Did Obama say (4.00 / 2)

that Geithner was doing a heck of a job?

---

by: AliceDem @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 18:53:51 PM UTC

Hmm (4.00 / 6)

Gibbs indicated that Geithner has spent months looking into all available means to block these bonuses.

Then why did Obama have to instruct Geithner to do this yesterday?

---

by: david mizner @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:11:54 PM UTC

Watching MSNBC (0.00 / 0)

I heard someone reporting that Geithner and the President only found out about these bonuses last Thursday.  

Which is it?

---

by: Jbearlaw @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 at 17:00:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

wall street has complete confidence in summers and geithner too ... (4.00 / 1)

... becoz those two get it.

Z

---

by: Z @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:12:17 PM UTC

geithner AND summers MUST GO!!!! (3.20 / 5)

Z

---

by: Z @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:13:35 PM UTC

Wrong (0.00 / 0)

They wont be going anywhere. and they shouldn't be going anywhere to cause they don't satisfy some spoiled Ideological purity tests. They are the ones that are responsible in part for creating one of the most progressive budget in a generation and a mid sized good stimulus. I am pretty dam satisfied with them so far.

Both wall street and main street are getting bailed out. spending is spending according to Keynesian economics.

---

by: Burry @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:31:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yeah, I loved summers' big business tax cut proposals for the stimulus ... (4.00 / 4)

... they were very progressive.

the immorality of giving out $165M of bonuses to a company that is essentially bankrupt is an "ideological purity" issue to you?

spending is spending according to keynesian economics?  So appraently it doesn't matter who it goes to, just that it's thrown out there somewhere.  this is simplicity to the point of idiocy.  

How are the crowds outside your office?  Did you cash your check yet?

Z  

---

by: Z @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:39:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

heh (0.00 / 1)

Shows the ignorance of some of the progressives and their purity claims.

spending is spending according to keynesian economics?  So appraently it doesn't matter who it goes to, just that it's thrown out there somewhere.  this is simplicity to the point of idiocy.

 

You know what Keynes said? In a recession you can give money to people to dig holes and fill them up and it will help the economy. it doesn't matter where you spend it. and most progressives identify with Keynesian economics.

Also the tax cuts for middle class is progressive and part of Obama's plan not summers (Unlike bill clinton he is following though with his promises for the middle class, also the all Stimulus jobs HAVE to be at union paid rates, learned that yesterday). there is only 50 billion or so for business in the stimulus(most of them for businesses making under certain amount of money, usually called "small business"). main street gets the lions shares of the stimulus which is a dam good deal for the progressives.

---

by: Burry @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:52:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't bastardize Keynes (4.00 / 5)

Yes, Keynes said IF NOTHING ELSE, digging holes and filling them up is better than government doing nothing. But it wasn't his favored stimulus.

Keynes recognized that different forms of stimulus had different levels of effect. He was also cynical about politicians ability to spend well. His digging holes comment was essentially a "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" argument - let the politicians waste the money so long as the money gets spent fast rather than being held up in endless negotiation. But Keynes would have been far in favor of spending on necessary infrastructure wherever possible, with tax breaks pretty low on the list. If the politicians are too stupid to do anything but tax breaks, Keynes would have said to take it - that's not the same as saying "spending is spending"

---

by: MadScientist @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 20:02:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

summers PROPOSED big business tax cuts in, but your hero larry ... (4.00 / 1)

... remember that is one of the guys that you are defending (larry is larry by the way, in case you've gotten confused) ... could not even get the conservative dems to agree to them in the stimulus.

I am not a big fan of keynes anyway.

spending is spending?  yeah, very cogent point and let me add to your "wisdom", air is air, hot dogs are hot dogs, ants are ants, and bullshit is bullshit ... let that reverberate thru your brain for a little while.

your belief that spending is spending and it doesn't matter who it goes to assumes that it will actually circulate thru the economy and find it's way into other hands along the way.  that same simplistic view could be used to justify trickle down economics ... which hasn't seemed to be much of a boost to our economy.  now I can see why u c no wrong with geithner and summers, if spending is spending, then what the hell just give it to a bunch of inept, corrupt aig people ... and give them plenty ... cause spending is spending so why not spend our dollars on them?  it's all the same.

I am not a bill clinton fan at all.  

Z

---

by: Z @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 20:15:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nope (4.00 / 6)

If anything, they are partly responsible for Obama's preemptive compromise on the stimulus bill that led him to ask for what he thought was possible rather than for what he thought was necessary.

On every issue so far, Geithner, Summers, and Obama have been more conservative than mainstream Democratic economists and more conservative than what polling indicates the general population wants.

