The Secret Paulson-Goldman Meeting 63 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
Andrew Ross Sorkin’s new book is out today, and breaks some pretty stunning news, dating from the end of June, 2008. At this point, we’re still months away from the now-famous but then-secret waiver, issued in mid-September, which allowed Hank Paulson to talk to Goldman Sachs; he’d promised not to do that when he moved from Goldman to Treasury.
But it turns out that Paulson just happened to be in Moscow at the same time that Goldman’s board of directors was having dinner there with Mikhail Gorbachev. (You know, as one does.) Take it away, Andrew:
When Paulson learned that Goldman’s board would be in Moscow at the same time as him, he had [Treasury chief of staff] Jim Wilkinson organize a meeting with them. Nothing formal, purely social — for old times’ sake.
For fuck’s sake! Wilkinson thought. He and Treasury had had enough trouble trying to fend off all the Goldman Sachs conspiracy theories constantly being bandied about in Washington and on Wall Street. A private meeting with its board? In Moscow?
For the nearly two years that Paulson had been Treasury secretary he had not met privately with the board of any company, except for briefly dropping by a cocktail party that Larry Fink’s BlackRock was holding for its directors at the Emirates Palace Hotel in Abu Dhabi in June.
Anxious about the prospect of such a meeting, Wilkinson called to get approval from Treasury’s general counsel. Bob Hoyt, who wasn’t enamored of the “optics” of such a meeting, said that as long as it remained a “social event,” it wouldn’t run afoul of the ethics guidelines.
Still, Wilkinson had told [Goldman chief of staff John] Rogers, “Let’s keep this quiet,” as the two coordinated the details. They agreed that Goldman’s directors would join him in his hotel suite following their dinner with Gorbachev. Paulson would not record the “social event” on his official calendar…
“Come on in,” a buoyant Paulson said as he greeted everyone, shaking hands and giving bear hugs to some.
For the next hour, Paulson regaled his old friends with stories about his time in Treasury and his prognostications about the economy. They questioned him about the possibility of another bank blowing up, like Lehman, and he talked about the need for the government to have the power to wind down troubled firms, offering a preview of his upcoming speech.
How on earth did Paulson think this was OK? Goldman Sachs was a hugely powerful for-profit investment bank, and there he is, giving private chapter and verse on his opinions about the US and global economy, talking about internal Treasury matters, and previewing an upcoming (and surely market-moving) speech. All in secret, at a “social event” which somehow got kept off his official calendar. Oh, yes, and one other thing — the whole shebang took place in the Moscow Marriott Grand Hotel, in the context of Goldman directors joking about how all the Moscow hotels were surely bugged.
This is sleazy in the extreme, and will only serve to heighten suspicions that Paulson’s Treasury was rigging the game in favor of Goldman all along. (It’s also a bit peculiar, to say the least, that the only two times Paulson met with private-sector boards he was out of the country, and arguably outside US jurisdiction.)
Paulson didn’t have this meeting out of fear or necessity: in fact, he told the directors that although there might be tough times ahead, “I think we may come out of this by year’s end.” (Blankfein was skeptical.) There was nothing in the way of extenuating circumstances which could possibly justify the secret rendezvous. This is definitely a situation where Wilkinson should have pushed back and said no way — but it’s hard to say no to Hank Paulson. Whose reputation has now taken yet another serious lurch downwards.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 63 comments:
On Oct 20 10:50 AM Alex Filonov wrote:
> Government of, for and by Goldman Sachs?
The whining can continue, and the others will make profits.
And who at Goldman Sachs wanted to meet with Mikhail Gorbachev?
And if Paulson and Goldman felt they could offer the russians disinformation, because the entire country is bugged, did they think the russians were that naive to believe everything they said at a meeting in Moscow?
The disinformation would be information to the russians.
I've heard grade school children with more sophisticated plot lines.
How do we put such dim witted people into such positions of authority?!
I am sure you had no problem with the NY Fed President loading up on Goldman stock last December, too. I mean, just because he new everything that the government was going to do doesn't really make it inside information, especially if he is just making money!! If so, why did he resign? Lost the job, kept the dough.
Jefferson wrote about this 220 years ago. You ought to become familiar with it. Lots of dollars, all worth nothing.
On Oct 20 01:00 PM JCC wrote:
> So what!! Goldman is amazingly successful, and so is Paulson. You
> make this sound horrible. It's just a meeting.
>
> The whining can continue, and the others will make profits.
