Or something...
Digby on Obama's speech to Wall Street :
Is Obama's Wall Street speech supposed to be some kind of Sista Soljah moment? If so, is that a good idea? I suppose it is if you think it's good that people perceive Obama as a friend of bankers who can give them a little scold and they'll feel badly enough to do better.
Oh well, I guess the impression that he's in the belly of the beast telling his friends that they are going to have to change the ways is better than nothing. But I think this would have been more politically useful if he actually went in their faces or if he'd given the same speech before a different audience. This avuncular approach seems more designed to make sure Wall Street doesn't stop donating to the Democratic Party than anything else.
I have a sneaking suspicion that the fuss Wall Street's putting up isn't quite as sincere as one might believe. They don't like it, of course, but they aren't so lost in their arrogance that they don't know on some level that they've gotten off easy. After all, they're still in business, generating billion dollar bonuses. It's all good.
I am not for conspiracy theories, is it just me or is that what she is getting at? What would you have Obama do, burn the place down? I know, I know someone wind up this Obot....before there is a malfunction.
I am Frank Chow and I approved this message
Update: Chris Hayes's rant makes better sense:
1 comment:
On health care I figure we have some margin for error. Ultimately if the fixes put in place don't do the trick, we'll be able to see this problem and patch it as we go. Better to get it right the first time, but we can make do.
On financial reform there is no margin for error. The only way we'll know they got it wrong is our economy plunging into the abyss. If we weren't so indebted already maybe we could get by, but we're really cutting it close right now.
If the reform that gets passed does not contain:
1) Meaningful regulation of derivatives
2) Meaningful reform of capital requirements in relation to derivatives
WE ARE FUCKED. There's no two ways about it. Ideally the derivatives reform will involve making all the derivatives happen on an exchange so we can see what's going on and ban synthetic/naked derivatives. I could live without the ban, provided we know who's making the bets and how much but we have to know what's going on.
There are other considerations like breaking up banks that I wish were more feasible in this climate, but at least those above two issues would help mitigate the damage. But unless we deal with derivatives we're going to have another melt down in the next few years and we'll not be in nearly the position to bail ourselves out that we are now.
Post a Comment