SIGTARP

[unixronin]

I'm not sure what SIGTARP should signify in computer terms.  But it would probably be something bad.  Probably related to SIGFAIL.

In this case, though, SIGTARP refers to the Inspector General of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, who has just released the latest official SIGTARP quarterly report.  I'll refer you to cipherpunk for a direct link to the report, in PDF format, and the executive summary on page 6 of the report (not least because if you're not already reading cipherpunk's journal, you probably should be).  But the capsule summary is that, just as many of us predicted, not only did TARP not really fix anything — in fact, the report states that TARP has not achieved any of its stated aims — but in fact it made matters worse.

"We're from the government, and we're here to help."

Comments

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

but the economists who were right all along (and that's none of the conservatives) keep saying it did stop a 1929-style meltdown.

I'm unconvinced it has. There is as yet no evidence it hasn't merely pushed it off a year or two. In the words of the SIGTARP report,

"[...] even if TARP saved our financial system from driving off a cliff back in 2008, absent meaningful reform, we are still driving on the same winding mountain road, but this time in a faster car."

[randwolf.livejournal.com]

On the other hand, we have yet to go over the cliff, so it has bought some time. 1932 was one of the ugliest years in US history--in world history--and 2012 promises to be another. There are few reformers with substantial influence on the national scene. The people who know best--who know anything--are still far from the centers of power. Demagogues, on the other hand, we have in spades. There is little will for the kind of regulatory changes that are required, and the Roberts Court is likely to interfere with any attempts. Republicans are so far unwilling to participate in the steps that would avoid a global financial disaster. With the Democrats split and the Obama administration unwilling to take sides, it is difficult to see how progress would be made. I suppose eventually matters will come to the point where, finally, the only thing to do is fix the problems, but we are not there yet, getting to that point is likely to be painful, and I still don't see who would actually do the work.

... President Franken? "Live, from Washington, it's--?" Well, we always said US politics was a clown show.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Republicans are so far unwilling to participate in the steps that would avoid a global financial disaster.

Both parties are, I think. Their answer to the problem is, largely, more of what caused it.

I think the truth of the matter is that neither the Republican nor the Democratic arty is actually viable any more. They're both just coasting on pure inertia, straight for a wall they can't even see because their ideology doesn't permit it. IMHO, the sooner they hit it and finally crash, the better.

Remember Wavy Gravy's campaign in Berkeley — "Why not vote for a REAL clown for a change!"

[randwolf.livejournal.com]

Things are not so bad in the House. In the Senate, though, custom and popular panic has led to a dominance of corrupt and reactionary elements. Even so, I'd say that without the deadlock the Senate has arrived at, we might find many of the Senators are at least capable of change.

Historically, collapses of political systems are usually followed by tyrannical interregnums. I therefore don't wish for collapse. On the other hand, perhaps we are now in such an interregnum. In that case, the question becomes how to find the path out.

I'd forgotten Wavy Gravy's campaign!