 by Chris HayesStory of the Week, Up w/ Chris Hayes |
JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon went before the Senate Banking Committee this week in what should have been a kind of ritual apology tour. Dimon has spent much of the last year and a half dismissing and belittling critics of Wall Street and harshly criticizing the major financial regulatory reform legislation that President Obama signed into law. The message has been: you guys in Washington don't understand our business, so you should keep to yourself and let the professionals like us, the smartest guys in the room, do what we do best.
Which is why it was more than a little embarrassing for Dimon when it was revealed that a single unit of JP Morgan Chase, indeed a single trader in a division of the firm that Dimon personally oversaw, had somehow managed to lose about $3 billion and counting on a huge bet on credit derivatives.
There are two ways to look at the fall-out from news of this loss. The optimistic one is that the position was uncovered and exposed and dealt with quickly enough that the losses didn't bring down JP Morgan Chase or the entire financial system.
The pessimistic one, is Lord knows what other uncovered positions are lurking out there, or what the next big Wall Street screw-up might look like.
This is the specter that haunts us after the spectacle of what I refer to in my book as "the fail decade." The notion that we can't simply trust our elites, the big decision-makers like Jamie Dimon, to actually run their institutions competently. And we know that if they screw up, we're likely all screwed. Dimon opened his testimony by eating some crow, but what followed in the hearing was downright bizarre.
While Dimon was there to apologize, many of the senators-- Republicans especially, but not exclusively-- were there to apologize to him, to seek his wise counsel.
Sen. Jim DeMint: I would like to come away from the hearing today with some ideas on what you think we need to do...
Sen David Vitter: Is there a true, real version of the Volcker rule that you think makes sense?
Sen Chuck Schumer: What can you suggest to the regulators...
Sen. Bob Corker: What would you do...
To me this entire hearing was a perfect microcosm of what I call the crisis of authority in American life. A nation whose pillar institutions are helmed by the "smartest guys in the room," like Jamie Dimon, who've overseen a cascade of crisis, and yet face little to no sanction for it. Elites oddly blinded to the destruction they have caused.
And in their ceaseless attempts to discredit government, Republicans are only too happy to point out that It's the same for the United States Congress, one of the only institutions in American life that garners less trust than Wall Street and as we've previously noted on this show, is even less popular with the US public than Paris Hilton and the prospect of the US going communist.
Rob Johnson, an economist, former hedge-fund trader and a man who once worked on the Senate Banking Committee, put it to me this way. "For years, the Right has worshiped markets and now they have reason to be skeptical," he told me. "Meanwhile, the Left has romanticized government and now they have reason to be skeptical. So what you've got now is a society that is demoralized because they have nothing to believe in."
We have seen a tremendous amount of institutional failure over this past decade, and in writing my book I spent a lot of time thinking about how it is that institutions break down, what happens inside them that creates the conditions for incompetence or corruption or both. What is it about the big banks, or the culture of Wall Street or the very process of selecting and forming our elites, that made the housing bubble and financial crisis possible? What made it possible for Enron to implode on itself in a wave of scandal, even created the conditions for the epidemic of steroids in baseball. What about the way our Congress works enables the banks to take big profits and make the taxpayer take on the risk?
I wrote my book, because I think understanding institutional failure, and elite failure, is the most important challenge we face, because as the Dimon episode illustrates, while much has changed in the last three years, while our trajectory has moved away from total disaster and towards recovery, Congress and Wall Street remain in many deep ways unreformed and on a path toward bringing us, once again to the edge of crisis.
Leave a Comment:
The thing that these guys know how to do best is game the system when no one's watching. We need someone with the authority to strike fear in their hearts if they step out of line. What good are derivatives trading hedge funds to the average American's pocketbook? These guys are no more honest than any other opportunist out there. They need to be regulated. Think about it. When are we in the most danger? Unregulated? Or, regulated? Let's put a bit of a straitjacket on these lazy bankers and see if that doesn't slow them down a bit.
