Volcker Out, Immelt In

Joe – I was actually encouraged by the news of Mr. Immelt’s appointment. He’s a leader with clout in the business community, and as you point out, has experience making products and creating jobs and is not just another financial guru.

Thought this NYT profile of him in early December was quite good: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/business/05ge.html?scp=8&sq=Immelt&st=cse

Maybe Volcker wrote “O”

He has experience actually making products…
.
…but which products, Joe? Light bulbs are one thing but jet engines for military aircraft and other defense products are another. GE is a big part of the MIC so having one of them cozy up to the inner circle is not good. Where’s Eisenhower when we need him?
.
http://www.militaryindustrialcomplex.com/totals.asp?thisContractor=General%20Electric

Obama may as well have picked another banker. GE basically turned itself into a bank anyway and it was another corporate welfare recipient during the bailouts.

Ever heard of GE Credit? GE Capital Management?

This is pure partisan nonsense with Joe showing his far left core. Bankers are no better or no worse than journalists or electricians. You have good ones and bad ones. To stereotype an entire industry is raw ignorance. To exclude the people who drive capitalism from planning is #1 braindead and #2 impossible.

It is a pity Paul is out but Obama ignored him anyway and Immelt brings nothing more than PR to the table. There probably isn’t another company that’s transferred more jobs overseas than GE. Nor is there a company that’s better gamed the govt energy disaster getting guarranteed money for windmills and legislation forcing utilities to pay above market prices. They were able to sell windmills are locked in prices with huge tax credits and then guarrantee profits despite it being the most expensive source of electricity. GE fleeced tax payors and
rate payors.

“…the important distinction here is between the business community, which should be encouraged to create more jobs, and the financial community, which should be shamed for its casino-gaming shenanigans and kept away from the inner circles of economic policy-making.”
.
I guess it’s just me then, I see no reason why corporate CEOs of any industry should be plying the inner circles of economic policy-making. It’s government policy-making, last time I heard and the conflicts between parochial corporate interests and the national interest have never been more obvious or severe. But, I’m sure, just like Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner, when it comes to policies that affect his interests and beliefs, he’ll put those conflicts of interest aside in favor of the best possible policies for all Americans. Just ask Lehman Brothers.

Well, you have and I have… has Joe?

I see no reason why corporate CEOs of any industry should be plying the inner circles of economic policy-making. It’s government policy-making,

****************************************************************

You are kidding right? So you put Obama, Harry and Nancy, without a clue on business or economics, in charge?

Just as an example of how stupid Joe is on this ask yourself who was Bill Clintons #1 economic guru and the most respected economic mind in his administration. I’ll give you a hint. His initials are RR and it’s not the great Ron Reagan. Now where did he work before coming to govt?

The funny thing here is he’s become “he who must not be named”. After serving Bill Clinton he turned to the dark side and went to work for the hyper-evil Citibank

“So you put Obama, Harry and Nancy, without a clue on business or economics, in charge?”
.
What?
.
Clinton lead the longest period of growth in American history – eight consecutive years!
.
Bush lead us into the financial meltdown.
.
You insisted that there had not been a recession in 30 years, when, in reality, there were recessions in 1981, your favorite year- 1982, again in 1988, again in 1991, again in 1992, again in 2001 and a huge recession in 2007 ending in the second quarter of 2008.
.
You, also, claim that supply side economics is more than a dismal failure as even most conservatives and all economists today say.
.
So, I know that if you say an economist if awful that is a tell tale sign that we are speaking of an economic genius
..
BTW: Robert Reich left the Clinton administration as Labor secretary because Clinton was too conservative for him. So, I don’t know which RR you are thinking of.

I would love to have Clinton back to set things straight here.

But the real issue is that a majority of the financial sector used methods to maximize profits, while cheating the system. Not all, but many. So we really need to put them back into line.

Hmmmmm…..

