While the repeal of Glass-Steagall was certainly a part of making our system fragile to the point where it is at today, thinking that a simple solution like breaking up the banks will be the panacea that we seek is incredibly naïve.
The cynicism that is engendered when someone like Weill, or Welch, changes his stripes is understandable. Who wants to hear from the guys who already cleaned up in Act 1? But, frankly, I find it refreshing. Where are today's leaders on these same subjects?
Sandy Weill's Citigroup engaged in fraud on a massive scale, unfettered risk taking and then needed a massive taxpayer bailout during the 2008 financial crisis because it was so big it couldn't be managed. Yet only now does Weill say it was all a mistake.
It may be that what we are actually watching is a not very subtle food fight between our two political parties for campaign cash. Simply stated, this is not about Dimon's management skills, rather it is about his wallet.
George Washington, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Albert Einstein must be rolling in their graves at the news that Sandy Weill, "philanthropist and retired Citigroup Chairman," has joined their ranks at the American Academy of Arts & Sciences.
How desperate is Obama that he would turn to the great triangulator, Bill Clinton, who opened the floodgates to banking greed, for validation of the sorry opportunistic hodgepodge that passes for this administration's economic policy?
If history is any guide, Blankfein may not go tomorrow, or even next month, but sometime in 2011, Blankfein will at the very least no longer be chairman of Goldman, and may also be forced out of the firm altogether.