White house nepotism

[BrntOrngStmpeDe]

I'm getting less and less thrilled with the Trump family's inclusion at high levels of our government. The family just needs to go back to being family and DT needs to bring in others. Ivanka is a 35 year old dilettante that has had everything gold plated since day one of her life. You can't tell me she brings any necessary skills to the table that we can't find elsewhere. The look of it isn't worth what little benefit the Ivanka/Kushner duo bring to the table.

And for goodness sakes, the repeated Mira Lago visits are getting old hat too. It's obvious that he's trying to turn give his commercial property a "White House history" so that he up the fees down the road.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I'm getting less and less thrilled with the Trump family's inclusion at high levels of our government. The family just needs to go back to being family and DT needs to bring in others. Ivanka is a 35 year old dilettante that has had everything gold plated since day one of her life. You can't tell me she brings any necessary skills to the table that we can't find elsewhere. The look of it isn't worth what little benefit the Ivanka/Kushner duo bring to the table.

And for goodness sakes, the repeated Mira Lago visits are getting old hat too. It's obvious that he's trying to turn give his commercial property a "White House history" so that he up the fees down the road.

Preach on brother! This summer it will be that golf course up North that he'll spend every weekend at on a tax payer funded holiday. Trump wasn't worth $10B before entering the White House but he most certainly will be worth that much afterwards.

 

[iatrogenic]

He does know how to bring in the dough.

 

[Mr. Deez]

The nepotism doesn't bother me as much as the trips to Mar-a-Lago.

 

[Musburger1]

I'm less concerned about the Trump family running the government than the Goldman-Sachs family running things.

 

[BrntOrngStmpeDe]

I'm less concerned about the Trump family running the government than the Goldman-Sachs family running things.

True enough. I sat in short lecture by Dr. Michael Cox the other day. SMU Biz school. Great presentation supporting capitalism. Why don't they ever grab a few academics like this guy? Having real world experience is nice and all but the Goldman crowd revolving door into policy making is just a little too "inside" for my taste.

 

[Brad Austin]

I'm perfectly fine with DT woooing foreign leaders in a relaxing, lavish beach resort with aesthetically pleasing environment. To think the secret service hasn't set it up well to accommodate such is complete nonsense.

It's a much better locale for forming bonds than formal gatherings at the stuffy, DC base location surrounded by an eroded, nasty city.

I wonder where guests prefer to meet the new leader of America...dirty DC up North or a trip to a beautiful Florida resort on the water. Anybody who's been to nice beach resorts knows the relaxing and calming effect compared to a concrete jungle.

It's not like most of these leaders haven't been to the WH already. Not to mention most of their lavish political residences smoke the WH anyway. There's no awe factor or home court advantage to bringing leaders to the WH like people claim.

If the guy prefers his guests to be relaxed and in a certain beach resort state of mind when working on policy, makes perfect sense. I'm sure he has his own place well set up for the home court advantage he desires.

 

[iatrogenic]

Who are these Goldman Sachs people, and what, specifically, are they doing to hurt America? I'm curious since I haven't noticed this vast undermining of our system by these folks.

 

[Musburger1]

Who are these Goldman Sachs people, and what, specifically, are they doing to hurt America? I'm curious since I haven't noticed this vast undermining of our system by these folks.

They do "God's work."

 

[iatrogenic]

They do "God's work."

Thank goodness they are not on Russia's side!

 

[BrntOrngStmpeDe]

I'm of the opinion that most of the banking regulation is warranted and needed. Too big to fail is a problem and I'm not convinced that the players can self regulate or that the market is capable of enforcing prudence. If boards and C-levels were held personally/financially liable for malfeasance and misinformation then I would be ok with the market providing the risk calculation but since we often don't have good, much less complete, information, I don't think the market is capable of providing appropriate feedback for risk taking. most of these execs have a one way bet. They win when things go well but also when things go poorly under their watch. I think the Goldman crowd facilitates this type of policy.

 

[iatrogenic]

I'm of the opinion that most of the banking regulation is warranted and needed. Too big to fail is a problem and I'm not convinced that the players can self regulate or that the market is capable of enforcing prudence. If boards and C-levels were held personally/financially liable for malfeasance and misinformation then I would be ok with the market providing the risk calculation but since we often don't have good, much less complete, information, I don't think the market is capable of providing appropriate feedback for risk taking. most of these execs have a one way bet. They win when things go well but also when things go poorly under their watch. I think the Goldman crowd facilitates this type of policy.

I have heard this line of thought before, but in reality many executives suffer when things go bad. They are also held personally responsible for malfeasance and misinformation.

 

[Musburger1]

I have heard this line of thought before, but in reality many executives suffer when things go bad. They are also held personally responsible for malfeasance and misinformation.

What are you smoking? The biggest financial scandal of all time nearly destroyed the world economy in 2008. It was systemic fraud. None of the top dogs were held responsible.