“BTW: Robert Reich left the Clinton administration as Labor secretary because Clinton was too conservative for him. So, I don’t know which RR you are thinking of.”
.
No doubt, he’s referring to Robert Rubin, even though he doesn’t seem to realize that he’s the poster-child for why you don’t put corporatist, corporate CEOs in charge of the country’s policy-making.
.
http://www.allbusiness.com/government/business-regulations/500983-1.html

I really was trying to find a way to say this, but couldn’t easily find backup.
.
A href=”http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/immelt-ge-capital-and-the-financialization-of-manufacturing/” GE is a FINANCIAL company

http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/immelt-ge-capital-and-the-financialization-of-manufacturing/

He told the NYT about a month ago that he was leaving b/c he said he can’t make speeches like he wants to. Anything he says is immediately interpreted as “Obama speaking.” This has resulted in a lot of confusion for both of them. He suggested a value added tax in a speech & Obama has been attacked for wanting a value added tax by both parties.. Just one example. I like him. I wish he weren’t leaving, but Obama said today he has depended on Volcker for a long time and would still be consulting him in the future.

Sort of like Obama will do whatever Alan Simpson recommended on the deficit commission. He said in early Jan he was still reviewing it but some in both parties are certain he is cutting SocSec pmts., etc.

Immelt was on the Recovery Council, too.

“I see no reason why corporate CEOs of any industry should be plying the inner circles of economic policy-making. It’s government policy-making”
.
Which explains 9+% unemployment, growing deficits, debt and states approaching bankruptcy. Government policy making at its best.
.
Do you check under your bed at night to see if there is a capitalist hiding?

No doubt, he’s referring to Robert Rubin, even though he doesn’t seem to realize that he’s the poster-child for why you don’t put corporatist, corporate CEOs in charge of the country’s policy-making.

********************************************************

Are you kidding?

Bill Clinton will tell you right now Rubin was his most valuable advisor. Robert Reich left because Clinton listened to Rubin and not him.

You insisted that there had not been a recession in 30 years, when, in reality, there were recessions in 1981, your favorite year- 1982, again in 1988, again in 1991, again in 1992, again in 2001 and a huge recession in 2007 ending in the second quarter of 2008.

***********************************************

What are you babbling about? I said no such thing. All of the recessions are well documented.

Clinton lead the longest period of growth in American history – eight consecutive years!

*******************************

What’s that have to do with Obama?

“Bill Clinton will tell you right now Rubin was his most valuable advisor.”
.
Why should I care what Bill Clinton thinks? He’s a corporatist centrist like Rubin and helped lay the deregulatory groundwork for the economic disaster we’ve just suffered – hint: centrists are almost always wrong on policy. Also, unlike you and your fellow RWA Teatards, I don’t slavishly believe everything I’m told by my political leaders.
.
.
“Robert Reich left because Clinton listened to Rubin and not him.”
.
One of Clinton’s numerous mistakes (see: ..Rubin…helped lay the deregulatory groundwork for the economic disaster we’ve just suffered).

Which explains 9+% unemployment, growing deficits, debt and states approaching bankruptcy. Corporatist government policy making at its best.
.
There, fixed that for ya.

Tell me what month you first came here and I will find your own twisted illogical words to quote for you.
.
You’ve insisted until about a week ago that there was no downturn after the 1987 stock market crash.

You brought up Clinton.
.
I responded with a fact about Clinton.

I brought up Clinton for relying on a Wall Street Financier, contrary to current liberal dogma.

Tell me what month you first came here and I will find your own twisted illogical words to quote for you.
.
You’ve insisted until about a week ago that there was no downturn after the 1987 stock market crash.

*********************************************************************

How about this. Before you run at the mouth you have your facts. I never said there wasn’t a downturn after the 87 crash. I said there wasn’t a recession after the crash. I also said the recovery was quick.

I may not get back to you for another few hours, since this is not my number one priority, but, I will find a link to you stating that there had been no recessions at all for 30 years.
.
BTW: What’s the difference between a downturn and a recession?
.
It’s like the difference between the the rhinovirus and a cold: one is the technical term the other is the vernacular, but mean exactly the same thing.