Who cares what one guy does in a small division of a company. Let them do what they want. The government's job is to protect people that can be harmed from those trades. If we are in danger because of interconnectedness the let's get less connected. IMO we ought to go back to when we did not have these problems which means going back to when they did not mix investment banking with regular banking. As far as who calls the shots. The government needs to call the shots. Take away FDIC from Morgan/Chase and see what happens. All other banks would quickly fall in line.
Chris,
You asked "what have we learned?" and I think there are a few parts to that answer. First, Wall Street learned that it is actually more powerful than the government and that whatever it does the government it bought and paid for will take care of it. Second, Main Street Americans learned that we are simply pawns, serfs, voiceless, faceless. We learned that our government is bought and paid for by the very wealthy and that Congress will use US to backstop the lifestyle of the wealthy, that we will pay the price for whatever the upper class wants. I am a life long Democrat and I want so badly to find Democrats fighting back and standing up for me but I can't find any.... and it makes me feel like crying. I have to say it but we need better Democrats (of course then the left will be accused of being as extreme as the right currently is but since we are going off the cliff anyway why not?)
The news media is complicit in all this. Lies are repeated without rebuttal or correction.... or the correction comes at a different time and place after the lie has grown legs. Where is the accountability? Where? I get so angry I can't sleep sometimes. The USA is turning into a 3rd world country.... where is the story about how the middle class and Democratic policies built the 40 year period between 1940 and 1980 where the middles class actually prospered? Then the next 32 years where (so far) we have seen numerous bank failures in the 1980's, decline of wages, greater wealth and income inequality, deregulation, Enron, Bear Stearns, Lehman, and the Great Collapse of 2008. Why isn't the media asking for accountability and giving the American people the facts instead of opposing opinions. I'm sick of hearing about the liberal media when it's not.... if the media is going to continuously be accused of being liberal (truthful) well, then it should just be truthful and let the accusations fly.
Tinuviel
Woah woah woah. There are some things seriously wrong with this take. And it is, coincidentally, also wrong with your book, which is a good one, but kind of falters on its premise, enjoyable writing aside.
First of all, the micro: Senators softballing Dimon is much more simplistically explained by one simple fact: J.P. Morgan Chase contributes directly to some of their campaigns, and has the potential to pick sides in the greater race for November, so seeing deference from mainly Repubs but also DNC members wanting some financial help (all of them), is perfectly in line with how our political system works today. The elites haven't failed if you, as a well-meaning and intelligent journalist, fail to recognize this glaring motivational correlation, and instead muddy the waters with a vague argument about institutional failure. Another technical point: you say "for years, the GOP has romanticized markets and no they have a reason to be skeptical". But you left out an important point. THEY AREN'T SKEPTICAL. Democrats, pussyfooters that they are, have somewhat acquised to the idea that Government is too big, despite evidence, because they have mangled, muddied, and confused the debate, much as this post, and your book does.