On Oct 20 03:08 PM Alan Young wrote:
> On top of all that, why would the entire board of GS travel from
> NY to Moscow to meet with Gorbachev? If it were just about getting
> advice for their Russian investments, a manager or two would have
> sufficed. Are they getting advice about how to loot the USA, the
> way Russia was looted of all public property when the Soviet government
> collapsed?
> On top of all that, why would the entire board of GS travel from NY to Moscow to meet with Gorbachev? If it were just about getting advice for their Russian investments, a manager or two would have sufficed. Are they getting advice about how to loot the USA, the way Russia was looted of all public property when the Soviet government collapsed? <
I think this is very close to the truth. Gorby surely knows a thing or two about that process, having greased the skids for his British and American corporatist masters. Of course they already know quite a bit about how to loot western democracies - they've been at it since the 70's. It's just that now they are getting down to the bottom of the barrel, so to speak. Pickins are getting slimmer in the realm of taking down and rationalizing industry and infrastructure. Now they have moved to the end-game, looting national treasuries of all once and future wealth.
Without a new FDR, they will get away with it, too.
1. Goldman Sachs gives tremendous amounts to BOTH dems and reps.
2. Other's such as Haliburton do the same thing, also with catastrophic results.
3. You elect people who have these connections and then run senate investigations into 'why?' when things go wrong. Is this to make the public feel that corruption is being outed.
4. Do you actually feel anything will change whilst this happens? Stop promoting democracy abroad and fix the obvious problems with your own democracy.
Finally, I think America will come thru this but unfortunately it'll not be easy for you unless you have connections as well.
Isn't lobbyist payments and contributions simply a form of corruption?
Big Oil, Big Finance, Prop & Tech Boom = America Inc.
The guy has a social meeting with his old colleagues - only after checking with General Counsel. What is he supposed to do to stay in touch with the currents of banking activity? ~Chat with Last National of Podunk, Arkansas ?
We should want our administrators to be well informed and preferably on first name terms with the movers and shakers, this stuff is much too serious to be handled by amateurs.
Goldman's donations in the last election are probably paying off more handsomely than any other investment they've ever made...
www.youtube.com/watch?...
On Oct 20 02:02 PM Warm_Paw wrote:
> How do we put such dim witted people into such positions of authority?!
On Oct 21 12:56 AM Past Tense wrote:
> The real problem here is how the American Government's Electoral
> finances are structured.
>
> 1. Goldman Sachs gives tremendous amounts to BOTH dems and reps.
>
>
> 2. Other's such as Haliburton do the same thing, also with catastrophic
> results.
>
> 3. You elect people who have these connections and then run senate
> investigations into 'why?' when things go wrong. Is this to make
> the public feel that corruption is being outed.
>
> 4. Do you actually feel anything will change whilst this happens?
> Stop promoting democracy abroad and fix the obvious problems with
> your own democracy.
>
> Finally, I think America will come thru this but unfortunately it'll
> not be easy for you unless you have connections as well.
>
> Isn't lobbyist payments and contributions simply a form of corruption?
>
>
> Big Oil, Big Finance, Prop & Tech Boom = America Inc.
• On September 4, 2003, Goldman Sachs admitted that it had violated anti-fraud laws. Specifically, the firm misused material, nonpublic information that the US Treasury would suspend issuance of the 30-year bond. The firm agreed to “pay over $9.3 million in penalties.”
• On April 28, 2003, Goldman Sachs was found to have “issued research reports that were not based on principles of fair dealing and good faith .. contained exaggerated or unwarranted claims.. and/or contained opinions for which there were no reasonable bases.” The firm was fined $110 million dollars.
• On January 25, 2005, “the Securities and Exchange Commission announced the filing in federal district court of separate settled civil injunctive actions against Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated (Morgan Stanley) and Goldman, Sachs & Co. (Goldman Sachs) relating to the firms' allocations of stock to institutional customers in initial public offerings (IPOs) underwritten by the firms during 1999 and 2000.
Surely you're not that naive or jaded by the profits"!
Do you work for Gov. Sachs?
These guys are 'legal' crooks in my opinion. As Matt T pointed out...they constantly break the law - get fined and pay such every couple of years...but, this is just a slap on the wrist and is calculated in the equation as a "cost of doing business".
You dont go year in and year out making the bread these guys do, and there isn't this growing and constant 'talk' about GS without there being some major truth to the accussations. They "own" the senate now and the Treasury and apparently the SEC and CFTC too.
