillion with a “T”. Can you imagine how much Obamacare is really going to cost? Do any of you really believe it will save money?
Increased housing commitments swelled U.S. taxpayers’ total support for the financial system by $700 billion in the past year to around $3.7 trillion, a government watchdog said on Wednesday.
The Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program said the increase was due largely to the government’s pledges to supply capital to Fannie Mae (FNMA.OB) and Freddie Mac (FMCC.OB) and to guarantee more mortgages to the support the housing market.
Increased guarantees for loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration, the Government National Mortgage Association and the Veterans administration increased the government’s commitments by $512.4 billion alone in the year to June 30, according to the report.
“Indeed, the current outstanding balance of overall Federal support for the nation’s financial system…has actually increased more than 23% over the past year, from approximately $3.0 trillion to $3.7 trillion — the equivalent of a fully deployed TARP program — largely without congressional action, even as the banking crisis has, by most measures, abated from its most acute phases,” the TARP inspector general, Neil Barofsky, wrote in the report.
The spending has to stop. Programs and new spending have to be paid for or offset by cutting other government spending. This Administration is out of control.
Posted July 22, 2010 by Scared Monkeys Barack Obama, Obamanation, Obamanomics, Socialism, Tax & Spend Liberals, WTF | 11 comments |
If you liked this post, you may also like these:
Comments
11 Responses to “Remember the $700 Billion TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) … Its Now $3.7 Trillion”
Leave a Reply
jebus cripes, they are giving the bulk of the loot to the people who caused this. and BF is the one who penned the wall street regulations, wonder who will get the money from that cherry of a bill?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
This is out and out theft from the people by the Federal Government.
Fannie Mae and Fredie Mac are the prime reason that the credit markets almost failed.
Whenever the government forces mortgage lenders to make high risk loans, that have no hope of being paid, this is what happens.
The administrative branch of our federal government has done exactly what our founders feared would be done. They with the aid of the Democratic controlled congress are ignoring our Constitution and the Judicial branch, specifically the Supreme Court sits on their hands and does nothing.
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer Andrew
Taylor, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 18 mins ago
WASHINGTON – New estimates from the White House on Friday predict the budget deficit will reach a record $1.47 trillion this year. The government is borrowing 41 cents of every dollar it spends.
The Office of Management and Budget report has ominous news for President Barack Obama should he seek re-election in 2012 — a still-high unemployment rate of 8.1 percent.
While there’s a slight improvement in the deficit for the current year, next year’s predicted $1.42 trillion worth of red ink — that’s 37 cents of borrowing for every dollar spent — is looking worse. It’s about $150 billion more than previously predicted, because of still-slumping tax revenues.
I just wish I could go back and stop the President from ever enacting the TARP funding. How dare Bush leave us this terrible program?
OK, to be more serious here, the Reuters article linked to does mention TARP, but I don’t see where it states that TARP has grown beyond its initial funding. It seems to be using the TARP funding amount as a measuring device, or yardstick, to discuss other support within financial systems. That is if I read the article correctly (try it, it really, really works).
____________
SM: TARP was a program that had Obama’s full blessing and yes it was a terrible program. Do you think just because GWB did it that we are going to say it was great? It was the foot in the door to Obama’s ridiculous bailouts. Sorry, SM takes Republicans to task as well.
R
#4-
Just to make sure we keep things in perspective; according to http://goo.gl/f3rp, the CBO predicted deficit for the end of fiscal 2009 (Sept) on 1-7-2009 was $1.2T.
Prior years actuals were about $100B for 2007 and $400B for 2008; if you look at the trend begun a few years ago, it adds to understanding where we may be going, and how we got there.
_______________
SM: Sorry Lib … you and your ilk are not going to be able to explain away the Obama deficits and record budgets. Obama is one and done.
R
#5-SM,
Well, where are the comments about Bush on TARP from this blog? Did you do then what you say now?
However, more importantly, what is the response to my comment on the linked article, that there is no link from TARP to the $3.7T it and you discuss?
#6-SM,
So are you trying to say that the carry-over budget from the Bush admin of an estimated $1.2T is totally because of Obama?
If Obama made no budget changes and the next years deficit remained at $1.2T, that by not changing the Bush budget Obama is nevertheless responsible for the ensuing deficit?
What if Obama made budget changes to cut the deficit in half in the next fiscal year; does he get credit for lowering the deficit or blame that there still is a deficit of $600B?
To round out the possible scenarios, if the following Obama budget raises the deficit to $1.4T, does he own the change of $200B, or the entire deficit?
When one takes a position, which they are entitled to, the consequences naturally include an explanation. It will be interesting to hear you explain your position and describe how that plays out. I, for one, would like to see the math of your position and the related accountability.
To bring this home, should we expect a new President to immediately and totally reverse a budget deficit to avoid being accountable the first dollar of deficit, taking into consideration the inherent inertia of government operations year over year, where programs (including Iraq and Afghanistan) are ongoing and need funds?
Debt at the end of Bush, Jr…11.8 trillion dollars. Debt under Obama now 13.2 trillion dollars. A raise of 1.5 trillion dollars due primarily to the stimulus and the passing of the unpassed final Bush, Jr. budget. President Obama has also instituted spending cuts which will pay back his portion of the national debt. But we are still stuck with the debt primarily accrued under Reagan and the Bushes.George, Jr. ran up more debt than any and all previous administrations in the entire history of America.
Now blog that!
_____________
SM: Libs, spare us the BS. Obama and Democrats will be run out of office because of their irresponsible spending.
I know this is difficult for you folks to deal with, but it is the reality. We did not need the Obama stimulus which has been a colassal disaster. We certainly did not need the cash cow of Obamacare that was a fiscal lie.
Say goodbye Libs, you will not see power again for decades. You have proved the the American people you are not worthy of office. Now the Republicans better have learned a friggin lesson in being responsible to the people and future generations or they will be thrown out to.
Say goodbye Obama.
Thank you Barack Obama:
White House predicts record $1.47 trillion deficit
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100723/ap_on_bi_ge/us_budget_deficit_2
New estimates from the White House on Friday predict the budget deficit will reach a record $1.47 trillion this year. The government is borrowing 41 cents of every dollar it spends.
That’s actually a little better than the administration predicted in February.
The new estimates paint a grim unemployment picture as the economy experiences a relatively jobless recovery. The unemployment rate, presently averaging 9.5 percent, would average 9 percent next year under the new estimates.
The Office of Management and Budget report has ominous news for President Barack Obama should he seek re-election in 2012 — a still-high unemployment rate of 8.1 percent. That would be well above normal, which is closer to a rate of 5.5 percent to 6 percent. Private economists don’t think the unemployment rate will drop to those levels until well into this decade.
The gaping deficits are of increasing concern to voters. But Obama and Democrats controlling Congress are mostly taking a pass on deficit reduction this year as they await possible recommendations from Obama’s deficit commission.
Yes Bush spend too much money. Yes Bush started this bail out crap but I thought Obama was all about “Change” how is it change when he continually spends spends spends. So he took the deficit and did what? he increased it.
Take a look for yourself
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Obamas-trillions-dwarf-Bushs-dangerous-spending.html
It’s only gotten worse not better. I thought he was going to fix things not make them worse.
Or try this one
http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748704320104575015072822042394.html
Either way you look at it Obama is spending more not less and he hasn’t been in office two years yet.