Lets go for a simpler and more logical explanation. You can't say that our current institutions are a meritocracy because you leave out the incredibly powerful, arguably most powerful element of WEALTH, how we as a culture have decided to worship it (if we ever didn't), and how it has pervaded and poisoned these previously more effective institutions. In fact, the obfuscation of merit and money is at the root of the problem. You cherry pick some examples of people subscribing to the meritocratic method, like Bernanke and Blankfein, but leave out the fact that although they might have worked hard and been smart, their motives in some cases, probably all cases, was that the culture pointed them towards personal wealth. The fact that Goldman Sachs, an institution obviously corrupted past the point of its usefulness by the monetary incentive, says that it is a "meritocracy" on its website doesn't actually make it one. Merit includes the values you are working for, not just the ability to be intelligent and hardworking. If I intelligently work hard to design a complex system of trades to skim millions off the top of the economy, knowing through my intelligence that I am guaranteed when my silly magical bets fail, this doesn't have merit. If I work hard to gain muscles, and intelligently corner you in a back alley, beat you up and take your money or food, this doesn't have merit either. No need to parse terms. And here's an answer to your rhetorical questions, whose existence I find hilarious given that you just wrote a book (or are you holding out the answers till readers buy said book? how meritocratic of you...): the money incentive. Skilling and Lay stood to make alot of money from Enron, and the MLB, and the juicing players, stood to make just as much. It is not some failure of the meritocracy, its the poisoning profit motive, culturally justified (just watch reality tv) and held high, even by your book in the apparent effort to ignore it. The problem with democrats is two-fold. One: they reject the dominant power of our time, the profit motive, in favor of the idea that we all help each other out, and are richer for it in the end. Two: those of us willing to engage in the complex economic and political process are often starstruck by the masters of wealth, and so engage in endless ritualistic, rhetorical, complicated dance moves to somehow evade the fact that its greed, pure and simple. Once we admit that, we can stop losing to the Republicans, who are unmistakeably selfish race baiting liars (at this point in history), because whatever their faults, they fight from solid ground: the continuing elevation of money; the right to make it regardless of how, and the right of money to hold ultimate power in our society. In other words, the worship of it. Their is plenty of evidence, talking points, and electoral will to erode the vaunted position of money in the culture, and dems should engage in this, fiercely and immediately. But first you have to realize it is the problem. This post, and this book, do little or nothing to find the target, much less effectively fire upon it. Money is just a trading tool. The true measures of a people are what that people accomplishes and how it treats its members. The profit motive has poisoned its way all the way up to the head (thats you). Now we can decide to deal with it, or let it hobble us with hand-rubbing glee (GOP) and hand-wringing whining (DNC), or we can deal with it, and moving on to the REAL problems of the world like starvation, pollution, and climate change, which will deal with us if we don't get to it soon enough.
That said. Vote for Barack, and keep doing the good reporting. Even if I believe you are mistaken, I hope its obvious that I am firmly on your side in general. Thanks for the hard work.
Also, there are solutions. They are out their and they are not that hard. "End This Depression Now" is a good example. I do not reject the entirety of the system. I just think we need to be clear on how to fix it.
You also need to recognize the federal government's involvement in all of this too! I work with MANY federal agencies and this is what I see:
Starting at the top with Politicos:
Each agency has a number of politicos foisted on them every four years. Theoretically, these people are here to "transmit the President's policies" to the agency, but basically what they are are people that did "favors" for the President while he was running for President. These are the people who raised money for the President or did "other favors". They are typically put in agencies they know nothing about and are dead set on "leaving their mark", which means for two years, IF the agency is lucky, the agency is in constant turmoil and barely able to accomplish anything for only a couple of years - but you can bet there will be a lot of juggling of personnel so employees know to really "polish" their social games and get as much "face time" as they can!!
Then you have the next level, the Admininstrators, Directors, Managers, whatever they are called, who were usually put into the position by the previous set of politicos and really don't know what they are doing either, but they way they keep their jobs is by being "yes-men" to the Politicos. Of course, they can't continue to be "yes-men" unless they fill the positions below them with their own "yes-men". And all of these "yes-men" want to be Under Secretaries some day, so the most important thing to them IS NOT the TAXPAYER, but "building their kingdoms" so that they "look good" on their resumes. So they convince themselves that they HAVE to have big organizations with LOTS of GS-15's and SES's because the more 15's and SES's you have, the more important you are! Do they know anything much about the organization or what it was they were created to do for the taxpayer? Nope, they don't even consider the taxpayer, because that is not their job!!! Their job is to play the "social game" so that they can be promoted to a bigger kingdom!!!
Are these people in the back pocket of industry? YOU BET! First of all, they don't have a clue what that industry does, so they have to take the industry's word for it. Second, they know that if they are "hard" on that industry, why then that industry won't support the current President or Party during the next election - so you do not ruffle industry's feathers or you will make your politco angry - a bad move for your career!!!! Why else do you think NO ONE has been held accountable for the destruction of our economy in 2007?
