There is absolutely no chance Jeb Bush wins the Fox Business/WSJ GOP debate Tuesday at 9PM

[Rigby.]

The Caliphate is forever, Brother.

I live in America brother,that's not how that works

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Elizabeth Warren launches tweetstorm after ad portraying her as a Communist

somebody embed these tweets for me

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

Wait...who wrote TARP that bailed them out?

Edit: There used to be some option on tweets to embed them...but I'm on my phone and I don't don't give a shyt what she has to say.

3x at tarp
1x at warren

edit* just found this gem:

Under the Troubled Asset Relief Program law, members of the oversight panel were paid for each day they worked at the same salary as a Cabinet secretary, roughly $200,000 a year, though the number of days they worked has not been disclosed. And panel members could hire and pay staffers whatever salary they deemed appropriate. Warren's TARP panel under scrutiny

 

[ineedsleep212]

Elizabeth Warren launches tweetstorm after ad portraying her as a Communist

somebody embed these tweets for me

Just peeped the ad and so ridiculous.

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Wait...who wrote TARP that bailed them out?

Edit: There used to be some option on tweets to embed them...but I'm on my phone and I don't don't give a shyt what she has to say.

Supporting banks by injecting capital is best practice for preventing financial and economic collapse around the world. It was, by the way, not the idea of then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson – he wanted to have the government buy up “toxic assets,” an idea that never really got off the ground (too complex, too easy to abuse and inherently nontransparent in deeply scary ways).

It was Representative Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat, who insisted that the Treasury receive the power to provide capital. Within a week of the legislation’s approval, this was the main option on the table and has remained front and center of what the government did in fall 2008 and January 2009, and what it could promise (or threaten, depending on your perspective) to do after the stress tests of spring 2009.

But three serious mistakes were made in the implementation of TARP.

First, there was no need to be so excessively generous to the financial executives (and their boards) at the institutions that had to be saved. In part this generosity was due to insufficient safeguards in the legislation (a point Ken Feinberg makes persuasively with regard to compensation), but mostly this was a choice insisted upon by key people in President Obama’s economic team.

The bankers were not even embarrassed by what happened – this was extraordinary, probably unprecedented and completely at odds with what the very same administration officials had advocated when their advice (and money from the United States and the International Monetary Fund) was needed by other countries (we cover this in detail in Chapter 2 of 13 Bankers). The historical record on this point is not in question.)

Second and closely related, the Obama administration missed the opportunity to change the structure and the incentives of Wall Street when it had the chance, at the very beginning of 2009. The Treasury line, then and now, was that the “essential functions” of the financial system had to be preserved, and this meant no one could be “punished.”

This is again a complete divergence from best practice, for example as recommended by the I.M.F. (with United States backing) in many situations over the last 50 years. The issue is not punishment or retribution; it is responsibility – and it provides incentives to be careful in the future. (Again, for more technical details, see 13 Bankers.)

Failing to seize an opportunity for reform is not sophisticated or the work of adults (as some members of the Obama administration self-servingly assert); it was simply a political mistake – and terrible economics. The idea that some banks were too big to fail arguably played a role in the run up to 2007-8; we can have that debate. But the notion that our biggest six banks are untouchable today is uncontroversial.

Their creditors know this, so these banks can borrow more cheaply than their smaller competitors, they can become larger relative to the economy, and if you doubt the risks that this poses, just look at the situation today in Ireland.

Third, by the time the administration put forward its financial reform ideas, the big banks were back on their feet – and ready to throw huge numbers of lobbyists and unlimited cash into the fight to preserve their right to take inordinate risk and to mismanage their way into disaster.

The administration’s proposals were weak to start with and were diluted by the House of Representatives (with a very few holding actions, most notably by Representative Paul Kanjorski). Surprisingly, and against great odds, the legislation was not gutted in the Senate – due primarily to the efforts of Paul Volcker (from the outside) and Senators Kaufman, Levin, Brown, and Merkley, the reforms became a little bit stronger. But the Dodd-Frank Act, while including some sensible consumer-protection measures, essentially does very little to reduce system risk as we move into a new credit cycle. In particular, there is nothing that ensures our biggest banks will be safe enough or small enough or simple enough so that in the future they cannot demand bailouts – the bailout potential exists as long as the government reasonably fears global financial panic if such banks are allowed to default on their debts

TARP Is Gone - But May Soon Be Back

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

Supporting banks by injecting capital is best practice for preventing financial and economic collapse around the world. It was, by the way, not the idea of then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson – he wanted to have the government buy up “toxic assets,” an idea that never really got off the ground (too complex, too easy to abuse and inherently nontransparent in deeply scary ways).

It was Representative Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat, who insisted that the Treasury receive the power to provide capital. Within a week of the legislation’s approval, this was the main option on the table and has remained front and center of what the government did in fall 2008 and January 2009, and what it could promise (or threaten, depending on your perspective) to do after the stress tests of spring 2009.

But three serious mistakes were made in the implementation of TARP.

