Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama's comments on Nationalizing Banks etc. to Washington Post

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Kdillard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 07:39 AM
Original message
Obama's comments on Nationalizing Banks etc. to Washington Post
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2009/02/obama_on_nationalizing_banks_a.html#more


When it came to fixing the banks, Obama acknowledged that “working through all those bad debts is going to be really tough.” Asked about a range of choices, from Japan’s go-slow approach to Sweden’s temporary government takeover of insolvent banks, he said:

"As you pointed out, sort of along the spectrum there are two ways of handling this. There’s the Japan model -- as I said, they sort of papered things over, never really bit the bullet, took their medicine, and so you never got credit flowing the way it should have and the bad assets in their system just corroded the economy for a long period of time.

"Sweden, in contrast, took over their banks and took out the bad assets and then resold the good banks, the fixed banks, to private hands. And they were up and running pretty soon. And as I said when I was asked about this the other day, you can make a good argument for the Swedish model, except for this fact: They only had a handful of banks. We’ve got thousands of banks. The scale, the magnitude of what we’re dealing with is much bigger. We’ve got global financial markets that are reacting in all sorts of unpredictable ways. And so what we have to do is to we have to pull the Band-Aid off so we don’t duplicate what happened in Japan. But we’ve also got to make sure that in pulling the Band-Aid off we don’t just start doing so much damage that things end up getting much, much worse. Finding that sweet spot is what we’ve been working on for the last several weeks and what Tim Geithner is going to continue to be working on over the next weeks, months, probably through the end of this year."

When pressed on whether he was ruling out the Swedish approach, he declined to do so:

"My absolute goal is to make sure that our financial system is set and that we get credit flowing again, that homeowners, small businesses and large businesses will get -- invest and create jobs and get this economy going again. I’m going to be very practical in terms of how to approach it. What we want to do is to make sure that we get this right on the front end. What Tim Geithner did was to provide a framework. He is presenting then a timeline of how this is going to roll out over the next several months: When do we start applying these stress tests to the banks; opening up their books; making sure that everybody knows for sure exactly what’s going on in there; structuring plans to attract private capital to help deal with some of these weaker institutions. Some of the smaller institutions that don’t pose systemic risks, if it turns out that they’re in really, really bad shape, then we may have to reevaluate how we approach some of those institutions.

"He’s also working the Federal Reserve Bank and the FDIC to open up lines of credit that immediately provide some relief to small businesses and consumers. There are a whole bunch of credit markets, like student loans or credit cards, that are locked up right now, but actually the underlying assets in these securitized markets are not that bad, so we may just have to use a variety of different tools to give private investors some confidence on that front.

"But here’s the bottom line: We will do what works. It is going to take time to lay out every aspect of this plan and there are going to be certain aspects of any plan that was designed which will require reevaluation and then have some experimentation -- if that doesn’t work then you do something else. What I’m confident about is that the basic framework that we have put forward is the right one, and that it balances a whole host of issues, including, by the way, the issue of making sure the taxpayers aren’t just carrying the whole freight on this thing, and that we’re sharing -- that institutions on Wall Street are sharing the burden of cleaning up this mess.

"We want to help because -- not because I’m particularly happy about how Wall Street has been running its businesses, but because if we don’t fix the banking system and the credit markets, then businesses can’t make payroll and we continue to see pain among ordinary Americans. On the other hand, I think that folks on Wall Street have to understand that these burdens have to be shared, and so restrictions on executive compensation, transparency, making sure that shareholders are more effectively involved, all those things we’re taking into account. And by the way, the market is not always going to like some of those decisions, because ideally what they’d like to do, they’d like to continue business as usual and not pay a price for a whole bunch of really big mistakes that were made."

We pressed him again on his meaning, and he said:

"I will not allow our financial system to collapse. And we are going to do whatever is required to get credit flowing again so that companies and consumers can do their business and we can get this economy back on track."

He also spoke straightforwardly about what he wished had not been cut out of the stimulus bill in the compromise between the House and the Senate:

"I do think that we probably could have done more on the education innovation front. I think we could have done more with some of the health-care reforms that would lower costs. I think that if you ask governors, Republican and Democrat, around the country, about their budgets, they would argue that cuts in help to the states is going to put them in a very bad bind, particularly if the economy does not turn around fairly soon. So those are all issues where again, I might have designed it a little bit differently, but ultimately this is a framework that is going to create between 3 and 4 million jobs. And that was my bottom line."

By E.J. Dionne | February 15, 2009; 4:34 PM ET | Category: Dionne
Previous: They Said It |





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 07:44 AM
Response to Original message
1. Long story short: some banks will be nationalized
but they will likely not refer to it as such.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kdillard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Yep that is pretty much what I got too but he is going to try to get to that conclusion
with solid evidence because you know the attacks will be coming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. I vote for pre-reprivatization
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-17-09 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. You're joking, but I bet that will be very close
to the actual terminology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 08:12 AM
Response to Original message
3. He's right, Sweden only had a handful of banks BUT America has a handful of BIG BANKS. Nationalize..
...the relative FEW big banks that screwed up and MAKE them lower rates while selling them blocks of money cheaply, there'll be a flood of refi then
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marsala Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. We probably will eventually
That's the likely outcome of the stress tests, but Obama doesn't want to announce it now since it could create panic in the markets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trajan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
4. Thanks for posting this .. but I have one small quibble ....
DU rules state that no more than FOUR paragraphs may be cited, per the Fair Use Doctrine ...

Other DUers have to stick to that rule (more or less), so it shouldn't be any different for you ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kdillard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Oops forgot about that. I tried to edit it but the editting period has expired.
I will remember it for the future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trajan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. I understand completely ....
And it is another great column from Dionne, so it is appreciated here ...

There is a good chance an administrator will edit this later, in any case ...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
7. K & R
Thanks for the post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevepol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
8. Nationalize, but call it receivership. Same thing, different name, same result.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-09 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
10. He's keeping options open. He's formed an outside advisory board.
Edited on Mon Feb-16-09 05:18 PM by chill_wind
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 04:54 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC