Why did the administration pick Neel Kashkari, an ex-Goldman Sachs banker, to oversee the bailout? Shouldn't we, the voters, have been informed that he was the White House's choice *before* the bill was passed? Didn't the failure of Goldman Sachs start off this debacle? Why isn't there a better method for us to control these people?
The Gift
-
[Christmas, 1965 or thereabout]
The boy was very young; perhaps 7 or 8 years old. He loved everything about
Christmas - the lights, the music, Santa ...
1 year ago
5 Comments:
This is why we have the Second Amendment, Stu.
(OK, no, I'm not really calling for us to go, armed and willing to kill, to Washington. But it is getting to the point where some folks are probably thinking that, unfortunately.)
Wait, a just read on nasawatch that he was also an engineer or at least involved in technology development at TRW way back when working on, among other things, the James Webb Telescope. I gotta check into that more.
Details from this blogger on discovery.com:
http://blogs.discovery.com/news_space/2008/10/nasa-dude-takes.html
Maybe it's not the Goldman Sachs thing at all, maybe he's better than that, 'cause he's got NASA history? Maybe it's actually a good choice.
You've got NASA cred, and you're not half bad.
My point is that this is a time for unimpeachable leadership. Paulson and Kashkari are part of the Goldman Sachs family. It would seem natural that they would be partial to helping out their friends. Right now we need people at the helm who are not friends with anyone who would benefit from their partiality.
ah, I see, having been at one of the banks in the midst of the mess already presents the appearance of being on the side of the banks.
Appearances, in times of urgency like this, matter. So, if there's a question at all of the ethics of the person providing oversight, then there needs to be a change in that appointment.
I can understand that. At this point, perceptions are really very important to the psychological rebuild as well as the financial. Don't make a bad situation worse but asking for more distrust.
Did I come close to what you were meaning?
Absolutely - it is about appearances, as well as something else: Will he make ethical decisions? I would question his ethics, just as I question Paulson's ethics. Why did some banks get bailed out and not others?
Post a Comment