Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone identifies as a progressive and a Leftist, and he comes in a big plate of gilt-wrapped obnoxiousness that might keep some people from realizing--and seems to keep him from realizing--that he is actually a man of the Right.
It is as though someone sat down and made a list of every individual on earth who actually did not need emergency financial assistance from the United States government, and then handed them the keys to the public treasure. The Fed sent billions in bailout aid to banks in places like Mexico, Bahrain and Bavaria, billions more to a spate of Japanese car companies, more than $2 trillion in loans each to Citigroup and Morgan Stanley, and billions more to a string of lesser millionaires and billionaires with Cayman Islands addresses.
Hey, if denouncing this is what progressives stand for these days, I'm cool with that.
- Comment (36)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Get the man a Ricochet invite.
May '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
I'm one that believes that more banks (and car companies) should have been allowed to fail. That said, it was the action of responsible men and women trying to act responsibly to avoid a financial meltdown of epic proportions. It's not fair to go back in time to score cheap political points by overlaying a perspective that has the benefit of hindsight. This was not crony capitalism, this was leaders trying to lead. How can we ask our leaders to be bold and decisive if we're going to finger-wag after the fact. Imagine the post-Medicare reform stories that will come when indigent grandmothers will die in dialysis and rich plutocrats will be buying replacement organs offshore.
And for what it's worth Matt Taibbi is a troll and welcome him on Ricochet at your peril.
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
What miserable decision would this logic not excuse?
His objective may be to score cheap political points. He has in fact achieved something quite different.
Feb '11
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
The problem isn't Wall Street per se; it's the Wall-Street/Washington nexus. For example, Clinton treasury secretary Robert Rubin was paid as much as $33MM/years ($115MM total) by Citi, despite his apparent lack of any significant operational responsibilities (and his definite lack of any serious effort to identify and prevent the major disaster that was impending for that institution. There are many CEOs of quite significant companies, working 12-hour days and accomplishing very important things, who are paid much less than this. Former budget director Peter Orszag seems to be getting on the same track at Citi, though his compensation is not yet anywhere near the Rubin level.
There is so much money to be made bouncing back and forth between "public service" jobs and the pseudo-private sector...including not only Wall Street but also certain kinds of law firms and lobbying firms...that there are hardly any other career paths that begin to compare.
Aug '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
It's called The Golden Rule, those who have the gold make the rules. Our era is essentially no different than any other tyrannical one. The world's leaders are mostly as brutal and unaccountable as the kings, popes, and dictators of the past. All the gains accumulated over centuries has been squandered.
May '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
What miserable decision would this logic not excuse?
No Claire. The point is that you can't change the yardstick after the fact. We all know the world did not end. But that was not clear at the time and only an argument that cogently explains why it was never going to end has any integrity.
Yes he has a compelling story about what appears to be egregious abuse of a too rapidly-designed program. But it's hardly as if he presents a fair case. Fair is boring journalism, especially in the pages of Rolling Stone, so he he gets a cartoonist to ink a misogynist cartoon and makes fun of two women that he smirks must be morons and describes as worthless some assets of which he has no real direct knowledge.
All due respect to your profession Claire, but this is cheap hackery, red meat nonsense. TALF was too much, too soon and bad policy but it cannot be dismissed as mere cronyism.
Feb '11
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Sep '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Trace Urdan
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
The point is that you can't change the yardstick after the fact. · Apr 13 at 6:56am
My fear is that too many of the actions of Wall Street in the late 90s to mid 00s have gone unexamined for their criminality. We have plenty of examples of the Obama admin simply ignoring criminal actions when it suits their political needs.
May '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Israel P. · Apr 13 at 6:59am
Trace is talking about something else entirely. That sentence shouldn't be construed in any fashion as approving of the administration's handling of the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies.
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Trace, take away that it's Matt Taibbi. Take away that it's Rolling Stone. Take away the nasty comments about Republicans. Take away the vulgarities. Attribute it to Ann Coulter and watch the Left rise up as one and denounce it as cheap, right-wing hackery. Seriously, you could probably perform an amusing experiment by editing it just slightly, posting it on OpenDemocracy with a stirring denunciation of the right-wing's propaganda Freikorps, and seeing them excoriate Ann Coulter.
May '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Patrick in Albuquerque
Trace Urdan
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
The point is that you can't change the yardstick after the fact. · Apr 13 at 6:56am
My fear is that too many of the actions of Wall Street in the late 90s to mid 00s have gone unexamined for their criminality. We have plenty of examples of the Obama admin simply ignoring criminal actions when it suits their political needs. · Apr 13 at 7:05am
Everyone take a deep breath here. There are things that are wrongheaded, misguided, or out-and-out stupid; there are also things that are criminal. The two aren't automatically the same and usually - as I see in my day job - there is a big, big difference between them.
Trace is right. There's no crime in being wrong, even spectacularly so.
Aug '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Claire, your thoughts reflect the Hamiltonian v. Jeffersonian conflict that has existed in this country since its birth. I clearly identify with the Jeffersonian Republican ideal much more than the Hamiltonian big-business-central government axis of influence. The bailouts were immoral to begin with and this abuse is more evidence of the same.
I believe conservatives (as opposed to Republicans) have more in common with some progressives than is assumed. An opposition to corporate welfare (of any form) is one such area.
Sep '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Matthew Gilley
Patrick in Albuquerque
Trace Urdan
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
The point is that you can't change the yardstick after the fact. · Apr 13 at 6:56am
My fear is that too many of the actions of Wall Street in the late 90s to mid 00s have gone unexamined for their criminality. We have plenty of examples of the Obama admin simply ignoring criminal actions when it suits their political needs. · Apr 13 at 7:05am
There's no crime in being wrong, even spectacularly so. · Apr 13 at 7:28am
All that you say is true. But your apparent faith in the machinations of DC seems to me not a good idea, especially when politics and Justice meet. Obama did tell the Wall Streeters that "I stand between you and the pitchforks."
Edited on Apr 13, 2011 at 7:55amMay '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Agreed.
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
I have read Matt Taibbi off and on over the last couple of years. On the con game played by Goldman Sachs and the like, he has been pretty good. I suspect that, like many another angry leftist, he will someday wake up and realize that the regulated will always in time capture the regulators, that the size and scope of corruption within a polity will in time approximate the size and scope of the administrative state, and that there is no way to get around this problem. If he were willing to abide by the Ricochet Code of Conduct, it would be great fun to have him as a guest contributor. My bet is that we would have a greater long-term effect on him than he would on us.
Mar '11
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
The difference is that we're mad because the bailouts were a corruption of capitalism and markets. Let them fail, say we. This guy at RS is mad because they're rich in the first place. He's going to hate them anyway, because having more money (never mind that most people actually worked for it) is just so unfair. Like Michael Moore, this guy doesn't think capitalism was corrupted. He thinks capitalism is the problem.
Never, ever confuse this clown with a conservative.
May '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Listen, if you want to get outraged about Wall Street and Washington, get outraged at the Dodd Frank bill which adds a ton of regulation, including long-held pet Dem projects but gets after very little that precipitated the crisis in the first place.
I'm all for allowing capitalism to do what it is supposed to do by teaching harsh lessons. My only objection is to impugning the motives behind TARP and TALF. I think everyone involved was holding their nose even as they did it. GM was something else entirely -- that was about jobs and votes and purely political.
May '10
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
You're assuming too much here. For example, do I think we should have poured buckets of cash down AIG's gullet so the counterparties to AIG credit default swaps could weather the losses from their terrible mortgage loans? No. Did I think it was a good idea at the time? No. Do I think, as Trace says, that we should have allowed more banks to fail? You bet. Do I think the federal government panicked and overreacted to the umpteenth degree? Yeah, I think they did.
The post, however, asks whether Wall Street should be in jail, not whether all of this was a good idea. I think we both essentially agree on these policies. I just get very nervous - especially as a conservative - when we start tossing "criminal" into a policy discussion.
Mar '11
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
Jail or not - the financial services industry has grown bigger and more dangerous with government encouragement. A lot of those responsible may not deserve jail, but they sure don't deserve their enormous bonuses and lavish lifestyles. They gambled and lost - but would did they lose?
Tails we win, heads we win. Crony capitalism is becoming a bigger part of the economy and it will hurt us more than socialism although the two work hand in hand. Socialism strikes me as at least somewhat more honest. It is more out in the open to question and debate. What secret deals were made with our money?
There is an unholy alliance of big business and financial interests, with the government. The suffering in the financial sector did not match its recklessness and stupidity. The scary things is that they have learned that their future behavior will continue to be backstopped by the tax paying suckers.
Its time for us to get really angry about this. Capitalism has no business with government besides leave us alone and protect contracts. I share Matt Taibbi's outrage.
Feb '11
Re: Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
"The post, however, asks whether Wall Street should be in jail, not whether all of this was a good idea. I think we both essentially agree on these policies. I just get very nervous - especially as a conservative - when we start tossing "criminal" into a policy discussion."
Uhm...pardon me, but the people of Wall Street were able to collect vast bonuses based on their "mistakes" making bad loans, then stick taxpayers with the bill. And yes, crimes were committed- all the way from Tim Geithner "forgetting" to pay $65000 in taxes to massive fraud in mortgage securitization.
The end result of these financial machinations could be the United States becoming a continent sized Weimar Republic- and almost no one will go to jail.
Amazing. For more specifics I suggest you look up Karl Denninger and read his marker tickers. He's been writing about the criminal activities of Wall Street for years.