Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Triana

(22,666 posts)
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 09:46 AM Jan 2016

"I worked on Wall Street. I am skeptical Hillary Clinton will rein it in."

by Chris Arnade at the Guardian

Wall Street is very much intertwined with the Clintons. I doubt that will change anytime soon.

I owe almost my entire Wall Street career to the Clintons. I am not alone; most bankers owe their careers, and their wealth, to them. Over the last 25 years they – with the Clintons it is never just Bill or Hillary – implemented policies that placed Wall Street at the center of the Democratic economic agenda, turning it from a party against Wall Street to a party of Wall Street.

That is why when I recently went to see Hillary Clinton campaign for president and speak about reforming Wall Street I was skeptical. What I heard hasn’t changed that skepticism. The policies she offers are mid-course corrections. In the Clintons’ world, Wall Street stays at the center, economically and politically. Given Wall Street’s power and influence, that is a dangerous place to leave them.

Salomon Brothers hired me in 1993, seven months after President Bill Clinton’s inauguration. Getting a job had been easy, Wall Street was booming from deregulation that had begun under Reagan and was continuing under Clinton.

. . .

Despite Wall Street’s reticence, key appointments were swinging their way. Robert Rubin, who had been CEO of Goldman Sachs, was appointed to a senior White House job as director of the National Economic Council. The Treasury Department was also being filled with banking friendly economists who saw the markets as a solution, not as a problem.


THE REST:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/28/hillary-clinton-wall-street-bailout?CMP=twt_gu
34 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"I worked on Wall Street. I am skeptical Hillary Clinton will rein it in." (Original Post) Triana Jan 2016 OP
Are there even any Clinton supporters who seriously believe she would? vi5 Jan 2016 #1
Hillary Clinton says in the debates that she has the toughest plan for Wall St. (NT) Eric J in MN Jan 2016 #13
Ha! vi5 Jan 2016 #14
They believe she will tell them to "Cut it out," with a wink and a nod. Live and Learn Feb 2016 #33
Thats the thing, I don't even believe that.... vi5 Feb 2016 #34
That is a great article... Punkingal Jan 2016 #2
+1 snagglepuss Jan 2016 #10
Yes. A must read. No more boom-bust-bailout economics! tk2kewl Jan 2016 #12
There's no skepticism, there's knowing she won't. RiverLover Jan 2016 #3
+1 daleanime Jan 2016 #27
Hillary said as much in one of the debates, but I can't SamKnause Jan 2016 #4
In my time I have seen these booms and bust grow in frequency. Baitball Blogger Jan 2016 #5
Exactly. SamKnause Jan 2016 #8
They grow in frequency and severity. . . . Triana Jan 2016 #9
That sums it up nicely. cali Jan 2016 #6
Hillary is Wall Street's creature. Odin2005 Jan 2016 #7
This in itself is a strong reason to support Sanders. bklyncowgirl Jan 2016 #11
Just one of many Doctor_J Jan 2016 #25
They are not even mid course corrections. Skwmom Jan 2016 #15
She will NEVER EVER bite the hand that feeds her and the Clinton global initiative. onecaliberal Jan 2016 #16
Recommend Read & and here's a bit more: KoKo Jan 2016 #17
Can you provide the link or source? floriduck Jan 2016 #18
Its the link in the OP from the Guardian: But Here it is, again. KoKo Jan 2016 #21
Thanks KoKo. nm floriduck Jan 2016 #23
You'd have to believe these groups are not hedging their bets, they always spread their Jefferson23 Jan 2016 #19
...she wouldn't do shit. SoapBox Jan 2016 #20
Great commentary The Blue Flower Jan 2016 #22
One of our 1% Wall Street Duers posted that he is GLAD Hillary will "represent Wall Street" Doctor_J Jan 2016 #24
"Wall Street?" "Wall Street?" Now, where have I seen that name before...? KansDem Jan 2016 #26
And There It Is - We All Know The Truth - Still Many Pretend Otherwise cantbeserious Jan 2016 #28
Now Cut That Out! Duckfan Jan 2016 #29
We Went From FDR to Hillary... Herman4747 Jan 2016 #30
k&r nationalize the fed Feb 2016 #31
It's probably impossible for any president BreakfastClub Feb 2016 #32
 

vi5

(13,305 posts)
1. Are there even any Clinton supporters who seriously believe she would?
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 09:53 AM
Jan 2016

I mean honestly, even the most full throttled defender of HRC I don't think has ever claimed she would do this. At most they can muster a "Well the Republican would be worse." on that issue.

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
33. They believe she will tell them to "Cut it out," with a wink and a nod.
Wed Feb 3, 2016, 03:53 AM
Feb 2016

Clinton supporters don't want serious change. They are quite happy with the status quo.

 

vi5

(13,305 posts)
34. Thats the thing, I don't even believe that....
Wed Feb 3, 2016, 09:28 AM
Feb 2016

Much like the Obama apologists I don't think they are happy with the way things are going and don't want change. But they think that having a particular figure head or someone whose presence is historic is more important than actual policies or actions with regard to governing.

SamKnause

(13,088 posts)
4. Hillary said as much in one of the debates, but I can't
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 09:56 AM
Jan 2016

remember which one.

What she alluded to was there will be booms and busts, but

she wants to control or manage those.

