Geithner's Latest Struggle: Reminiding The Public He's Never Worked For Goldman Sachs

nytimes.com:

Earlier this month, Mr. Geithner had breakfast in Manhattan with Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Robert Steel, a deputy mayor and former Treasury official in the Bush administration who had previously worked at Goldman. Facetiously, a Geithner aide said Mr. Steel and Mr. Geithner knew each other from the investment bank.

Later that day at a public event, the mayor in all seriousness referred to Mr. Steel and Mr. Geithner, and added, "They both worked at Goldman."

Read the whole story: nytimes.com

Comments

[Jackson Strong]

12:40 PM on 08/23/2010

Considering he was head of the New York fed, well, yeah, he worked for goldman. As well as Citi, Chase, and BofA (they make up the board members of the NY fed). Does no one else see this blatant conflict of interest?

[LizM]

12:41 PM on 08/23/2010

I'm afraid you have a very simplistic view of how the Fed operates.

[Jackson Strong]

03:31 PM on 08/23/2010

I do? Let me elaborate:

Currently, short term interest rates are between 0 and .25 basis points. This enables banks to borrow, based on an asset (such as mortgage or commercial paper) at extremely low interest rates, and lend it back to the government with 6 month, 2, or 5 year treasuries. This is effectively the fed subsidizing the banks which have access to this short term borrowing. Of course, when short term interest rates inevitably rise, all of the current refinancing will render the bank's assets worth far less, and exacerbate financial insolvency. Let's see if the fed has the balls to raise rates. More likely, they wont, and will allow the dollar to collapse in value. I probably have a much better understanding of how the Federal Reserve Bank operates than you.

[Figerre]

11:40 AM on 08/23/2010

Another lie repeated incessantly until it appears to be true. How shocking!

[LizM]

12:31 PM on 08/23/2010

It's par for the course.

[rory talbot]

05:07 PM on 08/22/2010

Timmy may never have been employed AT Goldman, but he's always worked FOR Goldman.

[MrOctober]

10:28 PM on 08/23/2010

Fanned!

[dukeitout]

04:45 PM on 08/22/2010

I've been told by a knowledgeable insider that Geithner is also a Muslim and is actually the highest Goldman official of this faith to have been appointed to the Department of the Treasury. Let's just say the source was very reliable and is a prominent Nevada political candidate.

[blueskybigstar]

03:23 PM on 08/22/2010

These bankers who lead GS and others and the media, those are only their side jobs because their first job is to the CIA. Why is it that people who run the CIA are often made the heads of banks? If he didn't work for GS, he might as well have. He was mentored by intelligence leader and war criminal Kissinger. It is true that he had all the bankers on speed dial and did not want to curb bonuses. Remember, nobody went to jail.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/tim-geithners-financial-crisis-declassified-phone-log-released

[Sendil Nathan]

02:36 PM on 08/22/2010

But he's still the same Jewish banker that Shakespeare so aptly characterized as Shylock. How many pounds of American flesh do you need to save the wall street banks, Geithlock?

[flatbushfan]

12:59 AM on 08/22/2010

But he is a Muslim right?

[blueskybigstar]

03:23 PM on 08/22/2010

I think he goes to temple.

[clearwaterclearmind]

06:06 PM on 08/21/2010

geithner's history at goldman sachs is classified and whoever leaked it is a traitor!

[LizM]

09:12 PM on 08/21/2010

Of course, Geithner doesn't have a history at GS.

By the way, do you make it a habit of not reading the piece you're commenting on?

Has the Huffington Post succeeded in pulling a fast one on you!? :)

[clearwaterclearmind]

09:20 PM on 08/21/2010

sarcasm:

it's not just for breakfast anymore.

[mashtoe]

03:17 PM on 08/21/2010

What? He's working for Goldman Sachs right now.

[floodmfx]

12:15 AM on 08/22/2010

The way he behaves, he doesn't seem to be working for the people

[sfsoma]

12:34 PM on 08/21/2010

Timmy G looks so cute when he is angry. Bet he looks hot geared up on his skateboard, too. I just don't think of working for the NYFED as public service. Sorry, can't buy it.

[LizM]

09:13 PM on 08/21/2010

You should see him on the cricket pitch!

[fromdnorth]

11:32 AM on 08/21/2010

The Rubin Con Goes On
Email this item Email Print this item Print Share this item... Share x

RSS Feed
Digg this item Digg
Facebook this item Facebook
TwitThis this item TwitThis
StumbleUpon this item StumbleUpon
Reddit this item Reddit
YahooBuzz this item YahooBuzz
Email this item Email
BlinkList this item BlinkList
del.icio.us this item del.icio.us
Fark this item Fark
Furl this item Furl
Google this item Google
LinkedIn this item LinkedIn
Mixx this item Mixx
MyShare this item MyShare
NewsVine this item NewsVine
Propeller this item Propeller
SphereIt this item SphereIt
Technorati this item Technorati
YahooMyWeb this item YahooMyWeb

Share 2
Posted on Aug 10, 2010
Rubin
AP / J. Scott Applewhite

Former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin testifies on Capitol Hill on April 8 before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, which was seeking an accounting of decisions that inflated a mortgage bubble and triggered the financial crisis.

Q & A - Live Chat with Robert Scheer

A live Q & A session related to this column took place on August 12, 2010 at 11:00 am PT.

Click here to view the transcript.

By Robert Scheer

The corruptions of journalism were on full display when CNN’s Fareed Zakaria turned to Robert Rubin this past Sunday for advice on how to fix the financial crisis that he, as much as anyone, caused.

www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_rubin_con_goes_on_20100810/

[floodmfx]

10:05 AM on 08/21/2010

It is true he didnt work for GS.
But he is a Wall St insider - he is a driving force behind everything that happened.