Until these pariah are shut down, our country will continue to look like the Russin Landscape with strong arm 'bosses' in the back rooms, pols and these guys, making a killing at he top and driving the rst of the country into poverty...step back and look closer...it is there..
Go Andrew!
Our government is the board of directors for this economic crime syndicate, and Congress is the where all the stackholders reside.
Until this is broken, nothing will change except the quality of life in this nation.
eye-on-washington.blog...
That will fix this.
On Oct 21 08:56 AM jjed88 wrote:
> I think you got to the root of the problem. All this lobbying and
> political contributions is a disgrace. My state senator, Dodd, is
> the chairperson of the Banking committee. His received about $130k
> for political contributions last year from Goldman. I don't think
> he can be impartial if he had to make decisions affecting Goldman.
> He's kinda 'nowhere to be found' anyway so hopefully the next Banking
> Chairperson won't be owned.
Good post. The Sorkin book is being added to my must read list.
I found the following quote you gave problematic:
For the next hour, Paulson regaled his old friends with stories about his time in Treasury and his prognostications about the economy. They questioned him about the possibility of another bank blowing up, like Lehman, and he talked about the need for the government to have the power to wind down troubled firms, offering a preview of his upcoming speech.
This doesn't make sense. The meeting was in June and Lehman blew up in September. The entire meaning would be changed and become consistent with history if the wording was changed as follows: "... the possibility of a major bank blowing up, like Lehman would later,..."
The best way to keep track is to chart out events.
I have to wonder, though, if we will find other such examples in the book. This undercuts its credibility, when it happens too often.
1. Term limits for all of Congress
2. Remove ALL retirement benefits from Congressional service and make them use SS like the rest of the country.
3. If you've served in Congress, you may NEVER be a lobbyist.
4. If you've been a lobbyist, you can NEVER serve in Congress.
Now, THAT will go a long way to fixing this mess. We have to stop the cycle of trough-hogging that's currently built into the system. Then we need real healthcare reform, not the tripe that's currently being stewed up in back rooms of wherever. Couple that with an overhaul of the banking industry - no more too-big-to-fail EVER, and we might see some real Hope and Change, not the sewer water that's currently being served with the appetizers.
On Oct 21 09:55 AM elcopone wrote:
> Agreed, we need to redo the entire political process. Get rid of
> all lobbists, trade groups and special interest groups. Eliminate
> campaign contributions from corporations. Put in term limits. Make
> it so that if you work for the government, you cannot then work for
> in the private sector for at least 5 years after you leave office.
>
>
> That will fix this.
On Oct 20 02:02 PM Warm_Paw wrote:
> And if Paulson telling Goldman at a meeting in Moscow which would
> surely be disinformation, that all will be wonderful in America and
> that it should be fixed within a year, the Russian's now know it's
> worse than they thought and that the US is vulnerable.
> How do we put such dim witted people into such positions of authority?!
the problem is not a single episode. It is a pattern of behavior that has happened over an over again. May I suggeset doing some background reading on the issue. Any truly informaed person that has an understanding of the sum totality of events can reach conclusions that are not consistant with american democracy or capitalism (at least the way it should be).
My guess is that you wouldn't consider goldman having two stock trading days of losses in a quarter to perhaps indicate the ability to manipulate the market, along with the code that says the justice department could be used ot manipulated the market. the 100% on the dollar from AIG, the appointment of Liddy, the fact that blankfein wass the only person in the room when the meeting went down between treasury and AIG, or perhaps the variance become a commercial bank in record time but the waiver to have to follow commercial bank trading rules and risk positions. Yeah you're right there isn't any potential issue here.
I tried real hard to not be overly insulting, but I think your comments insult you enough.
On Oct 21 02:25 AM John Aislabie wrote:
> What is the matter with everybody? The frenzied to need to show everything
> is a conspiracy is puerile.
> The guy has a social meeting with his old colleagues - only after
> checking with General Counsel. What is he supposed to do to stay
> in touch with the currents of banking activity? ~Chat with Last National
> of Podunk, Arkansas ?
> We should want our administrators to be well informed and preferably
> on first name terms with the movers and shakers, this stuff is much
> too serious to be handled by amateurs.
Paulson and all the Wall Street others in Washington know that they are nearly untouchable and thus do whatever they want in the gov't of today, short of anything sexual, which is still taboo in America. The Nixon thing was 35 years ago and great lessons on how not to get caught were learned from it and are extensively practiced today. That less sophisticated 70's era in our country's morality will never again be seen as it is actively worked by our gov't so that it is never seen again. The system must collapse for any change to occur, and that time is coming.