Not stop them, but control or manage them.

If you know which debate it was will you let me know ???

Baitball Blogger

(46,684 posts)
5. In my time I have seen these booms and bust grow in frequency.
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 10:05 AM
Jan 2016

Those booms are a perfect way to suck in people's pensions and investments, and those busts make a perfect getaway.

SamKnause

(13,088 posts)
8. Exactly.
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 10:12 AM
Jan 2016

They are intentional and Hillary wants to continue on this path.

That is why is stood out for me when she said it during a debate.

She is the problem, not the solution.

Skwmom

(12,685 posts)
15. They are not even mid course corrections.
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 10:56 AM
Jan 2016

Her "let's make the regulators the fall guy for the next crisis" approach is a joke. There is NO WAY that approach is workable.

Wall Street wants to conduct business like a crap-shoot. And why shouldn't they? Nobody goes to jail and they get bonuses.

When Bill Clinton engaged in his touted bi-partisanship and did away with Glass-Stegall the fallout from the S&L debacle was still in process. It was a no-brainer that further deregulation would create a crisis that would make the S&L crisis pale in comparison.

















KoKo

(84,711 posts)
17. Recommend Read & and here's a bit more:
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 11:01 AM
Jan 2016

More from the Original Article:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/28/hillary-clinton-wall-street-bailout?CMP=twt_gu

The bailout worked, with Mexico edging away from a crisis, allowing it to repay the loans, at profit. It also worked wonders on Wall Street, which let out a huge sigh of relief.

The success encouraged the administration, which used it as an economic blueprint that emphasized Wall Street. It also emphasized bailouts, believing it was counterproductive to let banks fail, or to punish them with losses, or fines or, God forbid, charge them with crimes, and risk endangering the economy.

The use of bailouts should have also been a reason to heavily regulate Wall Street, to prevent behavior that would require a bailout. But the administration didn’t do that; instead they went the opposite direction and continued to deregulate it, culminating in the repeal of Glass Steagall in 1999.

It changed the trading floor, which started to fill with Democrats. On my trading floor, Robert Rubin, who had joined my firm after leaving the administration, held traders attention by telling long stories and jokes about Bill Clinton to wide-eyed traders.

Wall Street now had both political parties working for them, and really nobody holding them accountable. Now, no trade was too aggressive, no risk too crazy, no behavior to unethical and no loss too painful. It unleashed a boom that produced plenty of smaller crisis (Russia, Dotcom), before culminating in the housing and financial crisis of 2008.

The response to that crisis was Mexico 1995 writ large: bailout the banks and save Wall Street. This time executed by an Obama administration filled with veterans of the Clinton administration, including Hillary Clinton and Larry Summers. Prior to joining Obama’s administration as a senator, Hillary Clinton voted to bail-out the banks, a vote she still defends.

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
19. You'd have to believe these groups are not hedging their bets, they always spread their
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 11:16 AM
Jan 2016

money around. You would also have to believe they will not receive a return
on their investment...so why would you vote for someone who takes their
money when you have an alternative?

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
24. One of our 1% Wall Street Duers posted that he is GLAD Hillary will "represent Wall Street"
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 11:35 AM
Jan 2016

as if their lot in life would crumble without the president shooing the hoi polloi off of them when needed.

nationalize the fed

(2,169 posts)
31. k&r
Wed Feb 3, 2016, 03:06 AM
Feb 2016
The success encouraged the administration, which used it as an economic blueprint that emphasized Wall Street. It also emphasized bailouts, believing it was counterproductive to let banks fail, or to punish them with losses, or fines or, God forbid, charge them with crimes, and risk endangering the economy.

The use of bailouts should have also been a reason to heavily regulate Wall Street, to prevent behavior that would require a bailout. But the administration didn’t do that; instead they went the opposite direction and continued to deregulate it, culminating in the repeal of Glass Steagall in 1999.

It changed the trading floor, which started to fill with Democrats. On my trading floor, Robert Rubin, who had joined my firm after leaving the administration, held traders attention by telling long stories and jokes about Bill Clinton to wide-eyed traders.

Wall Street now had both political parties working for them, and really nobody holding them accountable


There it is.

Iceland did something different


Iceland has jailed 26 bankers, why won't we?
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iceland-has-jailed-26-bankers-why-wont-we-a6735411.html

Iceland Jailed Bankers and Rejected Austerity—and It’s Been a Success

Instead of imposing devastating austerity measures and bailing out its banks, Iceland let its banks go bust and focused on social welfare policies. It has now repaid 85 percent of U.K. claims, and the Icelandic finance minister announced recently that all will be settled by the end of the year.
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/06/12/iceland-jailed-bankers-and-rejected-austerity-and-its-been-success

Iceland Just Jailed Dozens of Corrupt Bankers for 74 Years, the Opposite of What America Does. The prosecution of the Icelandic bankers represents an accountability that does not exist in America.
http://www.alternet.org/economy/iceland-just-jailed-dozens-corrupt-bankers-74-years-opposite-what-america-does

BreakfastClub

(765 posts)
32. It's probably impossible for any president
Wed Feb 3, 2016, 03:35 AM
Feb 2016

to singlehandedly reign in Wall Street. It's not realistic to expect that of anyone. Obama sure didn't do it.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»"I worked on Wall Street....