Gasp! Horror! The Government is MAKING Money on the TARP?

Regardless of whether or not the government makes money off of this "investment," it is not the job of the government to do so. The government needs to provide for my freedom, not invest my money for me. It is not a corporation. Long term, TARP will not work. The government becoming a shareholder (and thus taking an amount of control of the corporation) is not right. Note the problems Japan is still having despite decades of similar "stimulus" plans. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122938932478509075.html

That is certainly a nice little bit of good news for the short term, but it fails to account for the massive increase in the Adjusted Monetary Base as reported by the St. Louis FED. History shows that a deflation of the economy (which started in November), accompanied by "quantitative easing" (i.e. printing money en masse by the central bank) precedes a hyperinflation. In other words, the U.S. dollar is soon to be toast. Once that occurs, there will be no "earnings" or appreciation of those government-purchased assets. The price levels will drop, and if the government tries to "help" everyone even further, then it will likely prolong the misery. Consider, for example, this very revealing chart by Chart of the Day which shows clearly that the economy began accelerating its decline AFTER the FED and Treasury received their $700billion "bailout" package, which was actually nothing more than the federalization of the U.S. financial system in disguise: http://www.chartoftheday.com/20081205.htm?T Now that the U.S. financial sector has been socialized...the chart above tells us how well the government will continue to manage it from here. I am VERY concerned for the misery that will soon engulf those caught unaware when the hyperinflation occurs. Individuals truly need to do the research they need in order to know the historical "safe havens" for their investments and savings (i.e. physical precious metals) before they have none to harbor.

I hear you saying, that fair-value accounting losses that taxpayers are covering in the TARP aren't as serious for the government as they are for other kinds of financial-services companies. "While attention-getting, the mark-to-market loss,"will not accurately indicate actual or expected losses with the TARP Funding?" In addition, mark-to-market losses, except for the "impairment of many smaller companies," will not affect the governments statutory capital or the rating agency capital requirements." Best of all, from what I understand, is that this situation spawns confusion about the real effect of fair-value losses on the company's current "tradable, liquid portfolios of derivative assets and liabilities. There is more then one meaning to the phrase: Loss of Values

Why does FBN not utilize Funds Transfer Pricing for better market contextualization that libor ?

In fact, I'd say ? EVEN if the plane crashed, liquor on board ? ugh I'd rather hit Mrs' Henderson's right thigh, and that's the LAST thing I - oh nm. No, rather than that, if I were on that plane in the Andes of the Soccer Team ? I would have gone on a VENTURE to get out. screw that just say NO to cannabalism.

Where are you getting your numbers? Were these numbers provided by the government? Were they provided by the same companies that initially rubberstamped securities as AAA? This is my problem with your logic. If the banks needed to be saved...and by "saved", I mean they needed money. The government steps in and bails them out. Now, a couple months later, the banks are saved (they got the money they needed) and the government profited (they got money too). Where did this money magically come from. If after just a couple of months, profit is realized by the government, the banks wouldn't have needed any rescue (they could have just waited a couple of months and received this magical profit the government is now reaping). This is called a non sequitor. I'm fairly confident that either: A) You are part of some kind of misinformation campaign (prodded by either greed or hopeful thinking), or B) You have about as much understanding of the economy as the jerks that got us into this mess.

Great. When do I get my money back plus my cut of the "profits"? Oh wait, who's $700+ trillion was that, because our government is broke?

Somewhat easy to make money at this point when the market crashed and the government (which helped lead to this problem) was sitting there with cash on the sideline ready to invest. Now, I hope they start taking some of the profits (i.e. realizing them) and putting that money into protecting the public from the ultimate Ponzi scheme that we call Social "IN"security.

How much control is the government creating for itself over private enterprises? If the government is a vested partner in all these companies; what say and influence will it have in addition to regulatory processes? Is this not about CONTROL of everyone for and by the government? President Reagan had it right "government is not the SOLUTION to the problem; government IS the PROBLEM!"

I would hope any investors could make a little money with $247.26 billion; I know I could. The key in your post is: "currently valued at $255.10 billion". The day before you buy a new car the current value is much higher than the day you drive it off the lot. Time will tell. And it's a little too early to be counting those eggs, because I'm not seeing any chickens, yet. Another way we should measure profits in is: Purchasing power. With the devaluation of the dollar, everyone should be "making more money" because the value of money has gone down. Stocks should be rising with the inflation of the money supply.

Do we know which companies are included in the 184 companies? How much was "invested" in each and what did the government get in return? Did the government purchase stocks in each of them? What is the percentage of ownership did the government acquire? How many real investors dumped those stocks; and what did the value of those stocks do when the government purchased them? What would those stocks have done if the government did NOT purchase them? Is there a benchmark that the government would "sell" those stocks to get the money back? If so, then what actually will happen with that "profit"? will it be put back to reduce the amount borrowed or will the $700 billion become a slush fund to bail out other companies? At what point has this become a hostile takeover as opposed to a bailout or loan? I am not sure where we are seeing the "good news" yet. If we follow the ball for what happened in the Great Depression; it was primarily due to Government interference. If we raise tarriffs on goods; then those counties will retaliate just as the 66 countries did in the Great Depression contributing to its worsening. There are many similarities to what is happening now. The more government gets involved in private sectors; the worse this will get.

If they turned a profit so quick, then why did we need to bail them out in the first place??

By the way, if they actually do make a profit, do you think they will end up sending it back to the taxpayers?? Naw, they will just either 1. Shore up there own govt balance sheet or 2. Fund another govt agency. I suspect the latter. Of course, this "profit" will be after bonuses are paid out to the executives. Wow, what a poor investment equation. Taxpayers take all the risk but they don't actually receive any reward. I hope I'm wrong.

Profit is an incorrect way of looking at the governments "gain". More accurately it is a 100% tax on the stock and dividends. This is a very dangerous precedent.

Gosh!! I hope wall street don't hear about this. It might cause them to turn a profit too instead of nose diving every time a challenge faces them. What a mess!!!!!

This is all fairy-dust being sprinkled on the public's rose colored glasses. I'll reference just one bail-out, not to long ago,called the,"S&L Bailout"(1987-93)that cost the american taxpayers $124 Billion USD out of a total $150 Billion USD put in totally! Now, when these banks we bailed out,ie.)Citigroup is my best example, the warrants, and preferred(shares)stock will be worthless,which I feel the public isn't being fairly educated about. Thanks Brian,Oh I watch your ole partner Dylan religiosly,...

Yes, actually it is horrible. The government shouldn't be in business at all. That's socialism.

You and I ARE the government. When will you see the profits? You will see the profits in the form of slightly lower taxes, or slightly greater gov't services if Congress and the new president choose to spend it. I do not trust them to spend wisely so I would rather have lower taxes but those are the 2 choices or some combo of the two. Why did we bail them if they are turning a profit so quickly? Because fear and panic, drove stock prices down quickly for reasons not based on the fundamentals of the stocks, so the stocks went up rapidly causing the profit by the gov't. I have no problem with this profit