Either the banks behind the scene would racketeer and collude to buy the failed banks to keep themselves afloat or given lack of sufficient capital in total and they would force the government to subsidize them by showing the results of the first collapse.
It is not possible for Paulson to have not known that the collapse of Lehman would trigger a chain reaction.
Disgusting!
This has nothing to do with dis-information and everything to do with painting a clear picture to the Russians that Paulson was meeting with Goldman. A little later Paulson stopped off in Shanghai as well to have a little chat.
I am afriad that the people/animals at the top of most hierarchies are alpha in nature. Everything you see is how the Alpha Male acts. This is common to all colonies, the system of democracy/capitalism is designed not to eradicate but limit this alpha male behaviour. Believe it or not the USA ranks quite well on corruption compared to every other powerful nation. (not as good as Europe's new elites may I add).
Keep everything in prospective, I suggest those that are judging here may have to take a closer look at their own lives.
I agree with Kimbo and others about reforming the political system. But lets be clear, everyone in the system is involved in this 'alpha hierarchy'. And if the system is going to be reformed there, how can others aspects of the system be ignored. (the fed, domestic/international income Inequality, fraud voting system and stone mason political linage)
I myself believe in hierarchy, but those at the top of the hierarchy should be there out of service; not out of greed. 100-200 years maybe things will have changed.
XO XO
You and I can't do naked shorts. You have to have major ins with a big trading desk to get those trades off, because they have to wink and nod when you claim you have can locate shares. Now, if you happened to run that very same trading desk before you went to the hedge fund, or work with Joe who's about to do your naked short trade for you, that would simplify things, eh?
Here is the 64 Trillion $$ question - how many naked shorts were done completely off the radar last year, via the dark pools that certain large "liquidity providers" have been running for their special friends' benefits? Hmmm?
Now THAT is what we should be getting an answer to... Eric Holder, are you one of the very few in this administration that give's a flying freaking rats ass anymore?
On Oct 21 09:44 AM Glen60 wrote:
> Still haven't heard who the naked short sellers were in the demise
> of Bear Sterns or Lehman Bros. Presumably never will. Anyhow, two
> of GS's biggest competitors were eliminated. No wonder Warren Buffet
> felt confident In investing $5 billion in GS, last fall. Go with
> the money and clout.
On Oct 20 02:19 PM stark naked wrote:
> Paulson was a theif and see how GS made out in the last year since
> they were 'Bailed Out'! Oh Yes and lest nor forget Dick Chaney and
> Hilliburton!
On Oct 21 12:17 PM Jimbo wrote:
> In November, 2010 there will be another election.( At least I HOPE
> there will be another election). Let us turn out 100% of all incumbents
> and start anew. Let us insist that Congress, or the State Legislatures,
> initiate a constitutional amendment to limit terms of Congress (12
> years max in either house) and make it a felony for any former member
> of Congress to lobby. A law making non-payment of taxes grounds for
> dismissal from Congress and any Federal office would not be a bad
> idea either. The system is incredibly corrupt and it starts with
> Congress.
On Oct 21 12:51 PM James Lewis wrote:
> The Marriott in Moscow is not bugged. Well not all of it.
> This has nothing to do with dis-information and everything to do
> with painting a clear picture to the Russians that Paulson was meeting
> with Goldman. A little later Paulson stopped off in Shanghai as
> well to have a little chat.
>
> I am afriad that the people/animals at the top of most hierarchies
> are alpha in nature. Everything you see is how the Alpha Male acts.
> This is common to all colonies, the system of democracy/capitalism
> is designed not to eradicate but limit this alpha male behaviour.
> Believe it or not the USA ranks quite well on corruption compared
> to every other powerful nation. (not as good as Europe's new elites
> may I add).
>
> Keep everything in prospective, I suggest those that are judging
> here may have to take a closer look at their own lives.
>
> I agree with Kimbo and others about reforming the political system.
> But lets be clear, everyone in the system is involved in this 'alpha
> hierarchy'. And if the system is going to be reformed there, how
> can others aspects of the system be ignored. (the fed, domestic/international
> income Inequality, fraud voting system and stone mason political
> linage)
>
> I myself believe in hierarchy, but those at the top of the hierarchy
> should be there out of service; not out of greed. 100-200 years maybe
> things will have changed.
