Skip to main content

View Diary: Why Does Obama Insist on Filling his Cabinet with Corporate Hacks? (52 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I notice that (5+ / 0-)

    the diarist left out the laudatory portions of the Lew bio...the Nation author indicated that progressives should balance out their opinion with some of his progressive history as well as his time at Citi.
    And,as far as his Citi stint...what exactly is the gripe here?
    That he invested in Paulson's fund? That his unit might have lost money in his year at Citi? What exactly is wrong with his being employed for a year at Citi?
    Thin gruel imo. Give me a name if you dislike Lew so much.

    This just in: top talent usually works for corporate america at some point in their life in this country.
    If we exclude them from eligibility for service, we are cutting out a lot of top talent.

    •  that is so anti progressive (0+ / 0-)

      to say that top talent usually works for corporate america.

      yeesh.

      •  It's the truth. If you think that reality has an (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Deep Texan

        anti-progressive bias, it's your problem.

      •  Krugman worked (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        virginislandsguy, Deep Texan

        for Reagan,right?

        I would suggest a resume without any working experience outside of the academic towers might not be the best background for the job.

        •  Just because he worked as an economic adviser to (0+ / 0-)

          Reagan does not mean that he supported Supply Side economics. I suggest you examine his work. Then examine the work of Obama's advisers. What did they write? What decisions did they make? For all you know Krugman may have been a lone voice in the wilderness. After all he only lasted a year. Working for Reagan for a year is weak tea compared to being a Master of the Universe responsible in part for plunging the world's economy into chaos.

          •  And Lew (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Deep Texan

            was only at Citi for a year.
            Show me evidence that he was one of those responsible for plunging the world into chaos.

            I think we all need to examine the work of these individuals before painting them as evil for working at an institution.

            •  Because he ran a fund that returned 3 cents on the (0+ / 0-)

              dollar by 2008. He helped run Vikram Pandit's operation that ended up losing 1.8 billion dollars. I would not hire the janitor that cleaned out the wastepaper baskets at an operation like that. He bet against the housing market in 2006 and lost money. How is that possible when the housing market started to collapse in 2005 when mortgage bankers started going belly up. Lew is a very, very unlucky short seller.

              •  According to (0+ / 0-)

                the linked article,they did not determine what losses were related to his operation as they were folded into a bigger unit that lost money.

                I know that Paulson made 4.2 billion in 2008,so I find it hard to believe that Lew's investment in his fund lost money.

    •  BTW since you asked... (4+ / 0-)

      I'd tap an academic who knows wall street, but isn't a part of the inner circle that sunk it and has ideas about how to actually reform wall street.

      I would imagine there are dozens of people who would fit that bill.

      •  Elizabeth Warren already has a job <n/t> (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Deep Texan

        Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. -- K.Marx A.Lincoln

        by N in Seattle on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 11:04:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Might have lost some money? The unit nearly (0+ / 0-)

      took down the whole company. Which raises a basic question of competence. But wait, if you are from Wall Street you are magic. Even if you did a shit job and lost tons of money on poor decisions. Or is responsibility only for the poors?

      Show me the top talent that worked for corporate America. Tim Geitner? You mean the guy in charge of the NY Fed when the economy fell apart? Or Larry Summers who as president of Harvard University said women were not cut out for science? Or Bob Rubin who along with Summers stopped the CFTC from regulating the credit derivatives market which set up the economic collapse? Or Franklin Raines who ran Fannie when everything was falling apart?

      These are the guys who are in government and you seem to want them to stay. Even though they completely fucked up the economy and kept their fat pay checks and bonuses.

      The whole corporate talent should be in government because they are the best qualified nonsense came in with Reagan and should have gone out with him. Instead it lingers like a fart in an elevator. What we need are regulators who believe in regulation. Who have an adversarial relationship with those they regulate. Herein lies the root of corruption. Plato identified it millenia ago in the Republic. Yet we have not learned the lesson.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (148)
  • Community (70)
  • Memorial Day (29)
  • Civil Rights (27)
  • Elections (27)
  • Culture (26)
  • Environment (26)
  • Media (26)
  • Science (24)
  • Law (24)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (23)
  • Labor (22)
  • Economy (20)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Marriage Equality (18)
  • Republicans (18)
  • Ireland (17)
  • Education (17)
  • Climate Change (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site