Published: Monday, Dec. 17 2012 12:00 a.m. MST
Those that opposed TARP should at least be in favor of going back to limiting
consumer and commercial banks from merging. Commercial banks can take as much
risk as they want - with their own money and no planned or unplanned government
backing.But governing banks seems to be a one party ideal now.
Mr. Bennett, we miss you; why can't other Utahn Congressman be positive
and cheerful? The government, just like business, makes money; nothing wrong
I guess sometimes SOCIALISM can be very profitable.Does that make up
for the Solyndra?
Unfortunately, some will greet any news regarding govt. success as failure when
seen through a different lens. They want no evidence. Only talking points.
I appreciate Mr. Bennett's honesty in this matter. I wish more people in
Washington were 'pragmatic' in their assessments, as Bennett appears
to be on this issue.
Utah Republicans, you could have had Mr. Bennett, as solid a conservative as
you'll ever hope to see, representing you in the Senate.But no.
You let the Tea Party jerk you around and now we're all stuck with that
monumental embarrassment, Mike Lee, who is making a name for himself by being
simultaneously doctrinaire and breathtakingly incompetent.
What Bennett fails to acknowledge (and always did as a sitting Senator), is the
debilitating precedent TARP established when the government was allowed to begin
picking winners and losers. At the time I warned what would ensue when
government could continue to be more oppressive and more omnipresent in every
facet of our society, and now we see the fruition of the dangerous trajectory
that began with TARP. He's right, both parties participated, and so it is -
those who favor big government solutions to everything in what was once a free
market economy have now achieved their aims.And yes, I would have
preferred a worldwide financial meltdown as opposed to what we have inherited as
the natural consequence of TARP and everything that came afterward. The debt and
deficits designed to provide stimulus to the economy have proven to be
disastrous, and have only delayed the economic recovery. Keynes was wrong. I
believe in optimism, but hailing TARP as a success as he does in this article
speaks volumes about why Bob Bennett is now sitting on the outside of Washington
looking in. He will find no justification for his defeat by claiming
victory for TARP.
"Utah Republicans, you could have had Mr. Bennett, as solid a conservative
as you'll ever hope to see, representing you in the Senate."Ah, to many Bennett and conservative are mutually exclusive of each other
because he was open to that radical concept promoted by out founding fathers -
compromise. Despite the fact that TARP has been successful - what is missing
from this opinion piece is that FIAT has announced they will buy more Chrysler
stock. It was a program started by a republican, and implemented by
a Democrat. And it worked. Who would have thought.
We need more Senator Bennetts. Unfortunately, it won't happen. At least
not in the current GOP.
"The debt and deficits designed to provide stimulus to the economy have
proven to be disastrous, and have only delayed the economic recovery."I have seen this talking point so often - minus any facts to support it
- it has become silly.@Goatsnotes.... ok... provide some study
that details how a global banking lending meltdown would have been a better
solution to what was done. Anything. Show us all how cutting off credit to
most every business, would have been better. How having no working capital
would have provided a better solution. How in the world was this worse then the
great depression where financial systems did fail.... show us all how this was
a worse outcome... please.
Senator Bennett's between the line message - I told you so. And I agree,
Sen. Bennett you were right. We should have listened.As a state
delegate I held Mr. Bennett, a member of the banking committee, responsible for
failing to recognize the risks derivative trading posed to the country's
financial sector. 700 billion in loans was enormous. Hank Paulson admitted he
didn't know how much he needed so he just said 700 B because that was a
lot. I was shocked by the apparent recklessness. However, I will now eat crow
if the bailout was not a bailout at all, but a short-term stabilizing loan.
There were no socializing losses and privatizing profits. Unfortunately the consequence, as mentioned above, is new stimulus and TARP
step-children every year. Is this article an explanation for why
so few people went to jail for the collapse.
Thanks, Sen. Bennett, for an informative article. I'm no economic whiz, so
I particularly appreciated the paragraph below: "The details of
TARP were not widely understood and it was widely opposed. Those leaders who did
understand how serious the problem was, and how well TARP was designed to deal
with them, did the right thing and moved ahead anyway."This is
exactly how a republican form of government should work. Leaders must work hard
to understand the issues, then make the best decision, regardless of politics
and polls. By the way, I think the media have done a poor job of
telling us how successful TARP has been.