First, there was no need to be so excessively generous to the financial executives (and their boards) at the institutions that had to be saved. In part this generosity was due to insufficient safeguards in the legislation (a point Ken Feinberg makes persuasively with regard to compensation), but mostly this was a choice insisted upon by key people in President Obama’s economic team.

The bankers were not even embarrassed by what happened – this was extraordinary, probably unprecedented and completely at odds with what the very same administration officials had advocated when their advice (and money from the United States and the International Monetary Fund) was needed by other countries (we cover this in detail in Chapter 2 of 13 Bankers). The historical record on this point is not in question.)

Second and closely related, the Obama administration missed the opportunity to change the structure and the incentives of Wall Street when it had the chance, at the very beginning of 2009. The Treasury line, then and now, was that the “essential functions” of the financial system had to be preserved, and this meant no one could be “punished.”

This is again a complete divergence from best practice, for example as recommended by the I.M.F. (with United States backing) in many situations over the last 50 years. The issue is not punishment or retribution; it is responsibility – and it provides incentives to be careful in the future. (Again, for more technical details, see 13 Bankers.)

Failing to seize an opportunity for reform is not sophisticated or the work of adults (as some members of the Obama administration self-servingly assert); it was simply a political mistake – and terrible economics. The idea that some banks were too big to fail arguably played a role in the run up to 2007-8; we can have that debate. But the notion that our biggest six banks are untouchable today is uncontroversial.

Their creditors know this, so these banks can borrow more cheaply than their smaller competitors, they can become larger relative to the economy, and if you doubt the risks that this poses, just look at the situation today in Ireland.

Third, by the time the administration put forward its financial reform ideas, the big banks were back on their feet – and ready to throw huge numbers of lobbyists and unlimited cash into the fight to preserve their right to take inordinate risk and to mismanage their way into disaster.

The administration’s proposals were weak to start with and were diluted by the House of Representatives (with a very few holding actions, most notably by Representative Paul Kanjorski). Surprisingly, and against great odds, the legislation was not gutted in the Senate – due primarily to the efforts of Paul Volcker (from the outside) and Senators Kaufman, Levin, Brown, and Merkley, the reforms became a little bit stronger. But the Dodd-Frank Act, while including some sensible consumer-protection measures, essentially does very little to reduce system risk as we move into a new credit cycle. In particular, there is nothing that ensures our biggest banks will be safe enough or small enough or simple enough so that in the future they cannot demand bailouts – the bailout potential exists as long as the government reasonably fears global financial panic if such banks are allowed to default on their debts

TARP Is Gone - But May Soon Be Back

Warren served as chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel created to oversee the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

Yeah she missed her chance.

 

[SubZeroDegrees]

Gegenpauling?

@SubZeroDegrees

Too bad, Rand doesn't have the clinical finisher. Beautiful movement and passing but no final product, m8.

Jeb Mourinho must be his campaign manager @horse. kills

Carly Fiorina = West Brom

 

[dennis roadman]

Too bad, Rand doesn't have the clinical finisher. Beautiful movement and passing but no final product, m8.

Jeb Mourinho must be his campaign manager @horse. kills

Carly Fiorina = West Brom

wait till he brings in Klopp to "rescue" this election season


guaranteed results :jurg: :jurg: :jurg:

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Someone should make a list of everyone on that stage who has never actually had a meaningful accomplishment in their life.

Ben Carson would probably make a horrific president, but at least she's shown he can do something.

What has Rubio ever done....I mean ever....other than manage to win elections? Is anyone ever going to point out that he's never done shyt, nor ever been asked to do shyt...and then we want to make him president?

Not to mention Fiorina, who massively failed in the very position that supposedly "qualifies" her for this role, and then has proceeded to remain unemployed for the last 11 years.

 

[88m3]

What Would Actually Happen if Ted Cruz Shut Down the IRS? | VICE | United States

 

[Tate]

If Rubio knew what was good for him he'd really start hammering his higher ed/student loan plans because I think he is probably the only one with an actual fully formed legislative proposal as a part of his platform.

His plan is basically for profit colleges, which have bad rep, and indentured servitude. Not really fun talking points.

How mad are conservatives gonna be when they all go to this Benghazi movie and it doesn't blame Hillary Clinton for all the soldiers and ambassadors dying?

Cruz will drop an oped fanfic in politico with the real ending

He's really not.

nikkas get soft thinking its sweet out here when it comes to military.

 

[Jello Biafra]

His plan is basically for profit colleges, which have bad rep, and indentured servitude. Not really fun talking points.

His plan sucks but the art of politics is painting your plan as being awesome and hoping that voters never bother to scratch beneath the surface to the parts that end up fukking them over. He could make himself look like he actually cares more than the others since they haven't even bothered to come up with any solutions at all.

 

[Jimi Swagger]

My fellow non-Democrats sadden me. Wish Condi was nominated. She is experienced and intelligent but unfortunately a repressed lesbian so the GOP will never shed that All American image.