Jamie Dimon for Treasury Secretary: The Contradictor in Chief?

[D-Mack]

By Michael Corkery

With Timothy Geithner on the hot seat for his handling of the government’s financial-system bailout, the flagging dollar and persistently high unemployment, there is speculation a relief pitcher might be getting the call.

The New York Post cites unnamed sources as saying that J.P. Morgan Chase Chief James Dimon would “love to serve his country” and notes that he has been raising his profile around Washington recently, including an op-ed piece in the Washington Post last week and visits with Democratic power brokers.

This could be a classic case of the Washington rumor mill, stoked by Geithner’s testy exchange with Republicans at a Congressional hearing last week. Still, it is hard to resist the speculation about Wall Street’s “rock star” swooping in to save the White House’s economic effort.

...
http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2009/11/2...ctor-in-chief/

[Chomsky]

Re: Jamie Dimon for Treasury Secretary: The Contradictor in Chief?

Brother, can you spare a Dimon?

[goadam1]

Re: Jamie Dimon for Treasury Secretary: The Contradictor in Chief?

My son, who is 6, would like the job of "chief of the candy police." He can be in charge of all the worlds candy. He can give it out as favors. He can guard it. He can order more candy from the candy factory. He can eat all the candy he wants. He wants a gun and a uniform.

[Finster]

Re: Jamie Dimon for Treasury Secretary: The Contradictor in Chief?

[INDENT]By Michael Corkery

With Timothy Geithner on the hot seat for his handling of the government’s financial-system bailout, the flagging dollar and persistently high unemployment, there is speculation a relief pitcher might be getting the call...

That's a bad rap on Geithner. Nobody should expect one guy to just fix the world economy in a few months, let alone a few years. No, the rap on Geithner is that going by his public comments and policy, he has no clue what even went wrong in the first place. By his lights, it's variously the Bush administration and Republicans or excessive pay for corporate and finance execs. I guess if you're a partisan political operative, the opposing party and its last chief make expedient whipping boys, but we're not going to solve any problems that way. And if the problem has to do with overpaid execs, cutting their pay by fiat isn't going to do anything either. Not unless you start asking questions like why they were overpaid in the first place. (Possible they structurally have more say in their pay than the people doing the paying?).

And shame on him for the cheap partisan politics ploy. These problems weren't invented under Bush, heck, they were building under Clinton, and even before then. No, the problem didn't start in the executive branch of government in the first place. More like the fourth branch, the banking branch. You know, the Fed, Fannie, Freddie, etc. Perhaps Geithner would rather deflect attention away from that area, since he was one of its top deputies before becoming TSec ... as head of the New York Fed he was one of its most powerful men and was on duty while this whole mess was festering away. What was he saying and doing then?

The thing that scares me most - and also possibly spooking the financial markets - is the fact no one in power can even identify the real source of trouble. What kind of confidence can we have that things will get better, oy, even stop getting worse, as long as problems created by agencies of economic central planning are met with proposals for even more central planning?

I will start having more confidence in our economy when one of those guys steps forward and says something like, "It's not thousands of pages of more regulation we need. What was really missing was just one key principle: No entity may lend money it doesn't have."

I'm not holding my breath...

[metalman]

Re: Jamie Dimon for Treasury Secretary: The Contradictor in Chief?

That's a bad rap on Geithner. Nobody should expect one guy to just fix the world economy in a few months, let alone a few years. No, the rap on Geithner is that going by his public comments and policy, he has no clue what even went wrong in the first place. By his lights, it's variously the Bush administration and Republicans or excessive pay for corporate and finance execs. I guess if you're a partisan political operative, the opposing party and its last chief make expedient whipping boys, but we're not going to solve any problems that way. And if the problem has to do with overpaid execs, cutting their pay by fiat isn't going to do anything either. Not unless you start asking questions like why they were overpaid in the first place. (Possible they structurally have more say in their pay than the people doing the paying?).

And shame on him for the cheap partisan politics ploy. These problems weren't invented under Bush, heck, they were building under Clinton, and even before then. No, the problem didn't start in the executive branch of government in the first place. More like the fourth branch, the banking branch. You know, the Fed, Fannie, Freddie, etc. Perhaps Geithner would rather deflect attention away from that area, since he was one of its top deputies before becoming TSec ... as head of the New York Fed he was one of its most powerful men and was on duty while this whole mess was festering away. What was he saying and doing then?

The thing that scares me most - and also possibly spooking the financial markets - is the fact no one in power can even identify the real source of trouble. What kind of confidence can we have that things will get better, oy, even stop getting worse, as long as problems created by agencies of economic central planning are met with proposals for even more central planning?

I will start having more confidence in our economy when one of those guys steps forward and says something like, "It's not thousands of pages of more regulation we need. What was really missing was just one key principle: No entity may lend money it doesn't have."

I'm not holding my breath...

well, well. looks who's back. good to see you adorning these forums once more!

oligarchs got washington locked down.

too late for 'no entity may lend money it doesn't have'. maybe that worked 10 yrs ago.

we need, 'step 1... 1/2 the money you lent over the past 30 yrs? wasn't yours to lend. write it off. and... step 2... in the future don't lend money you don't have'.

no step 1, no step 2.

[goadam1]

Re: Jamie Dimon for Treasury Secretary: The Contradictor in Chief?

That's a bad rap on Geithner. Nobody should expect one guy to just fix the world economy in a few months, let alone a few years. No, the rap on Geithner is that going by his public comments and policy, he has no clue what even went wrong in the first place. By his lights, it's variously the Bush administration and Republicans or excessive pay for corporate and finance execs. I guess if you're a partisan political operative, the opposing party and its last chief make expedient whipping boys, but we're not going to solve any problems that way. And if the problem has to do with overpaid execs, cutting their pay by fiat isn't going to do anything either. Not unless you start asking questions like why they were overpaid in the first place. (Possible they structurally have more say in their pay than the people doing the paying?).

And shame on him for the cheap partisan politics ploy. These problems weren't invented under Bush, heck, they were building under Clinton, and even before then. No, the problem didn't start in the executive branch of government in the first place. More like the fourth branch, the banking branch. You know, the Fed, Fannie, Freddie, etc. Perhaps Geithner would rather deflect attention away from that area, since he was one of its top deputies before becoming TSec ... as head of the New York Fed he was one of its most powerful men and was on duty while this whole mess was festering away. What was he saying and doing then?

The thing that scares me most - and also possibly spooking the financial markets - is the fact no one in power can even identify the real source of trouble. What kind of confidence can we have that things will get better, oy, even stop getting worse, as long as problems created by agencies of economic central planning are met with proposals for even more central planning?

I will start having more confidence in our economy when one of those guys steps forward and says something like, "It's not thousands of pages of more regulation we need. What was really missing was just one key principle: No entity may lend money it doesn't have."

I'm not holding my breath...

If you work in NY finance and you have this house in Westchester, then you are (at best) a "tool" in every sense of the word.



Here is one of Jamie dimon's houses for sale. Now we are talking about a real pro.



Plus the real deal doesn't hold his own umbrella.

[Jay]

Re: Jamie Dimon for Treasury Secretary: The Contradictor in Chief?

Plus the real deal doesn't hold his own umbrella.

Does he shake it when he's done? Or someone else?

[goadam1]

Re: Jamie Dimon for Treasury Secretary: The Contradictor in Chief?

Does he shake it when he's done? Or someone else?

The piss boy shakes it.



It's good to be the king.