Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Wall Street's ownership of government

[katty]

more: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/

Glenn Greenwald
Saturday April 4, 2009 08:35 EDT
Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Wall Street's ownership of government

White House officials yesterday released their personal financial disclosure forms, and included in the millions of dollars which top Obama economics adviser Larry Summers made from Wall Street in 2008 is this detail:

Lawrence H. Summers, one of President Obama's top economic advisers, collected roughly $5.2 million in compensation from hedge fund D.E. Shaw over the past year and was paid more than $2.7 million in speaking fees by several troubled Wall Street firms and other organizations. . . .

Financial institutions including JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch paid Summers for speaking appearances in 2008. Fees ranged from $45,000 for a Nov. 12 Merrill Lynch appearance to $135,000 for an April 16 visit to Goldman Sachs, according to his disclosure form.

That's $135,000 paid by Goldman Sachs to Summers -- for a one-day visit. And the payment was made at a time -- in April, 2008 -- when everyone assumed that the next President would either be Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton and that Larry Summers would therefore become exactly what he now is: the most influential financial official in the U.S. Government

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. well he can always give the money back!!!

[defendandprotect]

2. This is where "small" weak people's government gets you . . .!!!

A while back I remember hearing also that when government and corporations

come to court these days, it's the corporations with all the lawyers now---

more lawyers/sharper lawyers!

[terisan]

3. Does smaller government necessarily have to be weak? or vice versa ?

I note that in the stimulus bill the government does not seem to have built in many overseers to catch fraud--although they certainly could have. It creates a bigger government but not one with sufficient tools to keep it honest.

[defendandprotect]

5. "Small government" doesn't hire watchdogs . . . and look where we are!!!

If we haven't been concerned about corporations becoming "too big to fail" . . .

why would we be concerned about big government?

EPA, FDA have all been corrupted by concepts of "fox in charge of the hen house"

hiring -- and by not proper oversight - and limiting programs.

Of course . . . . if you don't hire lawyers, you're at a disadvantage against corporations . . .

and we've done nothing but enrich corporations -- with tax cuts -- letting

they move money to "off shore" locations -- trade agreements -- and now

bailouts -- i.e., welfare for the rich!

Small government also means small education . . . how does that profit us?

and on and on down the line!

The only place we've grown is in military which, IMO, is anti-people's government!


PS: If you're "too big to fail" you're too big.

Let's move on anti-trust laws and break up these corporations --

[terisan]

6. I don.t think the issue is big vs small government. Bush grew the government.

I think the need is for an executive branch of government that is honest and has power to regulate and fully enforce the law.

[defendandprotect]

7. Right, I think we don't have to fear BIG government .... but we do have to fear BIG corporations . .

I was, however, of course, playing off of Reagan's "small" government theme...

There are exceptions to every rule -- and every cliche.

However, again, a government without an Education Department which was and probably
still is in GOP's-sights would be a negative for America. Ignorance profits no man?

Bush "grew" the Military Industrial Intelligence Complex and also privatized military
and government. 45,000 private contractors in Iraq now!

And, in general, while I agree a typewriter is a typewriter and it depends on who is
doing the typing -- IMO as the population grows so should government -- and if
corporations grow most assuredly so should government.

Government can, of course, be weak -- in the sense that you can open multiple savings
accounts for your children's education and never put anything in them! Like having
anti-trust laws we don't enforce, for instance. Education not properly funded, for another.
Btw, a lot of people don't know that money for CIA* was often hidden in school budgets, etc.

At any rate, Department of Agriculture, FDA, EPA are all, IMO examples of being co-opted
by the right and their purpose largely ignored or destroyed.

Bush may have "grown" the government BUT NOT IN THE INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC . . .
which is quite different from what I'm talking about!

I think the need is for an executive branch of government that is honest and has power to regulate and fully enforce the law.

Unfortunately, as our founders made clear, there will always be dishonest men among us and
because of that we need the rule of law to be followed. That's what the Constitution calls
for . . . defending against all enemies domestic and foreign. And, in fact, conspiracy
between President and Vice President is mentioned in some of the writings where they call
for the SUSPENSION of their services.

The idea of a people's government is to do the greatest good for the greatest number of people -
it is not dedicated to the interests of the few - nor should it be operating on the
"Manifest Destiny" license which is exploitive of all.




* We now also know that the CIA -- besides creating political mischief all over the world
to keep right-wing governments in play and barring liberal governments -- was also funneling
money to many right-wing Senators/Reps -- two of those I recall are Sen. Strom Thurmond and
Rep. Gerald Ford.

[frylock]

4. just another RW meme from the uber conservative salon..

where were they when GWB was skullfucking the world?!!

:sarcasm:

[defendandprotect]

8. We all know Summers is corporate and wrong for America. . .

and, obviously, Obama also knows this . . .

So the question is WHY has he done this?

Obama also moved toward inner-most DLC influence on his administration which is also
wrong for America.

WHY? is the question we need answered.


Just a PS if anyone wants to argue that Abama doesn't know this ....??

Then Obama is wrong for America!