4 ms·

Assuming you're not going on common Internet Wisdom and have some knowledge of this, I'd be interested to know in what ways Obama's top team is cozy with banks.

Assuming you're not going on common Internet Wisdom and have some knowledge of this, I'd be interested to know in what ways Obama's top team is cozy with banks. I'm not being facetious--well, maybe a little--but I find this stuff fascinating.

jbooth 15y ago
"Evil" is a silly term. Robert Rubin (citi), Henry Paulson (goldman), Tim Geithner (ny fed), these names aren't ringing a bell? The impression I've gotten is that the financial world is convinced that Obama is out to get them, so of course it's "common knowledge" that he has a plan to break up the banks. But what's he actually done? The settlement with the big banks a couple months ago was a slap on the wrist at best, and removed a huge liability.
- cynicalkane 15y ago
  Hey, sorry, I edited my post after you responded, but I didn't say and never said that it's "common knowledge" that Obama wants to break up banks. What I said is that the financial industry, as of recently, has had an antagonistic relationship with the government, and that this is common knowledge in the industry. That's how they see it, anyway. There's a lot of tiptoeing the government has to do, because they're still counting on commercial banks to clear the housing market, to have their back on distressed bank mergers, etc. Anyway, I'd rather see top bankers in those positions than top politicians. Obama's a moderate and a technocrat; so your thesis isn't distinguishable from the null hypothesis.
- mkramlich 15y ago
  > "Evil" is a silly term. Robert Rubin (citi), Henry Paulson (goldman), Tim Geithner (ny fed), these names aren't ringing a bell? My brain parses that as: people whose roles will require experience and insight in dealing with huge sums of money and complex economic effects at the national level TURN OUT to also be the kind of people you'd want to hire for other roles that benefit from applying experience and insight in dealing with huge sums of money and complex economic effects at the national level. Now, if they're corrupt, that would be a bad thing. But having prior relevant experience? A good thing.

jbooth 15y ago

"Evil" is a silly term. Robert Rubin (citi), Henry Paulson (goldman), Tim Geithner (ny fed), these names aren't ringing a bell? The impression I've gotten is that the financial world is convinced that Obama is out to get them, so of course it's "common knowledge" that he has a plan to break up the banks. But what's he actually done? The settlement with the big banks a couple months ago was a slap on the wrist at best, and removed a huge liability.

cynicalkane 15y ago
Hey, sorry, I edited my post after you responded, but I didn't say and never said that it's "common knowledge" that Obama wants to break up banks. What I said is that the financial industry, as of recently, has had an antagonistic relationship with the government, and that this is common knowledge in the industry. That's how they see it, anyway. There's a lot of tiptoeing the government has to do, because they're still counting on commercial banks to clear the housing market, to have their back on distressed bank mergers, etc. Anyway, I'd rather see top bankers in those positions than top politicians. Obama's a moderate and a technocrat; so your thesis isn't distinguishable from the null hypothesis.
mkramlich 15y ago
> "Evil" is a silly term. Robert Rubin (citi), Henry Paulson (goldman), Tim Geithner (ny fed), these names aren't ringing a bell? My brain parses that as: people whose roles will require experience and insight in dealing with huge sums of money and complex economic effects at the national level TURN OUT to also be the kind of people you'd want to hire for other roles that benefit from applying experience and insight in dealing with huge sums of money and complex economic effects at the national level. Now, if they're corrupt, that would be a bad thing. But having prior relevant experience? A good thing.