acptulsa
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 75,409
The Export-Import Bank is self funding. http://www.exim.gov/newsandevents/the-facts-about-ex-im-bank.cfm It was started with taxpayer money but no longer uses any- instead relying on interest earned on their loans. True the Ex-Im bank does help corporations. It makes loans to other countries (not to corporations though the corporations benefit from the business the loans generate) which must use the money to buy US goods and services.
But would you notice if the bank disappears at the end of September? If you’re one of the 7,000 businesses the bank says it helped between 2007 and 2014, it could make the difference between getting a big contract or not. If you’re a shareholder of Caterpillar, General Electric or Boeing — three of the biggest recipients of Ex-Im financing — you might notice slightly lower returns.
But overall, it only touches two percent of U.S. exports. And often, Ex-Im financing is something that’s just nice to have, not essential. As the chief financial officer of New Jersey-based Rastelli Foods, a big Ex-Im client, put it: “If their charter is not renewed, we will be scrambling to find trade insurance that is as flexible and easy to manage as that provided by Exim Bank.”
Sorry, Zippy. Wrong again. It costs taxpayers plenty.
Export-Import Bank costs taxpayers $2 billion a decade
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/e...-taxpayers-2-billion-a-decade/article/2548865
Of course. Zippy's gov.stats are frequently wrong, misleading or not applicable to the current topic.
Gee, Brian, what makes you say that? Was it past experience, was it Lucille's sound refutation of his rather silly-assed claim, or was it the fact that he made a statement in post 2 of this thread, then turned around and contradicted it his very own self in post 6?