Estimates: US Fed has lost at least $151 billion in the past seven weeks

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 26, 2013 6:13 PM GMT
    "Holding $3.3 trillion in bonds when debt prices are falling might end up costing taxpayers money, or, then again, maybe not."

    http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2013/06/26/fed-bernanke-bonds-losses/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 26, 2013 6:45 PM GMT
    Yikes!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 26, 2013 8:06 PM GMT
    Unintended said"Even to the Fed, $151 billion is a lot of money."

    Nonsense.

    "The Fed is going to lose some money on its bond market portfolio, but put in the context of the overall crisis-related bailout efforts, which have made money, it won't really matter."

    Finally, some sense.


    Except not quite:
    http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-17-28/myth-buster-tarp-bailout-may-realize-positive-return-taxpayers
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2013 2:12 AM GMT
    Unintended a.k.a Presentmind (sock) said
    sock sock sock sock sock sock sock


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2013 2:06 PM GMT
    chefBH said
    Unintended a.k.a Presentmind (sock) said
    sock sock sock sock sock sock sock




    Actually, it was Presentmind/Balancing/JockTheVote and now this one.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2013 2:08 PM GMT
    Unintended saidThis is what you always miss:

    "So it is fair to say regardless of the assumptions, it'd be hard pressed for TARP to break even let along turning a profit. If we count the other programs such as the Fed's $1.2 trillion secret loan to Wall Street, the likelihood is quite small that U.S. taxpayers would ever come out of this hole dug so deep by the banking crisis and the subsequent secret and not-so-secret bailouts. Sadly, it looks like the 99% will likely have more than just one lost decade in the course of bailing out the 1%."

    Hard pressed, but not impossible. More important, the positive economic effects are difficult to quantify. However, the bold statement is the real concern.

    I have always been critical of the Administration's approach to the recovery. I would have let certain banks fail, eschewed the payroll tax cut, immediately increased taxes on the rich and pumped more into the economy by government spending.

    Of course, Republicans would never let that happen because it would have provided a real recovery and job growth.


    And the negative effects of the bailout over time will be almost certainly larger and set the stage for problems in the future. And what did I miss? Ultimately it's the taxpayers that will bear the loss or deposit holders with
    effective default through inflation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2013 8:58 PM GMT
    We've been trying just that, spending trillions of dollars, and there's little, and sporadic recovery. How much more should we borrow and spend to make the left happy? How much more should we slow down the economy by increasing taxes? Same old crap.