Joe, both the bankers and the manufacturers are creating millions of jobs – in India, China, Malaysia and Mexico.

Immelt is the head of GE, one of the world leaders in outsourcing – in this recession he has eliminated tens of thousands of jobs in the US.

How does his appointment signal anything other than hopelessness for the American Middle Class?

Hi Joe,
I really like your column!!

There are a lot of inflammatory words like”Death Squads”

How about a nice word “Obamacare is because Obama cares for the little guy!

The Republicans are sponsor in “Richcare” the care and feeding of millionaires.

The Democrats need to get more clever with words that stick with the public!!

Keep it up!

I’ve got the right day and subject, but will get back to you with your quote tomorrow unless somebody else wants to remind you of how you know absolutely nothing about economics.
.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/03/15/israel-first/
.
It could be even earlier or possibly later, but, you go into your whole hypothesis that Israel is following Reagan’s lead.

Here it is!
.
“12.3

Patrick,

quite right, you know little of history or economics. Star Wars was successful because Gorby was terrified of it. We had better technology in our dolls than they had in their planes. Gorby understood there was no way socialism could compete with capitalism and our military R&D would eventually enable us to crush Russia.

As far as Reagan the greatest economic boom in US history started in 1981 and lasted almost 30 years. Lowering marginal tax rates from 70% to 28% was one of the greatest economic and legislative acheivements of all time.”

Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/03/28/israel-today-and-so-long-for-now/#ixzz1BiZpKSHV
.
When you said this, I began to imagine that I was communicating with a 16 year old with ADD.

How convenient. Jeffrey Immelt of GE, which received billions in federal bailout cash, now joins the administration. Seems a bit incestuous, n’est-ce pas?

What CEO was not bailed out either by Bush or Obama?
.
All of the biggest CEOs are on the list it seems.
.
The president would have to go to a University to find hands that have not touched bailout money and, if he did the Republicans would throw a fit – SOCIALISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
.
So, they picked good old bailed out capitalism.

patricksartor,

And the fact that GE was not a bank and, therefore, not entitled to TARP money was never no mind? Maybe the fact that GE owns NBC, the White House Ministry of Propaganda, had something to do with it. What say you?

dollared,

Bet that ComCast is about to outsource Immelt’s job.

General Electric and General Motors used to have such extremely high credit ratings that they were able to borrow overnight commercial paper at extremely low rates and lend out o a long term basis.
.
So, both GM – specifically GMAC – and GE functioned like lending institutions.
.
So, why didn’t ABC, CBS and CNN among others get federal money if it were not for the lending done by GE?
.
It’s ironic for you, a person who supports many of the conclusions of Fox News to accuse the White House of hiring out a news outlet as a propaganda organ.

Goodbye to the last of the economists who actually care about the other 99%.
Can Obama cram his head any further up there if he tries? I can’t wait to find out. I’m done with him. I’d rather see a crazy tea partier elected who the megacorporations can’t necessarily count on to do their bidding. I was hoping the republicans would maintain their backbone and vote against the bank bailout — it was the only time I’ve ever been on their site — but sadly, many of them sacrificed their principles. And now here we are. If those corporations had been allowed to fail, the people would have demanded real, substantive change. Yes, it would have been painful, but we would eventually be in a much better position to prevent corporations from commanding governmental policy and having the power to destroy our economy. We missed a golden opportunity to wrench control away from the corporations, and I doubt we’ll get another for a long, long time.

Don’t forget GE’s biggest product is military aircraft engines, which it sells to Israel and Saudi Arabia. For this reason, its NBC broadcast arm has incessantly stoked Middle East conflict. At least now that Comcast owns NBC we’ll see different propaganda: Less “Arabs are filthy animals, except for Saudi tycoon princes” and more “net neutrality is a blow against freedom.”