Daylife/Getty Images used by permission
|
The US Treasury has sold its remaining stake in Citigroup, in a deal which it says will make a $12 billion profit on its overall investment.
Citigroup was one of the worst victims of the financial crisis, and the US government stepped in with $45 billion of bail-out cash in 2008 and 2009. The money was part of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).
On Monday, the government sold off its remaining shares in the bank for $4.35 each…
The US government is in line for further earnings from Citi through the sale of warrants and preferred securities it holds.
In parallel to Citi paying off its debts, carmaker General Motors is likewise shedding itself of government control.
And the US Treasury is expected to begin selling off its stake in insurance giant AIG next year.
It is now estimated that the cost of the Troubled Asset Relief Program will cost the US taxpayer $25 billion, much less than earlier estimates.
$25 billion = the approximate current cost of 2 months of our glorious wars for freedom and democracy in the Middle East.
Good. I bought C at $3/share.
Socialism at work.
/snark
Obama kept the American financial infrastructure from collapse – and taking down everything with it. Philosophically good or bad, it was the right thing to do and a net return is icing on the cake.
It took a lot of courage to overcome the pin heads so afraid of government action, they can’t see past their 2″ dick to save their own life.
There is a reason for government.
I thought Obama was a socialist, the most liberal socialist guy ever? I’m confused. Are you trying to tell me that Obama took MY money (citizen tax dollars) and gave them to private for-profit corporations to bail them out? I thought a socialist would take the private company (GM, Citi, etc) and give their money to me (the citizen). This seems…kind of the opposite. We’re taking money from the masses/public and giving it to GM to keep it running…and NOT taking control of GM, but just selling back the shares (at a profit) as soon as possible.
If we were KEEPING control of Citigroup. Or taking their money and distributing it to the public, that WOULD be socialist. Isn’t this kind of the opposite? Would Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro take citizens money to bail out Citigroup? That doesn’t sound right.
Princess Bride: “You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Quite a gamble. Could have easily gone the other way. Of course, when you control the money supply, let accounting rules slide (remember that the bankers still don’t need to show current market value for their assets), and generally treat investors like mushrooms (in the dark and covered in manure), you might have an edge.
And why was the government picking winners and letting smaller banks die off? What part of the constitution lets Washington play favorites?
Say, didn’t Saint Ronald Reagan deregulate the Savings & Loan industry, then after completely nonsense practices, theft and just nutty financial moves, ended up having to bail out the Savings & Loan industry?
Sounds familiar. Thank god we learn from history huh!
Take a failing company whose shares are worthless, give it government guarantees that improves its balance sheet, and the share price goes up.
The cost goes into everything else where it is assumed that the government will bail them out.
The timing is perfect.
Now Citigroup can give their executives fat Christmas bonuses and claim that they deserve it for paying back the government.
“On Monday, the government sold off its remaining shares in the bank for $4.35 each…”
- I assume the government sold all their shares through Goldman-Sachs so that Timmy Geitner’s buddies get their commission.
lets ask a real question..
HOW much would they have gone in the HOLE, if they had reduced salaries, over 60% for 1 year?
Ha, ha. Some idiots here believe the USA is making a “net” profit off of the current meltdown? Holy double entry bookkeeping nonsense Batman–they’re going to fall for it==yank on the hook and line even harder!!!
I’ve even forgotten what I read about the stock sales being communicated to Wallstreet so that they could siphon off more billions while the books were organized to show a profit to the USA.
You stooges ever play the shell game?
Stoopid Humans. Finding a full meal in the fallen scraps.
>the approximate current cost of 2 months of our glorious wars for freedom and democracy in the Middle East.
Actually it is less time than that. Jake Tapper of ABC News tweets after the deal on taxes that Obama as part of the deal Obama has agreed to reinvade Iraq.
#7 I think a quick search will tell you that it was Jimmy Carter who “deregulated” the Savings and Loans. I put deregulated in quotes because they didn’t really deregulate them. They just removed SOME of the regulations and oversight while keeping the government guarantees. Just like Fanny and Freddy.
The feds bailed out the big banks not because they deserved to be bailed out, but because, like GM, letting them fail would cause far greater harm to the country than saving them. It’s like having a choice between the flu or cancer. Health isn’t a choice. You take the flu, get over it and get on with things.
All I can say is FCK the BUSH family, both the father and son. Going through the same sht for both father and son is not fun. Less so when you’re in the military.
#13–spsffan==the relevant issue, not to be fogged over, is not the “necessity” of the bailouts, but the lack of terms and conditions. No prosecutions for the crimes committed.
Bailout and Justice are not mutually exclusive.
#3: stop exaggerating. A 2″ dick is freakishly huge and frankly unbelievable.