Then you have the government people who actually try and do the work. If the government employee concentrates on the taxpayer and the job he or she was hired to do, then that person is considered a dolt, because his/her bosses see "getting the next promotion" as the only valid goal for any employee, not accomplishing the task at hand - that task will always be there whether it gets done or not - so only an idiot would care about that!! And there is a real possibility that if that person actually does their job, then some industry will be unhappy - and you can't have that!!! So if they want to actually work, you set them after small businesses - let them enforce regulations against them - they don't have any power! There is real scorn for employees who try to serve the taxpayer in government now!! You want to see those agencies that are most guilty of this behavior? Go look at the results from the Federal Employee Viewpoint Surveys done each year that OPM puts out - those agencies at the bottom of that survey have the most disrespect for their employees.
Then, because the 15's and SES's don't want to be made a fool of, they have learned that instead of hiring qualified people, they just hire people straight out of college. They really don't know much yet, but they have "nice degrees that can be flaunted and they won't challenge senior staff but will step straight in line!!! To build a nice kingdom, hire as many of them as you can!! Your politico will help you because he/she is considered only as important as the size of his/her agency!! The people who do know what is going on usually get nudged out of their jobs or are "convinced" to leave - because those "yes men" absolutely abhor having their "decisions" challenged. Anyone under the GS-15 is just supposed to be a "soldier" and do what they are "told to do"!
Then there are the "regulations", written of course by kids straight out of college, and each agency sends out "inspectors" to enforce those regulations. Just for grins and giggles, the next time you get "inspected", ask the inspector what his/her background is, what they know about what you do, and then ask them to "explain" to you WHY a particular regulation was written! You will get obvious BS from 90% percent of them!!! If you can't read and understand the regulations, do you think this young kid straight out of college can?????
And then there are the "IG"s - they are the ones supposed to be investigating their own agencies and making sure they are serving the needs of the taxpayer. Every single agency I work with calls them the "keystone kops". I've heard some real horror stories about what THEY do - like allowing a Director to investigate his own section that he was head of for years for wrongdoing! If there was wrongdoing, OF COURSE, it wasn't that DIRECTOR'S fault.... yeah!!!
If you really want to limit the size of government, the first thing that needs to be done is to limit the amount of politicos. Without that step, nothing will get done because they are the ones the most interested in and have the most ability to increase the size of their "kingdom" and make themselves more "important" in the scheme of government things.
The second thing that needs to be done is to re-institute civil service examinations so that you get QUALIFIED personnel working for the government.
The third thing is to limit promotions ONLY to people who have worked in their previous jobs for at least 10 years.
Then and only then will government get back to serving the taxpayer instead of itself!!!
But of course, Congress WON'T do these things, because they really LIKE big useless governments - they are the ones who write the laws that created it!!!
I hear some of these politicians talk about "corrupt government" in "other countries", and sometimes I laugh because otherwise I would cry!!
Am I going to vote for Obama - YEP!!! Because if Romney gets in, he will make government BIGGER because he has so many more "people" that he owes "favors" to, and he has to find places for all of them! Obama will just hold the status quo until hopefully, someone better comes along that we can vote for who actually understands what cost this "big government" is having on this country..
No Jamie Dimon is not the smartest guy in the room. He evidences more Hubris than anyone else in the room.
What is this? a wanna be Max Keiser / Zerohedge Lite showing from Corporate Owned Media?
It is OVER!! the World GDP is going backwards! and it is picking up speed!
The Trans Pacific Partnership is just NAFTA part Deux! LOL!!
It is OVER! the Sheep who are busy Celebrating thier Ignorance is Strength position.. will wake up to Rome Burning sooner than Later!
Which one of you Useful idiots wants me to shove the numerical facts down your throat? LOL!!
OVER!
IT!!
IS!!
OVER!!
Sincerely, JW
Dude from (WHERE ELSE?????)FL,
No really. You do not have to shove numerical facts down my throat. However, providing a link to your strongly stated position would have been a less violent option but obviously one you choose not to pursue.
