Or, in this case, possibly funding bugout homes in, oh, Bora Bora, say.
WASHINGTON - It's something any bank would demand to know before handing out a loan: Where's the money going?
But after receiving billions in aid from U.S. taxpayers, the nation's largest banks say they can't track exactly how they're spending the money or they simply refuse to discuss it.
Excuse the fuck outa me...?!? REFUSE TO DISCUSS IT?
Look, it may be just me, but there is a certain principle of accountability here ... you people FUCKED UP. The government, largely against our will, gave you 700 billion dollars of our money to try to repair the worst of the damage you did. And you're refusing to discuss how you're spending it, or even WHETHER you're spending it?
"We've lent some of it. We've not lent some of it. We've not given any accounting of, 'Here's how we're doing it,'" said Thomas Kelly, a spokesman for JPMorgan Chase, which received $25 billion in emergency bailout money. "We have not disclosed that to the public. We're declining to."
Being unable to account for where the money went, as government agencies are frequently wont to do, is bad enough. (In a recent year, the CIA was "unable to account" for more than 60% of its operating budget.) But when you ratfinks are collectively given seven hundred billion dollars of taxpayer money, ostensibly to try to fix a fuckup of this magnitude that you created in the first place, and you DECLINE to account for what you did with it?
I say you HANG. In public.
no subject
Of course, the government could just step in and try to make everything right... I'm sure you already know my opinion of how well that would go.
no subject
I HEREBY ANNOUNCE:
I will provide assistance in the form of food, shelter and protection to anyone wanted in connection with assault and battery upon a banker or "investment advisor".
Fuck these pinstripe punks.
no subject
And then the government calls the banks on the money in question. Demands every penny of it *back.*
"You're not willing to say where it went? OK, it goes back to us? Oh, you've already spent it? OK, liquidate whatever assets you need to, to give us that money back. Or we confiscate random assets of yours, liquidate `em, and keep confiscating/liquidating until we have it all back. Whether or not you're still in business at that point is immaterial to us."
no subject
Guillotine would be more so, of course, and firing squad probably beats 'em all.
no subject
Fire ants and honey are good with knives too.
no subject
no subject
Uh, Congress should require them to account for the money. If they refuse, the executive officers should be jailed for contempt.
no subject
no subject
I truly wish I were surprised by the bank's attitude and response. The banks understand that no one in elected office has the balls to make an issue of the subject, they are too exposed to the numbers that would come out.
If you believe, clap your hands
I suspect that they've determined that disclosing the details may do more damage than refusing to discuss it. Of course, they can't say that to the public without doing the same damage.
Behind closed doors, they can explain how bad things are, and they can convince most of Congress to let the issue drop. They can threaten the rest with charges of treason and terrorism for revealing state secrets and classified information. And of course "the destruction of civilization as we know it". Who's going to want that on their head?
Re: If you believe, clap your hands
Re: If you believe, clap your hands
How many times recently have we seen Congress obey the will of the people, then reverse their decision while people were still celebrating the initial result?