He deserves all the scorn he gets.

[LizM]

11:51 AM on 08/22/2010

Does he deserve any credit for stabilizing the financial system and preventing a complete economic collapse? Or, do you think he had nothing to do with that?

[Alpha11]

01:03 PM on 08/22/2010

Everyone seems to have it out for him, true enough.

[floodmfx]

08:02 AM on 08/23/2010

Wait, so you want me to cheer for him because he helped put out a fire that he helped start. So, if the pyromaniac is also a fire-fighter, in your opinion, then he isnt guilty of anything - because, well, he did something good as a fire-fighter.

Besides that - you are probably going to say that the economic reform that occurred was the best that possibly could have occurred - nothing more could have been done to protect the average American - or maybe, we got the half-baked reform why got because Wall St insiders like Geithner and Bernanke helped craft the whole thing.

Let me guess, you work in the banking industry right ?

[elimenez]

10:02 AM on 08/21/2010

I've always known Geithner was at the New York Fed before becoming Treasury Sec.. That should be seen as worse than being a Goldman guy, considering he was part of the group that watched and stood by while Lehman Bros. collapsed triggering the Great Recession.

[LizM]

11:54 AM on 08/22/2010

Well, it wasn't exactly a secret that Geithner was the president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, was it? But, I'm glad you always knew that.

Do you know any of the particulars regarding how the decision was made to allow Lehman to fail?

[elimenez]

11:55 AM on 08/23/2010

Wow sarcasm. That's really groundbreaking there. Really NO one else uses sarcasm in attempt to sound clever. You're the first. I mean it's not like anyone can just say something they don't mean in an attempt to portray the opposite or obvious.

Despite your intimidating wit, I'll trudge along. The reason I said I always knew that Geithner was at the fed was to make a point. Specifically, that always knowing he was never a Goldman guy I still disapproved of him even before the confusion started. To satiate you sincere curiosity I did a 2 minute search on this thing called Google to find the article for you. The link is below. I know someone with an obvious lack of time such as yourself would have a hard time spending 2 minutes and "googling" Geithner and Lehman Bros together so I'm more happy to respond.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/jamessurowiecki/2008/11/geithner-and-le.html

[MrOctober]

01:15 AM on 08/24/2010

Lehman was allowed to fail, because that's what former Goldman Sachs CEO and Bush Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson wanted to happen. The fact that Geithner sat in an office at the Fed and had no idea that Lehman was presenting a huge risk to the entire economic system, gives a quick view at Geithner's ineptitude.

[AZreb]

09:45 AM on 08/21/2010

It doesn't really matter who or what some of the administration heads worked for - I call Napolitano, Holder and Geithner the "Three Stooges" of this administration.

[elimenez]

10:16 AM on 08/21/2010

Why Holder? Didn't he oversee the arrests of hundreds of people that committed mortgage fraud and preyed on lower income families? He's done some good things. I don't think it's fair to lump him the other two nitwits.

[clearwaterclearmind]

06:09 PM on 08/21/2010

among other things, holder either flat out lied about honoring state policy on medical marijuana or his agents just don't care what he says.

[twmorganstern]

08:15 AM on 08/21/2010

The reason so many people make that assumption is that he so obviously steeped in the wall street culture. I don't think Sec. Geithner is a bad man, but widely misunderstood. I think he really does what he thinks is best for the US economy.
Unfortunately when he uses a word like 'economy' he is not talking about you or me, most folks don't get that. Most of our GDP comes from our financial sector, and that is what he means when he says 'economy'.
I do not believe he has the imagination or motivation to change this structure, because in his mind he saved the US economy (ie big business) already.
If you want to get a righteous rant going, consider that not one of this administrations advisers has the slightest notion what to do with the middle class. Not one idea has been put forward to restore our infrastructure. On the contrary, the ideas being put forward are to cut away at our infrastructure because the few people who control most of the wealth don't want to pay for it.
Sec. Geithner is a symptom of a broader problem, the concept of unlimited personal gain and it's long term implications.
It doesn't matter that he never worked for GS, he has been their cheerleader and referee for years. He exemplifies the attitude that money matters more than people, and defends his policy decisions with the notion that it would have been worse to do nothing at all.

[elimenez]

10:11 AM on 08/21/2010

Most of our GDP does not come from the financial sector. You're way off on that. I think they contribute like 5.8% to GDP. I think the largest chunk of our GDP comes from manufacturing and technology. I also think the administration has provided more to the middle class than the last 3 presidents. We've gotten enormous tax cuts, the largest stimulus spending bill ever, students loans directly from Dep. of Ed., healthcare coverage for everyone, SCHIP, and a few other major things that I really don't care to spend the time bringing up. The problem is it isn't enough. Having to deal with the GOP and Corporate lobbyists has weakened their attempts.

http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=35&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2008&LastYear=2010

[twmorganstern]

06:57 AM on 08/22/2010

My wording is not the best here, to be sure. It is not accurate to say that most of our GDP comes from the financial sector, what I mean is an increasing percentage of our GDP comes from that industry. Depending on whether you are looking at gross output or value added to GDP one could debate finance contributed more this past year than manufacturing, but that is an academic discussion. Thanks for pointing that out, bad language on my part.
I agree that this administration has attempted more to bolster the middle class than the previous two, and that their efforts are hampered by partisan poison. However, I stand by my assertion that there is no intention of returning to our previous methods of paying for our nations infrastructure. Rather, they seem intent on changing the nature of our infrastructure to favor the wealthy and big business because in the eyes of some one like Sec. Geithner they represent a higher economic priority.