CNBC's Gasparino Problem 28 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
Charlie Gasparino has outdone himself today. He reasonably blames much of the current financial crisis on "a lack of leadership from Washington" -- but somehow manages to convince himself that it's Obama's leadership which is lacking, rather than Paulson's or Bush's. "An Obama Panic?" says the New York Post headline; the subhed is "Markets Fear His Policies".
Overall, his plan includes some of the most lethal tax increases imaginable, including a jump in the capital-gains rate. He'd expand government spending massively, with everything from new public-works projects to increases in foreign aid to a surge in Afghanistan - plus hand out a token $500 welfare check that he calls a tax cut to everyone else.
This is clearly the wrong way to go in the wake of an economic meltdown - yet Obama, for all his talk of how willing he is to compromise, of how he'd bring people together, is sticking to his tax guns.
This is bensteinery of the first order: not only is it ill-argued, it's also utterly wrongheaded. Yes, it's a good idea for the government to spend money in a recession. Yes, it's a good idea to target that money at the poorest members of society, where it will do the most good and have the highest velocity. And no, with stocks down 40%, there really isn't an enormous number of people worried about capital gains taxes.
Still, one could forgive the litany of GOP talking points on a right-wing op-ed page were it not for the fact that Gasparino styles himself a working reporter. The more you set down your opinions in black and white, the less open-minded you become; this is true of everyone, and especially of stubborn, bull-headed types like Gasparino.
Trust in the financial media is probably at an all-time low right now. CNBC needs less screaming and extremism, and more sobriety and trustworthiness. Even if Gasparino's political views don't influence his reporting -- which is doubtful -- they will reinforce in his viewers' minds the idea that he's unreliable. I just can't see the upside of Gasparino writing a column like this, and I'm surprised that his superiors at CNBC let him get away with it -- especially since the Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch, CNBC's fiercest competitor.
The overall impression from reading this column, then, is twofold: that Gasparino not only lives at the wingnut end of the political spectrum, but that he is powerful enough within CNBC that he can go off and write whatever he likes for whomever he likes whenever he likes. Which means that there's probably zero editorial control of him within CNBC, as well. (Remember the quote in Bryan Burrough's Bear Stearns article in Vanity Fair about how "at CNBC, there is simply no adult supervision".) This can't be good for CNBC's franchise in the long term, even if it does help Gasparino with his Republican sources on Wall Street.
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 28 comments:
Chucky G is hardly a right-wing nut case; I've listened to him light into the current administration as well as the left. Importantly, however, he does regularly analyze and explain quite intelligently the often under-reported consequences of the actions of those whose hands are now on the financial throttle.
Quite frankly, I think we're being driven headlong toward a precipice, and Gasparino is just identifying the terrain along the way. Does Mr Salmon not recognize that we are on a dangerous journey?
CNBC is out of control. Show production can not stop cutting off anchors with hard breaks, manage inadvertent mic noise and other camerman bloopers.
The selective financial news reporting during the day on CNBC sent me to Bloomberg's station coverage. CNBC even selects the stock trading ticker symbol coverage, a shadow of what the channel used to be.
Were it a competitor of GE who had an issue, they would be all over them like the kitchen sink !!!
As well if the govt. is going to run up deficits as it is doing, why not bail out main st. the way they bailed out wall st ?? I make less than $ 250,000 per year and as such believe I might get a tax refund under Obama's PLan, but you can bet if I did, I wouldn't spend it, rather it would go into savings or debt pay down immediately, just like the last one did !!!
Democrats have arguably been the party of spenders BUT Robert Rubin under Clinton not only balanced the budget but left that SOB "W" a big budget surplus, which he has promptly pissed away !! No one in the GOP should utter a (Fking) word about budget deficits after this Administration, as no one in it has ever put their money where their mouth is on economic issues, but rather dawdled until such a time as we were in a near depression and then attempted to turn out all stops in trying to make order out of the chaos they created !!!
> jack
Bloomberg is becoming more attractive, but their 3 line ticker is very hard to read.
Interesting the volume of comments on this article, with fewer on more substantive issues. Easier to yell and to blame, than to think. Me included I guess.
Meantime, if you think the Market is not having a negative reaction to the possibility that a racist/commie/socialis... (BHO WHO) with no record of accomplishment or expertise who is willing to throw his grandmother under the bus to promote his own career might get elected and expand U.S. government beyond the pale , then IMO you are out in space somewhere.
Barack Hussein Obama operates from the communist basic premise
"From each according to his means, to each according to his needs"
Also in case Charlie Gasparino happens to read this,
The cause of this financial meltdown are the U.S. Politicians.
