[AndyJackson]

The government was supporting the banking system

This semantic distortion is what I mean by your dishonest and transparent shilling. The government was not supporting the "banking system." The Federal Reserve was supporting a small number of very large banks. The former is the excuse. As we have been learning ever more and more, the point of the exercies, the purchase of congressional votes, the stuffing of cabinet agencies was all done for a few banks. If others got a few crumbs, well it is an old trading rule that you leave some profit on the table for the other guy.

You, and those for whom you are a shill, try to portray this as a win-win. But as the enormity of the cost of all of this becomes apparent, it is obvious that the American public have lost, big time. My initial reaction to Paulson's ploy to get TARP remains. Give us $700 B (it turned out to be a lot more than that as we have seen), or we will take down the US economy.

Your defense of a bunch of high priced looters is immoral.

[Toddsterpatriot]

The government was supporting the banking system. They supported large and small banks alike. Enormity of the cost? The bank portion of TARP was repaid, at a profit. The Fed short term loans were repaid, with interest. The only loss from TARP will be from the auto portion, the mortgage modification (giveaway) portion, and the money used to prop up Fannie and Freddie.

Paulson claimed "we will take down the US economy"? LOL!

The only thing funnier than your ignorance is your poor memory.

[takenoprisoner]

By my standard, anyone who supported TARP is a socialist. It was unconstitutional, and corrupted.