Since 2008 we've seen a barrage of fines on several mega banks from falsifying documents to rigging of the libor rate. The fines are merely the "cost of doing business." The CEOs are never punished and continue to swindle the general public. The revolving doors between government agencies and the big banks they are suppose to regulate reveal that the top positions are always filled with people who have vested interests in serving the banks - not the public.

Fools like to say that the $800 billion dollar bailout was paid back in full. No it wasn't. Not really. The US public has been paying ever since in the form of Zero Interest Rates which have drained hundreds of billions of dollars from what would have been various savings accounts and instead allowed the mega banks to obtain billions of free interest by parking zero cost loans in the federal reserve to yield risk free interest.

 

[iatrogenic]

Sounds convincing. Which top dogs committed fraud?

 

[Musburger1]

Sounds convincing. Which top dogs committed fraud?

All of them. Jamie Dimon, Corzine, and many others. But you would most likely su_k their dic_s if they asked you to.

 

[iatrogenic]

All of them. Jamie Dimon, Corzine, and many others. But you would most likely su_k their dic_s if they asked you to.

So you have no proof, just childish insults? That's not very convincing, but facts and logic have never been your strong suit.

 

[Musburger1]

So you have no proof, just childish insults? That's not very convincing, but facts and logic have never been your strong suit.

Research it yourself if you know how. Were you born yesterday?

 

[iatrogenic]

Research it yourself if you know how. Were you born yesterday?

Oh I have, which is how I know that you are wrong. It is also why you can't produce any facts.

 

[Musburger1]

Tell me what you know about the following.
London Whale
LIBOR manipulation
Robo Signing
MF Global
"Sh-tty Mortgages"

 

[iatrogenic]

Tell me what you know about the following.
London Whale
LIBOR manipulation
Robo Signing
MF Global
"Sh-tty Mortgages"

I'll be happy to educate you as soon as you give me the CEOs that got away with fraud.

 

[Musburger1]

I'll be happy to educate you as soon as you give me the CEOs that got away with fraud.

I did already. All of them. When people like yourself - stupid or corrupt - control the reigns of power, the rule of law is compromised.

Now go research LIBOR manipulation and get back to me in a day or so. Or not.

 

[mchammer]

What are you smoking? The biggest financial scandal of all time nearly destroyed the world economy in 2008. It was systemic fraud. None of the top dogs were held responsible.

Since 2008 we've seen a barrage of fines on several mega banks from falsifying documents to rigging of the libor rate. The fines are merely the "cost of doing business." The CEOs are never punished and continue to swindle the general public. The revolving doors between government agencies and the big banks they are suppose to regulate reveal that the top positions are always filled with people who have vested interests in serving the banks - not the public.

Fools like to say that the $800 billion dollar bailout was paid back in full. No it wasn't. Not really. The US public has been paying ever since in the form of Zero Interest Rates which have drained hundreds of billions of dollars from what would have been various savings accounts and instead allowed the mega banks to obtain billions of free interest by parking zero cost loans in the federal reserve to yield risk free interest.

The flaw in your theory is that consumers who signed those bad loans were just as culpable.

 

[Musburger1]

The flaw in your theory is that consumers who signed those bad loans were just as culpable.

??? It's not that simple. Even the ratings agencies were in on it. Upper managers instructed employees to give AAA scores to mortgages they knew were flawed. Bankers know damn well how to qualify what is and isn't a good risk. The securities took the risk out of it. The incentive to do their job went away because they were able to pass on risk to defrauded investors. The people who misrepresented income and signed mortgages were only one part of the problem.

The "consumer" not only means the person buying the house. It also means the pension fund that purchased the bogus AAA rated securities.

 

[iatrogenic]

Mus:

It is clear that you enjoy being the victim. This is probably causing the encopresis you experience, but more importantly it explains your failure to succeed in a competitive system. Due to the nature of the system, someone has to be the loser. Lack of success, and the resultant psychological issues (insecurity + acting out+ projection of homoerotic desires), have pushed you to support a system (communism/socialism) that takes care of the weak minded and lazy. That is cool with me. I understand your position and accept you for who you are, just don't expect me to support such weakness.

 

[Mr. Deez]

This discussion's going to end well.

 

[iatrogenic]

My point for Mus is that we are not the enemy. The enemy is siting all around him; pasty white guys with a limited future typing misinformation on a computer in support of a totalitarian is not reaching your potential as a human. Marx wanted all humans to reach their potential. Self-actualization. Mus, if you want to reach your potential, do something about your surroundings. Change the path you are on. Stop the enemy. Take control of your life.

 

[Musburger1]

Crony capitalism isn't free market. The health care system, the media, and the financial system are all dominated by a few small firms that have essentalially captured the apparatus of government. Too big to fail becomes a feature where the giants are given special tax breaks and awarded bailouts because of systemic importance.

Ironically, the US is in fact devolving into a totalitarian system. Reality is 180 degrees from what iatrogenic's perception of the system.

 

[iatrogenic]

I do agree that our system is not perfect.