Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (233005)	12/14/2009 11:32:12 AM
From: NOW	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 306849

Barack Obama is so mad at Wall Street! Here, just look at what he told 60 Minutes last night: BARACK OBAMA: I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street...Nothing has been more frustrating to me this year than having to salvage a financial system at great expense to taxpayers that was precipitated, that was caused, in part by completely irresponsible actions on Wall Street...the people on Wall Street still don't get it. They don't get it...you guys are drawing down $10, $20 million bonuses after America went through the worst economic year that's it's gone through in decades, and you guys caused the problem. But he's not just all talk. He's also taking action! He's so furious he's going to have an hour-long meeting with Wall Street executives. Dear god in heaven! Phillip Swagel was Assistant Treasury Secretary for the final two years of the Bush administration, and wrote a paper for the Brookings Institution called "The Financial Crisis: An Inside View" that came out on March 30th this year. In it he predicted the Obama administration would use essentially the same strategy as Bush's Treasury Department, but with one difference—the Obama people would: ...use populist rhetoric and symbolic actions to create the political space under which the implicit subsidies involved in resolving the uncertainty of legacy assets can be undertaken. "Implicit subsidies involved in resolving the uncertainty of legacy assets" means, of course, "hundreds of billions of dollars given to Wall Street." Like many professional conservative apparatchiks, Swagel comes across as tremendously angry that the Democrats do just about the same things they did—but with a different PR veneer that gets them treated by the world as somehow better people. Based on the Obama administration's actions so far, both in domestic and foreign policy, it's hard not to agree they have a point. —Jonathan Schwarz