Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Congress: The clowns are running the circus
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, October 30, 2008

Or you could just put this under that endless category about the law of unintended consequences:
The government said it was giving banks more money so they could make more loans. Dollars paid to shareholders don't serve that purpose, but Treasury officials say that suspending quarterly dividend payments would have deterred banks from participating in the voluntary program.

Critics, including economists and members of Congress, question why banks should get government money if they already have enough money to pay dividends — or conversely, why banks that need government money are still spending so much on dividends.
Because they can? Because some of them didn't need the bailout money but were forced to take it?

This has certain members of Congress all upset and huffy:
"The whole purpose of the program is to increase lending and inject capital into Main Street. If the money is used for dividends, it defeats the purpose of the program," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has called for the government to require a suspension of dividend payments.
Was it Sen. Schumer? Then why didn't you specify that?
The Treasury's approach contrasts with decisions by foreign governments, including Britain and Germany, to require banks that accept public investments to suspend dividend payments until the government is repaid. The U.S. government similarly required Chrysler to suspend its dividend payments as a condition of the government's 1979 bailout.

The legislation passed by Congress authorizing the Treasury's current bailout program is silent on the issue.
As HL Menken once said:
The theory behind representative government is that superior men—or at all events, men not inferior to the average in ability and integrity—are chosen to manage the public business, and that they carry on this work with reasonable intelligence and honesty. There is little support for that theory in the known facts...
And that point is becoming more and more obvious every day.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
"The whole purpose of the program is to increase lending and inject capital into Main Street. If the money is used for dividends, it defeats the purpose of the program," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has called for the government to require a suspension of dividend payments.

Ya know, I’m starting to suspect that Chuckie - and the rest of the filthy democrats (spit) - just don’t understand the free market or what the hell a company is SUPPOSED TO DO.

I recall getting into an argument with an idiot liberal (sorry: redundant) about his idea that the purpose of a company was to put people to work. Survey says:

BZZZZZZZ!

No: the purpose of a company is to make money for its owners. It typically must employ people to provide the goods or services that it sells to other people (hopefully) at a profit to achieve this goal, but it doesn’t exist just to employ people. Similarly, banks don’t exist just to make loans.

Now, the REASON that people start businesses or invest in them is encapsulated in this notion that they’ll make money - a profit - from doing so. If they own stock, they get this money in the form of dividends and / or increased value of the stock, which they realize as a capital gain when they sell it. News flash to Chuckie and his fellow socialists:

NO DIVIDEND, NO INVESTMENT. HIGH CAPITAL GAINS TAX, NO INVESTMENT. NO INVESTMENT, EVENTUALLY NO CAPITAL.

What will stockholders do when they find out that the banks in which they own shares are going to stop paying dividends? Could it be that they’ll rush to pull out their investment money by selling the shares? Could it be that the result would be a collapse of the bank? Oddly enough, Chuckie of all members of Congress ought to know this, as he caused a run on a bank, Indymac, in the recent past:
In a written statement, the Office of Thrift Supervision, which regulated IndyMac, said “the immediate cause” of the failure was statements made by Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat. Mr. Schumer in late June publicly raised concerns about the bank’s solvency.

“Although this institution was already in distress, I am troubled by any interference in the regulatory process,” said OTS Director John Reich.
Jeebus, can we please lock this damned fool in a room somewhere to stop him doing more harm to our financial system???

I also wonder exactly who Chuckie thinks the banks should be lending money to??? Could it be that the moron wants them to continue - among other things - offering housing loans to people who can’t really afford them? This has been democrat (spit) policy for years and played a key role in causing this financial crisis. Given the dems’ (spit) absolute refusal to admit that they had ANYTHING to do with causing it, somehow I doubt that they’ll reconsider this policy. To the contrary: I think that they’ll try to EXPAND the program as part of the new Bill of Rights we’re starting to hear about. You’ve got a RIGHT to a nice house... whether you can pay for it or not. And if you can’t... Well, The Annointed One will find some wealth to spread in your direction, no matter who else it hurts.
 
Written By: docjim505
URL: http://
You mean to say the bailout/buy-in/prop-up plan might not have been such a good idea? Who’d have known?
 
Written By: Arcs
URL: http://
"and the rest of the filthy democrats (spit"

Let’s not forget that it was a bipartisan idea. Both parties were in a rush to pass the legislation.



*******************

"Do not rub hard as the texturizing materials may wear off,"

Oooooh. But the harder I rub, the better it feels.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
timactual,

Point well taken.

Sigh... We’re so screwed.
 
Written By: docjim505
URL: http://
Herpes infections are contagious
into contact with other people
Wash your hands frequently to prevent passing
is someone trying to tell us Congress is like herpes?
Geeze, ya know....now that I say it.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
My Congressman voted against the financial bailout both times. He tried offering free market alternatives but they (both R & D) weren’t having it.

Voting him back in is my only motivation I have for going to vote Tuesday.
 
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
Damn the spammers! DAMN THEM!!!!
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
I have to note that one Democrat friend of mine was also strongly against the bail out and wanted a free market solution.
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
I really thought the fiscal conservatives would play a major role in this election; we’ve been so abandoned for so long. But since the financial crisis has been successfully painted as being the result of being insufficiently careless with our money, and the solution being to toss the money around even more freely, I guess not.

Maybe we can rally for 2010? Maybe? Will somebody please grab my fiscal conservative vote? I want to give it to you, I really do.

(I find myself wondering how many more people like me there are. If you ask me if I’m satisfied with the (R)s, I’ll say no, but that doesn’t mean I’m ready to elect a socialist(D)! That’s falling prey to the two-party fallacy. Ah, well, what’s a little Great Depression among friends and countrymen?)
 
Written By: Jeremy Bowers
URL: http://www.jerf.org/iri
C’mon, is anyone really surprised?

Which of those self-important d*uche bags in congress (yes small ’c’)
[1] actually read the legislation before they voted yea
[2] of whose who read and **understood** it, cared about the consequences (unintended and otherwise)?

How about
[1] virtually none
[2] less than that



 
Written By: tim stevens
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider