Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Reading in the local rag over my cup of joe this morning that the govt. may look into using some of the already paid back TARP money to help boost job recovery and some in the GOP are bitching. Can somebody tell me why? As somebody who is probably gonna be losing his job in the next 2 weeks-it was only a temporary assignment, but was hoping for longer-there is no greater need in this nation right now other than job creation.

Not health care, not the goddamned atmosphere, but JOBS, JOBS, JOBS! j-o-b-s!!!

I know I am not the most rational of people discussing politics, therefore, I leave it to you my much higher educated and enlightened board brothers and sisters. Thanks!

catamount man wrote:Reading in the local rag over my cup of joe this morning that the govt. may look into using some of the already paid back TARP money to help boost job recovery and some in the GOP are bitching. Can somebody tell me why? As somebody who is probably gonna be losing his job in the next 2 weeks-it was only a temporary assignment, but was hoping for longer-there is no greater need in this nation right now other than job creation.

Not health care, not the goddamned atmosphere, but JOBS, JOBS, JOBS! j-o-b-s!!!

I know I am not the most rational of people discussing politics, therefore, I leave it to you my much higher educated and enlightened board brothers and sisters. Thanks!

Conks want big corporations to pocket the loot.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

catamount man wrote:Reading in the local rag over my cup of joe this morning that the govt. may look into using some of the already paid back TARP money to help boost job recovery and some in the GOP are bitching. Can somebody tell me why? As somebody who is probably gonna be losing his job in the next 2 weeks-it was only a temporary assignment, but was hoping for longer-there is no greater need in this nation right now other than job creation.

Not health care, not the goddamned atmosphere, but JOBS, JOBS, JOBS! j-o-b-s!!!

I know I am not the most rational of people discussing politics, therefore, I leave it to you my much higher educated and enlightened board brothers and sisters. Thanks!

Conks want big corporations to pocket the loot.

is that due to the constant belief that the GOP thinks that only businesses can create jobs? Again, a serious question. I will agree that a company that has the ability to hire will hire, but they have to have some money to do so. So, wouldn't that be coming from the unused TARP money? Thanks.

catamount man wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Conks want big corporations to pocket the loot.

is that due to the constant belief that the GOP thinks that only businesses can create jobs? Again, a serious question. I will agree that a company that has the ability to hire will hire, but they have to have some money to do so. So, wouldn't that be coming from the unused TARP money? Thanks.

naaaah, just plain old fashioned greed, you know, the thing that got us into this mess in the first place

OSBF wrote:

catamount man wrote:
is that due to the constant belief that the GOP thinks that only businesses can create jobs? Again, a serious question. I will agree that a company that has the ability to hire will hire, but they have to have some money to do so. So, wouldn't that be coming from the unused TARP money? Thanks.

naaaah, just plain old fashioned greed, you know, the thing that got us into this mess in the first place

if the company hoards the money, how does that help them? Would it not be better to put that money into a product, this case an actual person, who can then help that company out by putting out a good product through production which then pleases the customer who is THEN willing to pay money for said product bringing money back into the original company that hired the employee? again, thanks.

OSBF wrote:
naaaah, just plain old fashioned greed, you know, the thing that got us into this mess in the first place

The government is just as greedy as any business. At least the business has to come up with some product that you are willing to spend your money on while the government just passed a law or imposes a regulation. At least in the former you have the utility of the product or its' entertainment value while in the latter you are just out the money. And with the business you are free to choose where you spend your money. With the government, it decides where and how your money is spent.

1. EVERY PENNY of TARP is borrowed, running up the Deficit...Thus, any TARP money not used does not have to be borrowed, keeping the deficit down (A stated goal of the Obama Administration, I might point out)

2. EVERY PENNY of TARP paid back should go to reduce the deficit (A stated goal of the Obama Administration, I might point out)

3. ANY TARP money paid back that is then plowed into something else keeps the deficit up (Contrary to a stated goal of the Obama Administration), no matter how noble the idea may sound...

C-Man...does that answer your question...

Col Hogan wrote:1. EVERY PENNY of TARP is borrowed, running up the Deficit...Thus, any TARP money not used does not have to be borrowed, keeping the deficit down (A stated goal of the Obama Administration, I might point out)

2. EVERY PENNY of TARP paid back should go to reduce the deficit (A stated goal of the Obama Administration, I might point out)

3. ANY TARP money paid back that is then plowed into something else keeps the deficit up (Contrary to a stated goal of the Obama Administration), no matter how noble the idea may sound...

C-Man...does that answer your question...

it helps yes, so how do we create jobs without running up the deficit? Thanks.

catamount man wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:1. EVERY PENNY of TARP is borrowed, running up the Deficit...Thus, any TARP money not used does not have to be borrowed, keeping the deficit down (A stated goal of the Obama Administration, I might point out)

2. EVERY PENNY of TARP paid back should go to reduce the deficit (A stated goal of the Obama Administration, I might point out)

3. ANY TARP money paid back that is then plowed into something else keeps the deficit up (Contrary to a stated goal of the Obama Administration), no matter how noble the idea may sound...

C-Man...does that answer your question...

it helps yes, so how do we create jobs without running up the deficit? Thanks.

That's a good question, one I'm not sure government is equipped to answer.

catamount man wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:1. EVERY PENNY of TARP is borrowed, running up the Deficit...Thus, any TARP money not used does not have to be borrowed, keeping the deficit down (A stated goal of the Obama Administration, I might point out)

2. EVERY PENNY of TARP paid back should go to reduce the deficit (A stated goal of the Obama Administration, I might point out)

3. ANY TARP money paid back that is then plowed into something else keeps the deficit up (Contrary to a stated goal of the Obama Administration), no matter how noble the idea may sound...

C-Man...does that answer your question...

it helps yes, so how do we create jobs without running up the deficit? Thanks.

Since when has anybody in the federal government ever given a sh!t about the deficit..?
and why start caring about it now..?



this baffles me...
we could balance the budget and correct the deficit in 3 years if we closed just 50% of our 800 global military bases and curbed the global war machine...

pretending we care about the budget and the deficit is a game...
the answer is staring us right in the face and has been for 40 years

Chizzang wrote:

catamount man wrote:
it helps yes, so how do we create jobs without running up the deficit? Thanks.

Since when has anybody in the federal government ever given a sh!t about the deficit..?
and why start caring about it now..?



this baffles me...
we could balance the budget and correct the deficit in 3 years if we closed just 50% of our 800 global military bases and curbed the global war machine...

pretending we care about the budget and the deficit is a game...
the answer is staring us right in the face and has been for 40 years

Ron Paul.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Since when has anybody in the federal government ever given a sh!t about the deficit..?
and why start caring about it now..?



this baffles me...
we could balance the budget and correct the deficit in 3 years if we closed just 50% of our 800 global military bases and curbed the global war machine...

pretending we care about the budget and the deficit is a game...
the answer is staring us right in the face and has been for 40 years

Ron Paul.

A-men to that...
His attack on the Federal Reserve (A private organization) is awesome...



The Italian used to work at the Fed and was not at liberty to discuss much... but these days she flat out claims it "Needs to be shut down"

Chizzang wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: Ron Paul.

A-men to that...
His attack on the Federal Reserve (A private organization) is awesome...



The Italian used to work at the Fed and was not at liberty to discuss much... but these days she flat out claims it "Needs to be shut down"

Do you know how many people don't realize it's a private orginization? If for no other reason than the "Audit the Fed" bill (and hopefully the "End the Fed" bill) I would be a huge Ron Paul fan. Just so happens, we agree on a lot.

ASUMountaineer wrote:

Chizzang wrote:

A-men to that...
His attack on the Federal Reserve (A private organization) is awesome...



The Italian used to work at the Fed and was not at liberty to discuss much... but these days she flat out claims it "Needs to be shut down"

Do you know how many people don't realize it's a private orginization? If for no other reason than the "Audit the Fed" bill (and hopefully the "End the Fed" bill) I would be a huge Ron Paul fan. Just so happens, we agree on a lot.

YA..!!!
Secrets of the Federal Reserve is a book I was FORCED to read in school - of course I now act like I knew that stuff all along...

Secret #1: It's a private organization not a federal organization

Col Hogan wrote:1. EVERY PENNY of TARP is borrowed, running up the Deficit...Thus, any TARP money not used does not have to be borrowed, keeping the deficit down (A stated goal of the Obama Administration, I might point out)

2. EVERY PENNY of TARP paid back should go to reduce the deficit (A stated goal of the Obama Administration, I might point out)

3. ANY TARP money paid back that is then plowed into something else keeps the deficit up (Contrary to a stated goal of the Obama Administration), no matter how noble the idea may sound...

C-Man...does that answer your question...

Gonna hang with the Col on this one.

Thanks to Cleets I learned something new today.

Perhaps I will read up more on this topic.

slycat wrote:Thanks to Cleets I learned something new today.

Perhaps I will read up more on this topic.

I'll take the assist then.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

slycat wrote:Thanks to Cleets I learned something new today.

Perhaps I will read up more on this topic.

I'll take the assist then.

ASUMountaineer wrote:

catamount man wrote:
it helps yes, so how do we create jobs without running up the deficit? Thanks.

That's a good question, one I'm not sure government is equipped to answer.

Banks are awefully tight with money right now. Businesses rely on credit and they aint getting it like they used to. Need to figure out a way to get credit flowing so businesses can hire.

Deficit will be taken care of when people get back to work.

D1B wrote:

ASUMountaineer wrote:
That's a good question, one I'm not sure government is equipped to answer.

Banks are awefully tight with money right now. Businesses rely on credit and they aint getting it like they used to. Need to figure out a way to get credit flowing so businesses can hire.

Deficit will be taken care of when people get back to work.

I agree with you D. It's clear throwing money at the banks isn't the complete answer. The banks have to be more responsible with their investments, but also lending to clients. It's a tough move for banks to make right now, because no one is making money. This economic "crisis" is much different from ones past, and is not an easy fix. Spending our way out of it, may or may not be the answer, but with Congress' help we may never get a chance to find the answer.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

slycat wrote:Thanks to Cleets I learned something new today.

Perhaps I will read up more on this topic.

I'll take the assist then.

Agreed.

thanks guys for all the input. I really appreciate it. Just hoping if next week IS my last week on this temp assignment, something new and PERMANENT can come my way in 2010. Merry Christmas brothers!

D1B wrote: Banks are awefully tight with money right now. Businesses rely on credit and they aint getting it like they used to. Need to figure out a way to get credit flowing so businesses can hire.

One of the biggest challenges facing lenders (I won't single out banks here, because it's affecting Credit Unions as well) is the fact that there has been a paradigm shift in underwriting and lenders are having a hard time reconciling what they USED to do with what they NEED to do going forward. This impasse is what's leading to a lot of the "tight with money" issues in the banking world.

Since the invention of the FICO score, it's been possible (in CONSUMER lending) to predict a person's propensity to repay a loan within a quantifiable margin of error based on that score. For example, if a person had a FICO of 750, you knew there was a 99.7% (+/- .1%) chance they'd repay that loan, and you could price it accordingly. Similarly, with a FICO of 650, you knew there was a 98.5% (+/- .2%) they'd repay THAT loan and could price it accordingly. When the shit hit the fan back in mid-2007, those norms went right out the window. People with FICO's in the 800's were lining up to turn in their vehicles (many hadn't even had a LATE fee yet), and people with FICO's in the 700's were walking away from houses (now a depreciating asset) at record levels. The model we've used for 25 years blew UP in the span of 6 months and everybody went spiraling off into space.

Bottom line: lenders can not use the same consumer underwriting guidelines that they've used for 25 years and many are struggling to figure out how to determine if someone will pay a loan back, how to price that loan in this brave new world of consumer lending, etc., etc. This paradigm shift has caused something akin to gridlock in the "credit" world.

Similarly, on the COMMERCIAL side, the saying is "if the cash don't flow, the loan don't go", meaning that if the business doesn't have the Debt Service Coverage (aka "cash flow") to be able to cover their existing bills AND the new loan request, the loan is denied. And many business, running at a loss as they try to stay afloat, simply do NOT have the DSC required to qualify for new "credit". It's a viscious cycle to be sure, and not one that lenders necessarily have the answer to. We need to lend to get the "economy" flowing again, but without assurances that the loan will be paid back, many lenders are simply battening down the hatches and attempting to ride out the storm.

I hardly ever say this but...nice work AZ.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:I hardly ever say this but...nice work AZ.

+2.


I've been trying to put this issue into words for my wife for a while, but my mind hasn't been able to materialize it. I'm just going to email your explanation AZ.