So in light of those facts, why don't you just STFU get off your computer and go clean your gun or something.
President Obama and Eric Holder have both given Wall Street and the big banks, not only a super insurance plan when they make mistakes, but a lifetime 'get out of jail free' pass! Jamie Dimon, like the rest of the 1%, has to do something really, really, bad...to someone in the 1% itself, someone much more powerful than he is himself, before anything untoward might happen to him. Obama said he did not want to look back when it came to prosecuting those responsible for the crash of 2008, so everyone knows that they only have to commit these financial atrocities behind his back to get away with them. The 1% have shown again that they have purchased the law and the government, at least at the highest levels. Our President knows that he cannot prosecute these criminals because they can just withhold the contributions that his election needs.
The elites we have are the ones we have chosen. Take the tests for "elite" schools like Hunter. Is there a test for humility, for generosity, for empathy?
No.
What we test for is cleverness. The technical ability to arrive at expected answers more rapidly than others. We are not interested in judgement in how, when, and for what goals those cognitive powers ought to be applied, so we do not test for those aptitudes. Our system wants clever functionaries, not meritorious examples of the best that humanity can be.
That is what our meritocracy is directed towards. So long as we continue to direct it towards that which we individually do not regard as meritorious, then it is rather disingenuous and silly for us to be surprised at the misdeeds of the elites we have chosen and nurtured.
You're saying that our mistake lies in trusting Wall Street elites to police themselves. I agree. When left to their own devices, sharks follow predictable outcome scenarios. The difference between the wall Street crowd, in general, and sharks, in general, is that sharks don't overfeed. Sharks know when to discontinue feeding. Wall Street is insatiable. We can't trust Wall Street predators to follow ethical parameters. They just feed. They really can't be expected to concern themselves with ethical parameters. They just feed. They are, by nature, predators.
I do agree there should be policing and enforcement, but I do believe that we need to entrust people with power, and those in power ought to be given latitude to use their best judgement.
What I was pointing out is that we are culpable in the process the choice of proxies ("elites") we use to carry out tasks we need to be performed. Whether or not the proxy we used exercised good moral judgement is largely irrelevant to us. If we were honest with ourselves when we buy the supplies for the party at Walmart, we are saying that we really don't care that the poor schmucks working there are being paid less than poverty level. The 24 pack of diet Coke is $6.98, and $14.98 at the neighborhood store. The smart move is to pay your workers less, because the lower prices you can offer in your store means that more customers will patronize your store.
It may be the "smart" move if that is how we customers behave. But it is also the unkind move.
Kindness, care for the people you are employing... This is dumb inefficiency. You know who is a bigger schmuck than Scrooge? It's us, because we buy his lower priced products, then blame him for what happens to Tiny Tim. He is a proxy both for our amorality and our guilt.
Scrooge is simply being smart and realistic about our amoral decision making, and our eager desire to have someone else handle the dirty linens.
So, you are saying that American consumers are the problem, not Wall Street...Your post, imo, reinforces my post. Consumers will do what they need to do to survive without necessarily plumbing the socio-political, international, ramifications. They'll just buy the product that they like and can afford. That is reality. To expect all consumers to be savvy to international market forces on their favored products' pricing mechanism and impact on the American labor force is unreasonable expectation. The consumer can't be expected to analyze all their consumer choices. To infer that the American consumer is inherently responsible for corporate and Wall Street corruption is unreasonable. It does seem to be true to say that Wall Street and corporate narcissism precludes the assignation of any blame to Wall Street/Corporate America... in the minds of the sharks. Your post blames Scrooge's character defects on Tiny Tim. You are trying to reinitiate flight to the Hindenburg.
I did not intend to communicate to you such a Manichean picture, and I agree that corrupt elites are eager for others to share the obscene guilt of their actions. We need not share their self delusion. Simply pointing out that consumers are being schmucks does not make our proxies- elites like the Sam Waltons/ Jamie Dimons/ Jacob Marleys of the world any less so.
What is reality is constructed by our collective choices. There is no getting around the reality that a society that makes sets of choices that express little interest in the welfare of others will collectively be a mean spirited society. It is not survival that leads people to buy the 24 pack for eight dollars less than at the neighborhood store with union employees. Nor is this too complex for mortals to grasp. Consumers are not unaware of the connection between the mistreatment of people who work at such businesses and the "bargain" they are receiving. It certainly true we are emotionally inclined to keep such realities submerged from view by constructing a literature of isolated innocence for ourselves. Look- the greeters at the door are smiling and courteous. Everything is ok, right? Right?
You exercised the trope of autonomous progress being driven by blind self interest. The literary models of such economics have the veneer of being more "realistic", less naive because they apply metaphors we learn from the "cold hard facts" of how nature works. The trouble with the metaphors of cold disinterest in nature is that they are a distortion of how nature truly behaves.*
The fact is that there is survival value in empathy, and our system of "progress" has led inexorably to our Hindenberg financial system, our Hindenberg carbon dioxide generation, and our Hindenberg hemorrhaging of American jobs. Am I suggesting an alternative that is retrograde or unrealistic? What do we know about the nature of the flight path we are on today? How many spectacular disasters must we witness before we alter our decision making?
----------
Notes:
*For example, as evolutionary biologist Frans de Waal explains in “The Age of Empathy: Nature’s Lessons For a Kinder Society” (Sci-Fri interview), there is high selection pressure placed on females to respond quickly to the needs of her offspring. If they did not, the offspring would die due to loss of heat, food, or by threat of predators. Maternal care and other group survival needs fosters strong feelings of empathy and altruism in social groups. Economic, moral and social libertarians recoil at the “collectivist” implications of any alternatives to the literary model of rugged individuals exclusively motivated by self interest.
I'm sorry to be completely OT here, but I just had to share.
My partner bought me a "Fathers Day" gift of an imported beer, presumably made in "The Worlds oldest brewery". It's a good Bavarian Lager, and I'm enjoying one while I watch the show online.
Here's the thing, and it made a profound point to me; The label includes these words: Lager (which is the specific type of Beer this particular brew is)
Next line: Ale in Texas
To the rest of the World, this is a "Lager".
In Texas, it's an "Ale".
Tell me that's not a profound revelation!
The gorilla in the room: capitalism.
Capitalism concentrates money, i.e. power in the hands of a very few. There is even a term for it:
market consolidation.
In this respect capitalism is anti-democratic.
In politics there are checks and balances. No one person should have too much power. Capitalists can cumulate all the power they want.
Why we allow this is still a mistery to me.
Capitalism does not concetrate money!!!!
10.1
Another cogent, well-thought-out, argument from our local expert.
The Billionaire Aristocrats and their Republican Party flunkies have a LOT TO ANSWER FOR! These vain, self-serving, power-mad, greed stricken silver spoon con artists have turned the USA into the United Suckers of America.
Reagan/Bush killed ANTI-TRUST and any regulation that kept industry HONEST. When Reagan/Bush came to power, the USA was #1 on the planet in exporting goods and importing raw materials. This is the very definition of a prosperous economy. By 2006, it is the exact opposite. Why? Years of Republicans selling out the American middle class, that’s why. The Bush’s and a Republican Controlled Congress (1994-2006) gave it up for a very few wealthy families.
And what did these elitists DO? Stall new technology, steal pension funds, move to China, India, Mexico. THIS while paying for those high priced, patriotic commercials, WE LOVE THE USA, THIS IS OUR COUNTRY, etc. BS! (when I snap my fingers you‘ll wake happy and refreshed… lol)
I think we need to focus on those in the TOP 1% Koch Bros, Sheldon Adelson, Bush Crime Family types along with their flunkies such as the Mitt Romney, Scott Walker Ho's. An American Aristocracy, who made their fortunes on the backs of American workers… The water, air and wealth of resources used to manufacture the goods. The brain power and innovation, with American ingenuity, technology, ideas… using infrastructure paid for by the American taxpayer… And how did they repay us? The silver spoon, trust fund baby m’f***er’s moved all our jobs to Asia, fouled our environment with stuff that would make a bill goat puke and turned our politicians into a stable of high priced prostitutes.
