Current Article

Reich to Obama – Re: Geithner

By Linda Anselmi on March 16, 2009 at 7:45 AM in Current Affairs, President Barack Obama, Tim Geithner

Major h/t Andy!!

Since this pretty much speaks for itself, I’m just going to step out of the way.

(Robert Reich was the nation’s 22nd Secretary of Labor and is a professor at the University of California at Berkeley. His latest book is “Supercapitalism.” This is his personal journal.)

FRIDAY, MARCH 13, 2009
Paul Volcker to Barack Obama

Former Fed Chair Paul Volcker is briefing President Obama today on how well the stimulus package is doing. I have no inside knowledge of what he’s saying, but if I were Volcker (and I’m not — he’s almost two feet taller than I am), I’d say the following:

Mr. President, it’s way too early to know exactly what the stimulus is doing because the money is barely out the door, but I’ve got to tell you I’m worried as hell. Unemployment is at 8 percent, and underemployment is over 14 percent of the workforce. The economy is shrinking much faster than it was when you put the stimulus together. It will be more than a trillion dollars short of its full capacity this year, and I have every reason to believe the same next. State governments alone are hundreds of billions in the hole, creating a huge drag. So your $787 billion over two years, only two-thirds of which is direct spending, isn’t going to get us nearly far enough. I’d strongly recommend you make ready a second stimulus, about the same size, and get it enacted as soon as possible, with the proviso that it will be implemented if and when unemplyment hits 8.5 percent or underemployment reaches 15 percent.

Oh, and by the way, Mr. President. You may not want to hear this, but your Treasury Secretary is making things worse. His dithering on what to do about Wall Street, and his incapacity to speak clearly to the Street and to the public about what needs to be done, is spooking everyone. Why doesn’t he just put the irrevocably insolvent banks into receivership under the FDIC, sell off their assets, protect depositors, and reimburse taxpayers with whatever remains? Let the rest of the banks fend for themselves — working out their bad loans with their creditors. As to AIG, well, that’s a complete basketcase. Put it out of its suffering. Take it over, sell its assets, protect policy holders (you’ll need to create a big co-insurance plan with every other major insurer in the world), then get out.

Want a cigar?

I don’t smoke, but a cigar and a health shot of tequila is sounding good about now. And it couldn’t make the sick feeling in the pit of my stomach any worse.

listing starboard

Isn’t Reich the same fellow who wanted to make sure the stimulus jobs did not go to qualified white male workers?
http://noliinsipientiuminiuriaspati.blogspot.com/ adagioforstrings

Why not use existing bankruptcy laws to get rid of bad banks versus nationalizing them? Who is profiting from nationalizing bad banks? How are the responsible, good banks supposed to compete against a nationalized bank backed by seemingly infinite amount of tax dollars?
Sassy

Good work Linda!
I’ll pass on the cigar and shot…my stomach is sensitive as well.
Reich is another sycophant, who was riding first class with the BO team.
He, like so many others, are showing signs of regret, and I think they want to salvage their reputations if the entire economy goes south.
Too bad! Many of us are going to remember their involvement for a long time!
Colleen in Indiana

Absolutely right, Sassy. These people are getting what they asked for. Unfortunately, so are the rest of us.
Peggy Sue

These guys really need to get on the same page. We’ve heard nothing but crises, catastrophe and gloom and doom. Then Obama comes out last week saying things “aren’t as bad as they sound,” the market bounces and everybody smiles and says it’s the wondrous stimulus package percolating through the economy.

Reich’s right: the porkfest bill is barely out the door.

And then Ben Bernake goes on 60 minutes to say the recession will end later this year, we have averted the “Depression,” and we can expect to see the economy grow in 2010.

Add Geithner to the mix and we have Confusion 101. This does not inspire confidence. The word “incompetence” is creeping into articles I’m reading on this mess, even from Obama supporters.

We are in deep, deep trouble. And happy talk is beginning to look utterly desperate. I’ve got a radical idea:

Tell the American public the truth.
betty

On some other blog I read a statement that all the main stream media is about is preserving the status quo, protecting the life style of the wealthy. So that is how I hear everything said on the media and now this post. When ever you hear about another stimulus package picture a fat guy wearing striped pants and a pair of spats who is patting you on the head while smoking a big cigar and telling you we need more of your money.

What was the phrase the we were using with the republicans that described how they planned to bankrupt the government so that no it couldn’t afford entitlements? How are the actions of that bunch (if indeed it is a different bunch)different from this bunch who are bankrupting America even to our great grand-children’s generation. And making me wonder if we will be America in name only in a few years.
huh

In case all you fellow Crackers forgot:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opxuUj6vFa4

Explosive Video Reich, Obamas economic advisor no “White Male Construction Workers”

Tell this little goof to go pound sand.
Docelder

It’s almost like the far left was made to watch “Leave it to Beaver” too much as kids and they all grew up to resent middle class working people with strong morals and work ethics… and now they are driven to anything and everything that is contrary to the very values, morals and ethics that helped us to be a great nation to begin with. But, I know the truth is more complex than that. Even though the far left does seem to hate everything good, moral, ethical and just about this nation.
Andy

Right on Peggy Sue. I second your comment!!
PamFlorida

Obama didn’t start the “things ain’t so bad” rhetoric until AFTER the stock market gained points. Check the dates. His next move will be to tout the positive effect of the “stimulus”.
lilytoo

When you say ….”we will be America in name only in a few years…” , I think you are being optimistic with the years part ! Bush couldn’t steal Social Security for Wall St in 05 , so they came by the back door…and yes it’s the same people. It’s just that the front men are different.
tek

huh: OMG! Give construction jobs to people who are not skilled construction workers? I believe if people are “long-term” unemployed, they don’t want to be employed.
Docelder

it’s the same people. It’s just that the front men are different

I would say that it’s the same people and the front people are also the same. We only have one functional party. It is the re-elect me party. The me-me-me-party has a lock on Washington. Special interests are robbing us blind because all the politicians care about is raising the money for re-election. At the risk of being offensive for being redundant… we need a ~~third~~ second party.
Doc99

Oh … and Barry? What up with the anti-rich rap?
http://www.jacquotlaw.com/vindictive-prosecution.html David Jacquot

GEITHNER & RANGEL TO BE SUBPOENAED IN TAX FRAUD CASE

Federal Case Alleges Political Elite Get Favorable Tax Treatment Over Ordinary Citizens

On 5 March 2009 a Motion was filed in U.S. v. David Jacquot, Case # CR 08-1171, in the Federal District Court, in San Diego, California seeking to dismiss a false tax return indictment on the grounds that the Defendant was not treated in the same manner as politically prominent individuals. A hearing on this matter is set for 30 March 2009 in San Diego and the Defendant in this case intends to subpoena Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, and others.

The Defendant in this case is David Jacquot, an attorney and retired Army Officer. He is a decorated disabled Desert Storm veteran living in rural Idaho with his family.

This “Geithner Motion” cites HR 735 titled the “Rangel Rule Act of 2009,” which if enacted, would eliminate penalties and interest for common citizens to allow them to be treated in the same manner as House Ways and Means Chairman Representative Charles Rangel. The Geithner Motion also quotes President Obama stressing the need to “treat common citizens in the same manner as politically prominent individuals in regards to tax matters”.

The Geithner Motion details how Mr. Jacquot was vindictively indicted in retaliation for his successful defense of his clients against the IRS. The tax returns of his corporate law firm for the four (4) years of 2001 to 2004 were investigated and the government alleges that the law firm declared almost $200,000 TOO MUCH income during this time period. The Geithner Motion contains descriptions of numerous actions by the government and Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) Faith Devine that are the basis for the claim of retaliation against Mr. Jacquot for his zealous representation of his client’s Constitutional and statutory rights. The improper actions of AUSA Devine have been reported to the DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility for disciplinary action and are currently under review.

A copy of the Geithner Motion can be downloaded at:

http://www.jacquotlaw.com/vindictive-prosecution.html

Vindictive-Prosecution
Linda C.

Many economist were not very happy with the tax cuts. The spending over 2 years is not enough. The banks have not been fixed although this might take international coordination considering it was not only US regulators but international regulators that failed the system. The “system” being us…although a few people really benefited..their friends.

There were criticisms on the initial stimulus that it left out women and seemed to go towards the male dominated fields. I thinks some of that criticism was voiced on this blog. Other than that I think Reich’s comments were fairly stupid about white male construction wokrers.

As for AIG and what the contractual agreements happens to be…it depends. When the Pittsburgh and Lake Erie Rail Road was sold, the union contracts were nullified even though that was against the Railway Labor Act. The Supreme Court ok’d this. So there is precedent for busting a labor contract when a company gets bought out despite a Congressional law to the contrary. However, I think the contract busting will only be applied to the middle class folks/union members and not in the case of those modestly paid 1.2 million per year folks.