>
> XO XO
"Bazooka" Paulson has openly admitted that he brought in GS officials (and ONLY GS officials) to "consult" with the government before important policy decisions were made - as a matter of practice.
Translation: Goldman Sachs is ROUTINELY provided with ADVANCE information on U.S. policy decisions - so that they can place their bets on this "insider" information before anyone else in the WORLD has access to it.
If you had written this piece two years ago it would have had a lot more value.
On Oct 21 02:25 AM John Aislabie wrote:
> What is the matter with everybody? The frenzied to need to show everything
> is a conspiracy is puerile.
> The guy has a social meeting with his old colleagues - only after
> checking with General Counsel. What is he supposed to do to stay
> in touch with the currents of banking activity? ~Chat with Last National
> of Podunk, Arkansas ?
> We should want our administrators to be well informed and preferably
> on first name terms with the movers and shakers, this stuff is much
> too serious to be handled by amateurs.
On Oct 21 10:11 AM John Lounsbury wrote:
> Felix - - -
>
> Good post. The Sorkin book is being added to my must read list.<br/>
>
> I found the following quote you gave problematic:
>
> For the next hour, Paulson regaled his old friends with stories about
> his time in Treasury and his prognostications about the economy.
> They questioned him about the possibility of another bank blowing
> up, like Lehman, and he talked about the need for the government
> to have the power to wind down troubled firms, offering a preview
> of his upcoming speech.
>
> This doesn't make sense. The meeting was in June and Lehman blew
> up in September. The entire meaning would be changed and become consistent
> with history if the wording was changed as follows: "... the possibility
> of a major bank blowing up, like Lehman would later,..."
seekingalpha.com/artic...
In this article/blog a new book by a NY Times business writer is clearly referenced as the primary lead into the questions raised. The Sorkin release has an interesting excerpt in Vanity Fair:
vanityfair.com/bus...
Sorkin's accounting is a fascinating chronology that seems to run all too smoothly as a defense teams' public relation spreadsheet (of sorts). At one point in his narrative, if you accept all he presents as truly non-fiction) the entire world economy rested upon the shoulders of one single man and his insider connection to Goldman: Hank Paulson. This also goes on to reveal that the seemingly unethical connection between Goldman & Paulson were actually worked out 6 months earlier (under speculative "what if ...." considerations) so that the ethical waivers were all in place when the "Economic 9/11" events did actually take place (with coincidental timing to the anniversary of the real 9/11 tragic National & Global crisis). This association appears to be front and center to Sorkin's stochastic presentation of the facts as they unfold, and the depiction of strategic crisis management and essential interventions read like a Hollywood script.
There is a very fascinating chronology in the work-up of the story, but it remains to be tested by a greater objectivity. In reading this account you would think that all these guys were monumental heroes and they had nothing at all to do with putting the entire system in danger in the first place. I think I would wait for the Michael Moore movie version of this book; or at least for some critical whistle blower to show up from Lehman Brothers to get a second opinion on this official "inside" defense team version. Any takers from LEHMAN BROTHERS?
Gorbachev, Goldman & Paulson ? Obviously this is an international meeting to assess PERESTROIKA
Lehman's Failure: Did Paulson and Bernanke Lie? BY The Daily Bail (PREVIOUSLY CITED LINK above)
How Paulson Gave Goldman the Lehman Heads-Up
by Felix Salmon
seekingalpha.com/artic...
> The Marriott in Moscow is not bugged. Well not all of it.
At least it's not bugged by the FBI, so no worries.
> This has nothing to do with dis-information and everything to do
> with painting a clear picture to the Russians that Paulson was meeting with Goldman.
Agree. Douchebag carry trade - Paulson was borrowed in June 2008 by GS right before his social capital eroded.
>A little later Paulson stopped off in Shanghai as well to have a little chat.
Updating "Chinese wall" technology?
In the west, we professed that there was no corruption but the situation was much more insidious. That was where the lobbiests and connections came into play.
Basically, we have honest crooks in the east and lying crooks in the west.
On Oct 21 02:25 AM John Aislabie wrote:
> What is the matter with everybody? The frenzied to need to show everything
> is a conspiracy is puerile.
> The guy has a social meeting with his old colleagues - only after
> checking with General Counsel. What is he supposed to do to stay
> in touch with the currents of banking activity? ~Chat with Last National
> of Podunk, Arkansas ?
> We should want our administrators to be well informed and preferably
> on first name terms with the movers and shakers, this stuff is much
> too serious to be handled by amateurs.