It would be hard for Obama to find someone to replace Geithner with who wouldn't have done at least as much as Geithner has done to fix the economy, and odds are you'd get someone who will do more.

It's not an ideological purity test. It's a matter of the Geithner-Summers-Obama approach being too far outside the mainstream on these issues.

---

by: MadScientist @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:43:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I hope this is an issue of competence (4.00 / 3)

Because if it's an issue of ideology and Geithner purposefully did nothing to impose conditions on AIG, then the man should be run out of the administration on a rail.

Either he's incompetent, or he's on the side of the banks. Think it through. If Obama does the decent thing and fires the man, maybe you'll be able to look back at this rationally and conclude that maybe Geithner hasn't got taxpayers the best deal here.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

---

by: Englishlefty @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 22:06:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nationaiizaton group formed "A New Way Forward" (4.00 / 3)

 This has legs, the anger is real, the feelings are cross political, supported in lots of ways, lots of voting blocks and its just. A New Way Forward
Here is a new group, I found this on boingboing.net a very large though not normally politically centered site they are giving this issue big coverage. The site even quotes Mike Lux and Paul Krugman.

A New Way Forward

It's time to stop giving huge handouts to banks and start creating systemic change that helps everyone. We demand a new way forward now.

We are sick of bailouts that are enriching bankers without restructuring a broken industry. Join us on April 11, 2009 as we rally for systematic change based in fairness and intelligent economics. Nationalize, Reorganize, Decentralize. If you don't see your city or town listed on the right, please sign up your city to get it going.

NATIONALIZE: Experts agree -- Insolvent banks that are too big to fail must incur a temporary FDIC intervention - no more taxpayer handouts. (see Krugman on nationalization)

REORGANIZE: Current CEOs and board members must be removed and bonuses wiped out. The financial elite must share in the cost of what they have caused. (see Simon Johnson on Reorganizing)

DECENTRALIZE: Banks must be broken up and sold back to the private market with new antitrust rules in place-- new banks, managed by new people. (see Mike Lux on Decentralization)

Obama needs to lead on this. Time to get in front of where people are going and lead. This is why we elected him. I posted this link on Mike Lux' article as well.


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

---

by: HousesofProgress @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:23:11 PM UTC

Dear goodness (4.00 / 1)

"it is not quite as bad, but it is close"

No, it is not "close". Open Left diarists need to take a collective chill pill and calm down.

---

by: Semblance @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:28:56 PM UTC

Aye (0.00 / 0)

These 2 seem to be doing the best they can.No matter what they have done in the past (under more conservative environments and governments) They have helped design a dam progressive budget and are PRing for its passage effectively (esp summers) and helped pass a good mid sized stimulus package.

---

by: Burry @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:36:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree, they are doing the best they can. (4.00 / 4)

That's the reason they should be replaced, rather than simply told to do better.

They are not doing the best that could be done. We know that because they are not doing as well as has been done during past crises.

---

by: MadScientist @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:46:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yea (0.00 / 0)

50 days in and they are totally judged! and compared to the people who had years to work out in the "past crisis".

instant gratification culture on steroid here.

---

by: Burry @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 20:14:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"complete confidence" (4.00 / 4)

Isn't "having complete confidence" a required stage before the "resignation in the best interest of the country"?

Didn't Bush have "complete confidence" in Alberto Gonzales?

Keep pushing, and push congress to push. This could really happen.

---

by: MadScientist @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:36:34 PM UTC

Not-so-nitpicking (4.00 / 2)

"As far as major congressional votes go, this is akin to not telling the public that Iraq didn't have 0WMDs (it is not quite as bad, but it is close)."

A million Iraqis have died, at least a third of those as a direct result of the invasion.

It's not nearly close to comparable.

---

by: salmontarre @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 20:48:22 PM UTC

If tens of millions worldwide end up in poverty as a result (0.00 / 0)

Which is entirely possible, then yes, it is close.

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 22:39:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I encourage everyone to read this, it is very important (0.00 / 0)

if you want to understand how this situation came about

http://firedoglake.com/2009/03...

Z

---

by: Z @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 20:55:50 PM UTC

Geithner (0.00 / 0)

is the worst Obama appointment. Time for him to go. What is Obama thinking? Geithner is undermining all his political capital.

---

by: coral @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 at 01:57:45 AM UTC

Geithner (0.00 / 1)

is a dam patriot. working 24/7 without any deputies to save the asses of people like you and being bashed by EVERYONE including wall street and the far right/left. He is an absolute patriot who will be vindicated in the end IMO (already starting to happen, bank stocks going up 100% the last 2 weeks including citi and BoM, also they were profitable for jan and feb).

---

by: Burry @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 at 04:57:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]