Topic: Federal Reserve Bailout
Another Poor Choice By Obama What makes Barack Obama so sure his choice to replace the equally unnerving Henry Paulson is committed to “integrity and transparency” first and foremost?by A.H. Dowden
(libertarian)
Friday, January 23, 2009
Why can't government bureaucrats find an economist without ties to either a failed regulatory system or the profligate banking institutions they seek to oversee? What makes Barack Obama so sure his choice to replace the equally unnerving Henry Paulson is committed to "integrity and transparency" first and foremost? Tim Geithner, formerly the President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, sort of, accidentally, kind of forgot to pay his self employment taxes for over three years to the tune of more than $34,000. He was one of the key regulators when it all went south and directly involved in the Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, JPMorgan Chase fiasco that saw Bear Stearns bailed out and promptly sold to JPMorgan Chase along with $29 million in federal aid, while Lehman was allowed to collapse.
Why not select someone like Chairman of the FDIC Sheila Bair. Who in late 2008 proposed funding the same type of program she successfully instituted at the California based bank IndyMac. The program gave borrowers who are 60 days late on payment to refinance at a lower interest rate but extend the length of the loan. Sure, under this plan investors take a hit, but it keeps the loan performing and therefore worth something. In fact, Ben Bernanke has vindicated her position by calling for more aggressive action to stem foreclosures. One of his suggestions was the very program instituted by Bair at IndyMac. Congress too proposed legislation to create a loan-modification plan to be paid for with Secretary Paulson's TARP/bailout funds.
So how are Bair and Geithner connected? Well, just last month Bloomberg News reported that Obama's pick to head the treasury, Tim Geithner, was trying to get rid of her after the Senate hearings in which they all participated. At the very least, the guy has some serious explaining to do. And with so many qualified people in the mix, why would Obama make the borderline unethical mistake of sticking with a professional financier that forgot to pay his taxes for a few years and is currently hip-deep in the bailout scandal? That doesn't go very far toward regaining the "public trust."
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 24 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of A.H. Dowden only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. A.H. Dowden is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Taking the necessary time to evaluate the men and women being appointed who will make decisions affecting the lives of the citizenry is the responsible and logical thing to do. The typical Washington insiders, with skeletons virtually hanging out of the closet, being appointed to offices in a non-chalant manner sure sounds a lot like every other professional politician that came before Obama. Where's the change? There is no change, at least not on this one. So, of all the qualified people out there, why didn't Obama change the way things have always been done? Why not appoint someone with a great deal of integrity? You can make all the snide comments you like about me, but any thinking man can see you're avoiding the question. :)
You'll be yelling about the choices of Obama until doomsday. No one that he chooses will satisfy you. That's why your opinion is totally DISREGARDED. Only your Libertarian cohorts ~ a small, tiny group of disgruntled, disregarded brethren ~ pat you on the back for your animosity and irreverence.
Obama has only been President for 4 DAYS, and you've passed judgment on him and his appointments already! What a mockery!
There is no discernment. You can't possibly know what these people WILL DO. Circumstances change constantly, and the little nuances of CHANGE are often things that you wouldn't even notice. Just the EMPHASIS and the DIRECTION of the policies of this administration are VASTLY different from Bush.
Do they satisfy YOU? Of course not! Nothing that a non-Libertarian does or proposes will satisfy you.
Why are you resorting to positing your silly fantasy notions about me? If Obama would have appointed someone with a high level of integrity to Treasury Secretary I would have appluaded him. Again, how is appointing left-over clintonistas, a few neo-cons and some unscupulous bankers any sort of change? You're avoiding the questions. Is the Obama administration incapable of finding someone of integrity to serve as Treasury Secretary that is committed to what the President personally stated as his goals of "integrity and transparency" in order to "regain the public trust?"
Nobody knows the future. Thanks for pointing out the obvious. But one can obviously take a logical decision on the character and ability of any appointee (good or bad) by his or her past actions and undertakings. Right? If you disagree, then what would you say if Obama appointed Karl Rove as his chief advisor? You have no idea what Rove WILL DO! next...
You're correct about one thing though, I will never compromise my convictions in any way to remain "relevant."
And you will NEVER applaud (the correct spelling, by the way) anyone that Obama appoints. I watched the hearings with Geithner and was very impressed with his cautious, deliberative manner, and his tremendous background.
He will be an EXCELLENT Sec. of Treasury.
It is your judgment in posting an article that is critical of Obama's selection that I am referring to. If a Yankees' fan trashes a Red Sox player, no one thinks much of it. We know that his judgment is biased, bigoted, and irrelevant to the matter he's commenting on. Of course, your Yankee buddies will howl like coyotes in support. That doesn't make it any more relevant or accurate.
Why dont' you just make it clear about what your motivations and biases are before you try to pass these kind of comments off as something that's impartial and unbiased. You have INSTANT disdain for ANYTHING non-Libertarian ~ just like the Yankees for the Red Sox.
You look silly attempting to posit your shallow notions of what you think I would and wouldn't think and/or approve of. My biases are somewhat indicated by that little yellow star up there on the multi-colored diamond genius.
It's the GUISE that you try to put on that you're being fair and impartial that's the problem. You aren't FAIR or IMPARTIAL in any way at all! You're Libertarian, and that's it!
Don't bash away at these people like you're making a fair assessment because you aren't. If you look at the credentials, the background, and the abilities of this cabinet, they are as STELLAR as any you will find ANYWHERE!
Posted By: Andrew Hughes
Date: 2009-01-25 15:53:42
Talking about Sheila Bair, here's one of her better quotes..
"We will dig out of this. And when we do, I hope for a back-to-basics society - where banks and other lending institutions promote real growth and long-term value for the economy, and where American families have rediscovered the peace of mind of financial security achieved through saving and investing wisely. We need to return to the culture of thrift that my mother and her generation learned the hard way through years of hardship and deprivation. Those are lessons learned that the current crisis is teaching us again."
There is a consolation in the choices that Mr. Obama has made in his Presidency and that is that after all the blame has been misplaced on the free market, on capitalism and everything else that they can dream up to place blame upon, when this Administration fails to produce real substantial change they will have no where to place the blame but upon themselves and the rotting corpse of John Maynard Keynes that they (government bureaucrats and politicians) keep dragging up from the grave.
Like all the worn-out Keynesian and Neo-Keynesian Economists embedded in the flesh of this country, they will continue to press the policies that created this mess in the first place and since it is the policies themselves that perpetuate problems they will have no choice but to implement yet another layer of policies once these they propose fail to do the trick. Thus down the feckless road we go and the country will continue to suffer for their decisions. I have to wonder when the American People will finally awaken to the fact that there is nothing that makes these politicians well equipped or the bureaucrats they choose able to cope with the issues that are mounting up against the future of our country…if ever the parable of the blind leading the blind was appropriate then this time in our country’s history certain fits the bill.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
