Reply #60: After reading the entire piece, ...

[CRH]

It is difficult to comment on much of it without much research.

If one ascribes to the appointments of good ole boy Wall Street professionals as inherently evil there is certainly lots of smoke before possible future fires. The article does paint a bleak insider influence picture, but at the same time perhaps prematurely inflames expectations of doom of yet to be enacted legislative reform, even before it is passed in its final form.

I found the comments of Rubin's various failures concerning when in context to him being the architect of proposed reform. Much of the past deregulation that caused the meltdown does land on his doorstep, and his tenure a Citi was beyond malfeasance. About all the good one could say of this, is if his intentions are honorable, he has a wealthy experience of what not to do.

There are a couple of points this author and others seem to infer that are disputable, or at very least need more time to ascertain. Example, the all encompassing statement of bailing out the largest Wall Street banks costing the tax payers countless billions, paints a picture with a broad and undiscriminating brush. Not all money lent to all banks will be lost, in fact the grand majority will be repaid. There are exceptions to this, not all of AIG will be repaid, but in large it is not accurate to assume that all the billions in TARP are a give away, and in fact some say small profits could eventually be realized.

There are other presuppositions in other areas of this article that tend to take the bleakest possible outlook of eventual outcome, and for me will take more research to agree to the same conclusions.

All in all a thought provoking article that needs more study before extensive comment, and periodic review of its predictive clarity in retrospect.