Let’s say that TARP isn’t passed quickly enough to prevent the failure of most American banks. What would happen then?
So the result would have been utter chaos with the austerity years being a truly great depression.
Russia, China and quite a few other countries move their armies to acquire whatever resources they can.
But what would the political effects of this be? Due to a lack of TARPs there would be less of a libertarian backlash against “big government.” So probly a radicalization of the public against wall street, hence an earlier and much stronger Occupy, as well as an earlier emergence of a “Trump" figure in the GOP. Mabey if things happen quick enough a radical like Mike Gravel might win in 2008.
The push for TARP came in part from Spencer Bacchus's idea of a liquidity injection for stabilization purposes. I think its likely that it comes about still as a result.Would TARP have existed if Dubya didn't appoint Paulson?
Too grim but i doubt it. The thing is a massive depresion crash china too...(and might kill japan) but as other say, the recover will be different but people will not be happy with Wall Street and we might see even stronger regulations that everThe economy crashes and burns worse then the Great Depression. America goes hard isolationist. Russia, China and quite a few other countries move their armies to acquire whatever resources they can. It’s the 20s and 30s back again and if American politicians don’t realize it in time and co-opt it then the far left and far right aided by the social media will take power like never before seen in America.
Europe will not be immune either as if America economically collapses into a deep depression so will be the EU.
A bloodbath, maybe a bigger and real third party based on OTL tea partiers and maybe a more radical left one tooWhat would the 2010 midterms be like?
As for what would happen, well, you would see what happens when banks fail, which is that creditors are compensated via tier, and that means depositors get paid first, but at that point, I believe the threshold was only 100K. This would have some pretty steep effect on the upper middle class. The process of unwinding unguaranteed asset values would have a disastrous impact on the entire economy, especially considering how much investment had gone into said assets in the buildup.
That's the conventional wisdom. I've heard a contrary view, which says the banks could've been wound up & shut down in orderly fashion, without them crashing, using existing tools, & without giving a $700 billion gift to the crooks who organized the Crash in the first place.If the banks failed shareholders would lose their money. Creditors would be settled by tier.
The loans and employees would have to go somewhere and would be snapped up by stronger banks at a fire sale as Barclays did with Lehmans.
This would all be disasterous, but not catastrophic...So the result would have been utter chaos with the austerity years being a truly great depression.
The Republicans and Democrats might go the way of the whigs. This is unlikely, but if it were to happen, it’s likely that the Greens would replace the Democrats, and the Constitution Party would replace the Republicans.What would the 2010 midterms be like?