You know, just meeting with a bunch of old cronies from GS who he later wrote a shitload of tax dollar denominated checks to via AIG as the conduit. Back under your rock.
On Oct 21 02:25 AM John Aislabie wrote:
> What is the matter with everybody? The frenzied to need to show everything
> is a conspiracy is puerile.
> The guy has a social meeting with his old colleagues - only after
> checking with General Counsel. What is he supposed to do to stay
> in touch with the currents of banking activity? ~Chat with Last National
> of Podunk, Arkansas ?
> We should want our administrators to be well informed and preferably
> on first name terms with the movers and shakers, this stuff is much
> too serious to be handled by amateurs.
Another example of extremely poor judgment by Paulson. Moreover, does anyone honestly think that he would hold such a meeting with other bankers in such a surreptitious way?
I can hardly wait until Sarah Palin gets her campaign financing!
On Oct 20 01:00 PM JCC wrote:
> So what!! Goldman is amazingly successful, and so is Paulson. You
> make this sound horrible. It's just a meeting.
>
> The whining can continue, and the others will make profits.
On Oct 20 03:08 PM Alan Young wrote:
> On top of all that, why would the entire board of GS travel from
> NY to Moscow to meet with Gorbachev? If it were just about getting
> advice for their Russian investments, a manager or two would have
> sufficed. Are they getting advice about how to loot the USA, the
> way Russia was looted of all public property when the Soviet government
> collapsed?
While the media, except PBS, celebrates the story of the Lehman failure, GS would have been concerned about the Bear Sterns failure. So as I read it, there was speculation by GS that Lehman might collapse like Bear Sterns. Given the rest of the book this also makes sense, Lehman was shopping for a buyer for months and there's even a story in there where Paulson ask Lehman to share their book with GS.
On Oct 21 10:11 AM John Lounsbury wrote:
> Felix - - -
>
> Good post. The Sorkin book is being added to my must read list.<br/>
>
> I found the following quote you gave problematic:
>
> For the next hour, Paulson regaled his old friends with stories about
> his time in Treasury and his prognostications about the economy.
> They questioned him about the possibility of another bank blowing
> up, like Lehman, and he talked about the need for the government
> to have the power to wind down troubled firms, offering a preview
> of his upcoming speech.
>
> This doesn't make sense. The meeting was in June and Lehman blew
> up in September. The entire meaning would be changed and become consistent
> with history if the wording was changed as follows: "... the possibility
> of a major bank blowing up, like Lehman would later,..."
Problem is, it's tough to charge anyone with wrongdoing when they can point back at their accusers and say (and rightfully so), "Hypocrite!"
On Oct 21 12:56 AM Past Tense wrote:
> The real problem here is how the American Government's Electoral
> finances are structured.
>
> 1. Goldman Sachs gives tremendous amounts to BOTH dems and reps.
>
>
> 2. Other's such as Haliburton do the same thing, also with catastrophic
> results.
>
> 3. You elect people who have these connections and then run senate
> investigations into 'why?' when things go wrong. Is this to make
> the public feel that corruption is being outed.
>
> 4. Do you actually feel anything will change whilst this happens?
> Stop promoting democracy abroad and fix the obvious problems with
> your own democracy.
>
> Finally, I think America will come thru this but unfortunately it'll
> not be easy for you unless you have connections as well.
>
> Isn't lobbyist payments and contributions simply a form of corruption?
>
>
> Big Oil, Big Finance, Prop & Tech Boom = America Inc.
2) Lawrence H. Summers, "Harvard academic"
3) Paul O'Neill was chairman of the RAND Corporation,
4) Alan Greenspan disciple of Ayn Rand
5) John W. Snow chairman of Cerberus Capital Management.
6) Henry Paulson at Goldman Sachs for 32 years.
7) Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Chase Manhattan Bank.
8) Timothy Geithner, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, He was Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs (1998–2001) under Treasury Secretaries Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers. Summers was his mentor, but other sources call him a Rubin protégé.
Until this (if ever) "New York City/Harvard" chain is broken, nothing will change.
We need a man from middle-America, a Warren Buffett (Warren are you sure you can't do both jobs?), a banker from middle-America who knows what it is like to lend money to a farmer, a small auto repair shop, a small grocery store, etc. Maybe a banker from the Saint Louis or Minneapolis Fed?
Until we hire bankers from middle-America who lend money to people who actually make things or provide a service that involves physical labor (and not just push paper credit default swaps around) I see no change in policy.
Okay, I am going to start holding my breath now...