Obama seeking bank fees to cover billions in TARP losses

**iravedic** · 01-15-10, 11:21 AM

The comments about the preferred stock are correct, although it was a purchase of stock it was much more like debt. However, preferred stock can be voting or non-voting, and in the case of GM I think (not sure) that the preferred stock was in fact voting. The real kicker for the Gov't that gave them an ability to share in the growth of the companies were the warrants to purchase common stock. The warrants basically locked in the Gov't's ability to reap the upside if the bank stock went above X dollars in the market. The Gov't could then exercise its warrant and buy the stock at a discount and reap a profit. The common subject to the warrants was normal common stock with all voting rights attached.

**draco7891** · 01-15-10, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Originally Posted by draco7891

The point I was making is that the government did a massive end-run around actually buying stock; they got all the benefits with none of the risks or public outcry, and now they expect to reap their reward just like a stockholder.

Draco

The difference that you conveniently leave out is that the companies can repay the funds thus regaining complete control of their firms. That wouldn't happen under socialism.

On a side note, why do you end every post with your name? Do you fear we'll forget you?

The difference that you conveniently leave out is that new banking regulation doesn't magically disappear the moment a few banks pay off their debt, and it affects the entire financial industry. That's how this new fee structure is being implemented, through regulation and government control. Socialism.

I do it just to annoy you, trigger.

Draco