You might want to review the specifics of the bailout plan, Zeb; As part of the plan, Treasury and the FDIC will guarantee against the "possibility of unusually large losses" on up to $306 billion of risky loans and securities backed by commercial and residential mortgages. Under the loss-sharing arrangement, Citigroup Inc. will assume the first $29 billion in losses on the risky pool of assets. Beyond that amount, the government would absorb 90 percent of the remaining losses, and Citigroup 10 percent. Money from the $700 billion bailout and funds from the FDIC would cover the government's portion of potential losses. The Federal Reserve would finance the remaining assets with a loan to Citigroup.
As for the plane - it is EXACTLY the problem with Citibank. Not the plane per se, but the attitude that it could go out and buy it while it was racking up hundreds of billions worth of bad loans and accepting tens of billions in taxpayer funded loans. On Jan 28, 4:17 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually, since the bailout money is tecnically a loan, the taxpayers > aren't paying for anything for Citi bank. They probably put half the > money down on the order and thats all lost now and for what. The plane > was hardly the problem with Citibank. > > On Jan 27, 11:56 pm, studio <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 27, 8:38 pm, Ohio mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > pelosi has her own jet paid for by the American people. she is the > > > only speaker who has ever had a jet. where is the liberal outrage > > > over this, eh? > > > oh brother... > > > #1. Pelosi is not the first Congress person to have use of a > > government jet. > > #2. You could just as well ask where the liberal outrage stands on > > Air Force 1 and 2. > > #3. Your confusing public and private entities where the public is > > being asked to pay for the private. > > > > On Jan 27, 8:13 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > The jet is a minor detail. > > > Wow, $50 million is a minor detail... > > An over abundance of minor details seems to be creating one huge > > problem. > > > Don't worry too much about their failure to acquire a new jet... > > they already own a few older ones that are just as efficient at > > getting > > them where they need to be. > > > Oh the horror of flying in superbly maintained older jets.- Hide quoted > > text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