Reference especially Fannie/Freddie forcing bad loans to noncredit worthy individuals. AND
1)Fair Value account = "mark to market" => Sarbanes Oaxley
Destroyed the accounting system, made balance sheets unstable, and caused Book Value to become meaningless
2)Elimination of Glass Steagall Act = eliminating separation of invesment and commercial banks
3)ELimination of uptick rule on short sales
4)Allowing 5% margin on commodities trading Leading to oil,gas price rises thru speculators. $50k equity controls over $1MILLION in futures contracts.
The politicians caused this financial panic. Fix the points above, bring back trust and stability to the financial system and you will bring back normalcy.
MO
Charlie G. was one of the few who had the nerve to state the obvious: For most investors, Obama is NOT viewed as a potential boon for the economy. That week it became clear that, barring a miracle comback, Obama will win.
Surrounded by a phalanx of media sycophants (like you), the most naive, unvetted, unexamined, unqualified, inexperienced, anti-capitalist pol ever to emerge from the Daley Chicago political cesspool is going to get elected president.
And what a financial background he has!
What financial expertise he brings to the table!
Obama helped ACORN in the early 1990's pressure the banks to write stupid mortgages. He then helped pressure Fannie and Freddie into guaranteeing those liar loans. Then he accepted tons of money from Fannie and Freddie when he arrived in the US Senate in 2005.
He and his pals Chris Dodd and Barney Frank helped block reform of Fannie and Freddie when there was still time to act.
Your cartoonish picture seems to suggest that you are young enough to have missed out on the "fun" of Jimmy Carter reign of feckless economic stewardship, Jan 1977-Jan 1981.
Worry not, thanks to naive folks like you we'll get Jimmy Carter II.
Certified Rating Agencies for bonds and other corporate paper are currently paid by the bond issuer and not the bond buyer. It should be the other way around. If I were the buyer, I would want to have my own bond risk appraisor and may want to get a second opinion. Three are too few of the rating firms and that keep cost too high.
Corporate or GSEs are publicly held and should not be giving stock owner’s to any outside organization, unknown, or politician with out stock owners permission. All employees of companies can give their own money to whom ever they choose. Giving money to charities should also require the permission of stock owners and the board. Such gifts should be on the yearly proxy letter for the next year. Then if I do not like the gift they have chosen, I can defer buying that firm.
Currently company owners, the stock holder, have little ability to control action of corporations. Board members are not required to have a majority vote by sock holders to assume office, not even a majority of those voting. I believe it possible for a board member to assume office with few votes.
A need for a new up tic rule is apparent as is one for selling stock you do not control. No one can sell my car, my home or doe, without controlling them, so why can they borrow my stock and sell it? Naked short selling should never be allowed. Margins for selling short should be the same as for buying and need to be raised for commodity trading. It may be possible to sell short more shares than exist.
SIVs and CDOs should consist of assets of the same risk to allow for finding the low risk items. The habit of mixing various risks within the same conduits has diluted the value of all SIVs or CDOs. The buyers of these investments have no way to rate what they are buying because once they are joined; no one can find the bad apples.
News rules for credit swaps and mark-to-market vehicles need to be upgraded with some improvements
The 50% rule might need to become the 20% rule. The way it is now companies move risky assets off the books and put them on the books of another company which they do not have a 50% interest but control none the least. What company would volunteer to take on bad debt and help another company cook their books without some thing in return?
Stock options are a mess and cause too much controversy. I would prefer cash awards but if stock options are needed, then have the boards declare the options dates 60 days or more in advance and back dating would stop. Legal back dating should not be legal.
Voting for our politicians with ACORN and other registering anyone, dead or alive, pet, or flowers, is making a mess of our elections. No matter who wins, I am not going to believe it was a fair election. We need voter ID more than ever and only military absentee voting. All states have pre-election voting and we can make the process long enough to cove r any out of town trips.
Ask your Congress person why we are paying a high traffic on South American bio-fuels?
I know hes better than this Felix Salmon idiot.
He is out numbered by most of them who are left wing idiots on cnbc.
You would think a financial network would know obama will decimate the economy. Salmon is a jealous dipshit
If they want to call your attention to the screen, why don't they use a flushing toilet sound? Or, still better, just drop the sound. I switch to Bloomberg when it gets the best of me.
Also, the person that gets me is the ex-blond (what ever her name is). They should send her to finance school for 5 years -- perhaps by that time she will have learned something. Actually, I don't think she has the brains to be in her position, and nothing can ever help her. What is even worse, she is so simple she doesn't recognize her simplicity.