Let the GOP witch-hunt of political purity continue.They will
continue to purge and burn any all so-called RINOs until they are extinct.Reminds me so much of the ignorant villagers in Monty Python's Holy
Grail."We did do the nose, and the hat...but she's still a
Witch!""She has got a wart."BURN her anyway!Sen. Bob Bennett was burned by his own village idiots.
As the debt ratio increases, the exchange value of the dollar may fall. Paying
back debt with cheaper currency could cause investors (including other
governments) to demand higher interest rates if they anticipate further dollar
depreciation. Paying higher interest rates could slow domestic U.S. growth.Higher debt increases interest payments on the debt, which already
exceed $430 billion annually, or about 15 cents of every tax dollar for 2008.
According to the CIA Factbook, nine countries have debt to GDP ratios over 100%
for 2010, the largest of which is Japan at approximately 197.5%.Further, a high public debt to GDP ratio may also slow economic growth.
Economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff calculated that countries with
public debt above 90 percent of GDP grow by an average of 1.3 percentage points
per year slower than less indebted countries. The public debt-to-GDP ratio in
March 2010 is about 60 percent of GDP; CBO projects it will reach 90 percent
around 2020 under policies in place in 2010. If growth slows, all of the
economic challenges the United States faces will worsen.That's
why debt and deficits will kill America, Mr. Bennett.
Providing “for the common defense” is one of the primary reasons our
Founding Fathers ordained and established the Constitution. Moreover, they
clearly wanted the defense imperative to be unmistakable, so they put it in the
Constitution’s very first sentence, the Preamble. Later, in Article I,
Section 8, they gave Congress the power “to lay and collect taxes”
and “to borrow money on the credit of the United States” in order to
fulfill the imperatives.In short, we have gone far beyond the
original intent language, and we continue to gut the meanings based on
"modern contingencies" not foreseen as justification for unlimited
borrowing, advocated now by Geithner and Obama. The Founders told us to defend
America then told us how to pay for it (tax, and borrow on credit). Could the
founders have made it any clearer? Maybe, just maybe, if they’d said it
something like this: “The president and the Congress must defend this
country; to do that properly, Congress must maintain the country’s good
credit, and must tax and borrow as necessary.”Excessive debt
is an existential security threat to us.
Screwdriver,There are still laws in place that prevent the merger of
different types of banks. Your classification of “consumer” banks
and “commercial” banks is unknown in the industry. Can you explain,
please, what types of banks you mean? Do you mean investment banks and
commercial banks?As evidenced by the debate over TAG extension,
dudd-frank failed miserably in its goal of ending too-big-to-fail.Actually, the TARP that passed the dem house and senate would have been a
miserable failure had not Paulson modified how the funds were used. The dem
congress said to buy the bad assets, though no price was established and there
was NO market. Paulson used the funds to invest in bank capital – which
has been / is being repaid with interest.Geithner is reducing the
profit the treasury could be making on TARP by converting the 5% – 9%
paying preferred stock to common, and then dumping it for less than treasury
paid for it. Geithner’s actions make no economic sense.Where
we will lose money from TARP is the housing and auto bailouts – beyond
Thanks, Senator, for the update. Unfortunately, the Republicans have turned TARP
into just another myth that they use to test for political purity. When will the
GOP come back to reality? Can't see it happening in the foreseeable future.
Banks motto: private profits and public risk
We miss you, Senator Bennett. How refreshing to hear a politician say 'I
was wrong.' How encouraging to see someone privilege evidence over
Goatesnotes: "And yes, I would have preferred a worldwide financial meltdown
as opposed to what we have inherited as the natural consequence of TARP and
everything that came afterward."Really? You'd prefer
global economic failure? 25% unemployment within developed nations? Widespread
disruptions of food production? Millions of Americans losing their homes?
Massive global political upheaval? Do you have some kind of
"Road Warrior" post-apocalypse fantasy in your head? I think you must,
because that's exactly what "worldwide financial meltdown" would
create.I swear, Democrats don't need to pay consultants to
devise strategies for running against Republicans - all that's required is
to just remind voters of what Republicans go around saying out loud.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments