Geithner Aides Reaped Millions Working for Banks, Hedge Funds »
Posted By gunnyreef 1 month, 1 week ago in News
Some of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s closest aides, none of whom faced Senate confirmation, earned millions of dollars a year working for Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Citigroup Inc. and other Wall Street firms, according to financial disclosure forms.
Read Full Story at bloomberg.com »
977 Views Share Story 82 Comments Report
Submitted By:
gunnyreef
I am a true conservative, i believe in limited government, low taxes, personal responsibility,states rights and personal freedom! I tow no party lines and ...
Who Also Submitted:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 76 of 82 Comments (view all)
-
-
-
Neutral
jordan111 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What's the big deal? Not a problem for you in bush boy's land. NOW you're going to whine? I'm all for calling ANY administration on what they do that isn't right. What i'm NOT for is letting folks like you get away with bashing one political party and giving YOUR party a free ride. A free ride to nearly destroy this country! Your intentions are suspect.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
71%
tehranchik1 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Am I understanding this correctly Klar and Beav?
Reply
Are you still in denial about an eight year administration that took us into wars, condoned torture and murder? Lied. An administration that led us into a record breaking financial crisis. An administration that approved billions in bailouts for 'friends.' The last administration is responsible for some of the highest unemployment rates we've seen in these united states. An administration that created 'the patriot act' - loss of personal freedoms. The list goes on.
That's what I mean when I say a 'progression of the last eight years.' The corruption of the new administration is no different than the old administration. Buddies helping buddies fill their pockets.
-
-
77%
jesh1 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Speaking to financial executives last month, Obama said: “We will not go back to the days of reckless behavior and unchecked excess that was at the heart of this crisis, where too many were motivated only by the appetite for quick kills and bloated bonuses.”
Reply
At the same time, the president has promised to change Washington by keeping lobbyists for special interests at a distance and by making decisions in the open.
WHERE IS THE CHANGE ? -
60%
dBergeron1 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama is a liar. Geithner is a criminal. Rangel is an unethical liar and criminal. Pelosi is an enabler as well as a supporter. What a sham! Come on Nancy, drain the swamp already. We're waiting on your "most ethical" policy to kick in! tick tock tick tock
Reply -
-
-
68%
Striker1011 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The article vaguely lauds the lefist viewpoint that high earnings are somehow objectionable and therefore such "sinners" should not be working now in government. Mental disconnect.
Reply
Not a word, though, about the big bailout dollars paid out by government (think taxpayer debt to cover government debt) to institutions which were so greatly damaged by Gov/Fed manipulations (e.g. the CRA) which triggered this whole mess. -
-
57%
vor1 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You IDIOT! None of these people currently work on Wall Street! Do you not understand past and present tenses?
Reply
For any of you cons who claim to believe in an unfettered free market to complain about these bonuses and salaries is the ultimate of hypocrisy. This is exactly what you defend with your votes every two years. If these were Republicans you would defend it by saying they "earned" every penny. These salaries or compensation packages do not appear extraordinary in the least compared to the most aggregious examples.
"All of Geithner’s counselors are subject to federal ethics rules, including a pledge to avoid contact with their former firms for at least a year, Williams added. "
The financial world proves to be no different than the MIC (in reality it has long been that way) . A revolving door between public and private service. Nothing shocking here (much of the article was quite benign if you read it) now move the herd along...enough rubber necking.
I don't know what a CJ with a bunch of sheep must look like but this board would be the closest possible simulation.
-
-
-
86%
Bkumm1 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't know why anyone would be surprised by this. When we were told that there would be change (for which I voted), I assumed it wouldn't be business as usual. I was wrong.
Reply
Now, I am surprised to note that the conservatives are up in arms about this. It's not as if anything has changed except the management. As long as we keep putting Wall Street folks in charge of being the watchdogs for Wall Street we're going to be in this boat. This is nothing new. It's just very disappointing.-
61%
Hhussk1 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now, I am surprised to note that the conservatives are up in arms about this. It's not as if anything has changed except the management.
Reply
Surprised...really?
Because I knew when the words came out of Sen. Obama's mouth in 2008 that he was lying to you. I knew that he wasn't going to take "public matching funds", when he promised he would, once the money started rolling in. I knew that, based on lack of experience in creating legislation that he was going to be incorrect when he said he'd close Guantanamo Bay within the year.
I knew, when it was learned that he mostly voted "Present" instead of "Yes" or "No" on votes, that he would not actually lead an agenda, but have others establish agendas while he sits back and waits to take credit.
The truth is, you propped up a puppet, and now you expect him to make decisions and lead. Obama is not a stupid man, I'll grant you that, but he is not a leader. He is a speaker. A good one. Nothing more.
He was born in Chicago politics...are you sure you didn't see any of this coming?
I did.
And seriously, it surprises you when conservatives get upset about the government taking over part of the auto-industry, backing legislation that mandates penalties if you don't buy health care, focuses on apologizing for the United States, et al.? -
91%
wtagg1 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes, the irony of those that complain the change that they did not vote for hasn't arrived. I would think they would be happy in a president that is continuing the policies of his predecessor.
Reply
Considering the tax issues of the republican vp candidate, I am surprised at the ire of tax cheats on the other side of the aisle. Either they are tax cheats or they are not. Party affiliation has nothing to do with the accusations or guilt.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
50%
dBergeron1 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dosen't it bother anyone that 90% of the Republican have Profited from the financial collapse they caused????.
Reply
What are you talking about? It is obvious that you don't have a clue as to what you just typed. This class envy thing really has to stop. You libs think that you are so smart. But, you are really looking stupid on this one. And, with posts like this, you really can't hide how stupid you really are. -
-
94%
tchef1 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm not happy with those who have been appointed to "fix" the financial crisis. This is my biggest disappointment with President Obama. It really seems that the fox is in charge of the hen house. He has continued with people from the same line that President Bush had. They all trace right back to Goldman Sachs.
Reply -
88%
Hhussk1 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
To be honest, the current "financial crisis" we are referring to seems to be working itself out. Less than 10% of the stimulus has been dispersed.
Reply
The stimulus was supposed to hold us below 8% unemployment...and it certainly isn't doing that.
I also don't agree with the bailouts that started last year with the previous administration. I believe we already had laws to cover the problem...bankruptcy laws.
...and we circumvented them.
And now we're in this mode of changing everything we can...which is going to make things worse.-
100%
corl641 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"the current "financial crisis" we are referring to seems to be working itself out. Less than 10% of the stimulus has been dispersed.
Reply
The stimulus was supposed to hold us below 8% unemployment...and it certainly isn't doing that."
Not according to this article. The administration is already patting itself on the back for "saving" the economy.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Stimulus-jobs-Is-the...
.
-
-
75%
icono11 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think Geithner is following The 0 Man's wishes and just redistributing some of the tax payers wealth to his Wall Street buds for their advice on how to save the economy.
Reply
(I take it, that generally, it was Wall St's advice as well as some real loony govt financial agendas, that got us into this situation in the first place. But I'm sure that is entirely Bush 2's fault.)
So everything is ok in 0Bama world and we need not worry about excessive Capitalism ever sneaking into the picture. For The Pres has told us that and we know he wouldn't lie to us common proletariat types would he.
fta;
"Speaking to financial executives last month, Obama said: “We will not go back to the days of reckless behavior and unchecked excess that was at the heart of this crisis, where too many were motivated only by the appetite for quick kills and bloated bonuses.”
I wonder if Geithner and his Wall St. buds would like to redistribute some of their 'meager profits' our way? Didn't The 0 Man tell Joe the Plumber that his, 0Bama's, whole political agenda was about the redistribution of wealth? Or did Pres 0Bama really mean the redistribution of wealth from the 'common working masses' to the select few in Govt service and in the Govt's good graces? -
100%
canadianrancher571 month, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Just curious about one thing, those who have received a lot of this money are they republicans or democrats, most of this nonsense started well before Obama, with the payouts to banks and the meltdown in the credit markets. I don't know who advised the President of appoint Geithner, since I doubt that he made the decision by himself, but those who did are as big a bunch of idiots as Geithner and also those that he is bringing in to help, I don't care what the politics of these people are all I know is they are partly to blame for this mess.
Reply
Submit a Story
Advertisement
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.