If Obama intends to protect working Americans, then why

[MannyGoldstein]

did he appoint Geithner to set up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau?

Timmy's begun staffing the thing.

The fix is in: Checkmate! Bankers win, working Americans lose.

Holy fuck.

[TheKentuckian]

1. He doesn't that's why

[dionysus]

39. well, you agree with the teabaggers that he's "gonna destroy murka..."

:eyes:

[okieinpain]

43. yeah it's confussing, sometimes he has no cahunas, then

he's a evil mastermind out to destroy america. man has that ever happened to anyone else.

[gateley]

2. I'm thinking to piss you off, Manny.

:evilgrin:

[VMI Dem]

3. Because its pragmatic.

[ThomCat]

9. That is not pragmatic.

There is nothing pragmatic about having a banker staff an organization that is supposed to protect consumers from bankers. :(


This is just as bad as when Bush would put a mining executive at the head of an organization that was supposed to regulate safety and regulatory compliance at mining companies. Yeah, we all know how well that has worked out. :(

[ProSense]

4. Because

that's what he said he'd do?

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Do you see that in what you linked to?

I sure as hell don't.

Please be specific.

[Greyhound]

16. You're not supposed to actually read the blue links, silly.

:rofl:

[Autumn]

30. Those blue links are just to

break up the emptiness of the post. Clicking on them doesn't make any sense. I clicked once and it went right back to one of their posts, which was nothing but their opinion. Please don't ask for specifics, it's hard enough as it is.

[Greyhound]

13. More circular logic, Very good precious.

:rofl:

[Greyhound]

14. Wrong place

[geek tragedy]

6. The statute determined that the Treasury Secretary would do so. nt

[MannyGoldstein]

7. link please?

Thanks.

[scheming daemons]

8. He didn't "appoint" him... the new FinReg law puts the bureau under the Treasury dept.

Your tinfoil hat needs adjusting.

[ThomCat]

10. Who do you think negotiated that this bureau would be there

instead of independent, reporting to Congress? :shrug:

[geek tragedy]

17. Do you want it reporting to Ben Nelson

and John Boehner and Joe Lieberman?

[ThomCat]

20. Right.

It would only be reporting to those three people. :eyes:

[Swamp Rat]

11. The greatest heist in human history isn't over yet.

[Greyhound]

15. Not by a long shot.

They've shoveled so much money upward that the bottleneck is the limit of their ability to scoop it up quickly enough.

We're seeing the end game.

[704wipes]

38. That's right, the rich still need our Social Security

nt

[LWolf]

12. He doesn't intend to help working Americans. nt

[Hansel]

36. Yes, I'm sure that's it. Not. nt

[bvar22]

18. Great Question.

The answer, of course, is that Obama & the Centrist Democratic Party Leadership couldn't care less about Working Americans.
Nothing done in the first 18 months indicates that they do, beyond lip service trolling for votes, and dangling shiny crumbs like the Public Option to keep the low information voters fooled.

The day is approaching when the Working Class & the Poor, Democrats & Republicans, realize that WE have more in common with each other than we have in common with the Ruling Class in either Party.

[Cali_Democrat]

19. If it's all over but the crying, then why even bother posting aynmore?

It's hopeless.

We're doomed

Fuck it.

[Hansel]

37. What an excellent question.

Isn't it time to curl up into fetal position and rock?

[treestar]

21. Hatred of Geithner blinds people around here

Your only argument is I hate Geithner, so anyone who hires him on hates the working, class, blah, blah, it's only about people here. Geithner can just carry out policies, please advise which of the President's policies that Geithner carries out prove he hates the working class, blah, blah.

[MannyGoldstein]

22. Bailing out AIG counterparties at 100% using our cash

While fighting the regulation of financial predators.

Geithner has consistently worked hard to help banks while harming working Americans.

[scheming daemons]

23. ....was done before Geithner became treasurer. That was Paulson's doing...

...but don't let the fact get in the way.

[MannyGoldstein]

27. Paulson had zero to do with it

Geithner bailed them out as President of the NY Federal Reserve.

Geithner is a predator to working Americans.

[treestar]

28. I thought that was to keep them from collapsing, leading to a major

depression, but I guess that would hurt only the bankers and not the working class?

We are all connected to the banks, just wanting them all to fail is no defense of the working class, but rather a hope they suffer more intensely than they would have.

If you and Geithner don't agree about helping save the economy that's fine but let's give examples, and how Obama doesn't control Geithner.

[MannyGoldstein]

33. No.

AIG did not need to be bailed out 100% in order to save the banks. It needed to be bailed out 100% in order to save the banker bonuses.

Why do people think that either the bankers were bailed out 100%, or civilization would collapse? As Krugman has stated, we took the most expensive and crappy options to keep the financial system from failing. All of those options, however, favored the bankers against working Americans.

[treestar]

34. It did not go 100% to banker bonuses

We are all ultimately connected to the operation of the banks. Every homeowner, for example. The irrational hatred of "bankers" does not blind everybody - that includes the working class.

[MannyGoldstein]

35. Where did I say it did?

But we spent far more than necessary in order to preserve record-high banker bonuses, which reached 1% of GDP last year - Geithner's 100-cents-on-the-dollar bailout of AIG counterparties is just one example. And, the bailouts included zero changes in regulation, and zero provisions to help non-bank businesses and consumers - which is why we're so achingly fucked now.

You seem to feel that the options were either:

- fully bail out banks including all bonuses with zero new regulations and zero provisions to help working Americans, or
- have the financial system collapse.

Do you not realize that there were plenty of other options that would have kept the financial system afloat?

[dionysus]

40. manny, i'm afraid you really don't have any idea what you're going on about.

i know you wouldn't mind a global banking collapse in order to spite the "banksters" but jesus...

:rofl:

[BootinUp]

25. If they could even point to a statement or two

where Geithner betrays the intent of the law or the purpose of government regulation in some way. But all there is against him is that he was in favor of stabilizing the financial system, and that he worked in the financial system.

Another point in Geithners favor is that apparently he was singing about the need to reverse deregulation before anyone else in government with similar high level positions.

[treestar]

29. I really do get from many DU posts that just working for a bank

or insurance company is grounds for personal condemnation. Then of course there is the question of the job of Treasury Secretary going to someone who knows nothing about finance but what they pound out on DU on a keyboard, since those are the only people pure enough not to be tainted with any experience in the field.

[BootinUp]

24. That all you got?

I'll just suggest something totally outrageous. Maybe Geithner will set it up according to the parameters his boss and the law has set in place instead of making up rules.

There is far too much this guy or that guy is just BAD and EVIL I just KNOW IT bullshit. Take a vacation from your fears on this one, thats my advice.

[JVS]

26. Modus tollens

[JNelson6563]

31. Sorry to be out of the loop but

who is getting appointed?

Julie

[golfguru]

32. Tax cheat Timmy Geithner as SOT is boss of IRS! nuff said

[nightrain]

41. why? to gut it too.

[Barack2theFuture]

42. "If" being the operative word,

since, of course, he does not.