It used to be called bribery, collusion and all those crimes covered by the RICO Act. How come they can get away with a white bred corporate crime wave of epic proportions but our jails are filled by pot smokers? WHY IS THAT? These Wall Street guys ruined our economy with their ALEC, reckless policies and deregulation, so why aren’t the American PEOPLE standing up to them? WHY AREN’T THE FED’S PROSECUTING? WHERE’S THE IN-DEPTH INVESTIGATIVE NEWS REPORTS documenting the outrage? I am somebody who demands accountability consciousmc.blogspot.com
So I guees there are no rich democates!!!!
Steve Winn ever hear of him????
How about senator Kohl???
In fact there are more millionaire demcorates in the congoress than republicans...
Talking about Enron without mentioning how the evidence and records needed in court were destroyed during 9/11, basically bringing prosecutions to a halt, is missing a big part of the story. But if they discussed how the records were destroyed (in building 7), then the question would naturally shift to how a big building full of important documents just sort of fell down.
All three buildings were destroyed with controlled demolitions. To recognize that fact rather changes the apparent motives of 9/11. Besides as an excuse to start wars, 9/11 very effectively destroyed a lot of documents. They did mention that no prosecutions had happened since Enron, but they failed to mention how 9/11 was a huge paper shredding operation that stopped them.
Until they are ready to explore why and how 9/11 was an inside job, talking about banking failures is irrelevant. Wall Street is apparently run by banks and they are intimately involved in dirty money laundering. None of the 'experts' on TV ever mention it.
I suppose if your employer ... They say a person can never understand a thing if his paycheck is dependent on him not understanding it. Using that reality of human nature as a quality control test, I think we can safely assume that no press people work for anyone who is not beholden or afraid of the truth about 9/11. I say this because not only do reporters and comedians get the science of 9/11 wrong EVERY TIME, they also aggressively attack anyone who ever gets the science right.
I find that very suspicious.
As a consumer of the news, I see it as a criminal conspiracy and collusion in a cover up. In other words, I think they are producing a DEFECTIVE NEWS PRODUCT that is significantly responsible for producing the political conditions that are killing us all.
I hope Chris will make amends. 9/11 WAS an inside job, lets talk about what that means.
And the 1969 moon landing was staged, the earth is really flat...
The sun is a large lump of coal....
The moon is a wedge of swiss cheese ....
Jamie Dimon is a "Swinging Dick Capitalist Stud".....
JPM did not do anything illegal!!!!
Next it was their money!!!!!....
And JPM will still make $20-$22 billion this year..!!!
The senator said it best "$2 billion, we lose twice that much everyday here in Washington"!!!
stupidita you forgot your valium today.
Said Chris, "The notion that we can't simply trust our elites, the big decision-makers like Jamie Dimon, to actually run their institutions competently. And we know that if they screw up, we're likely all screwed."
As usual, in Chris' world government elites are never the problem unless Republicans/conservatives are involved. Can Chris argue successfully that government (especially at the federal level) has been or is currently being run in a competent manner? And if it's not being run competently aren't we still all screwed?
What is all this fuss about Jamie Dimon and his stand against regulation? What position did you think he was going to take? Really. So he blew 2-6 Billion of his company's own money. That's their problem. This time. Next time, it is likely to our money and our economy that will take the hit. But, I don't understand why we are all so shocked that these guys are winning and gutting the Dodd Franks regulation package. It was drafted so that they could do exactly what they are doing. Why would we leave the drafting and implementation of regulations up to the industry? What did we think would happen. But enough about the failed attempt to regulate. What happened to prosecutions? As I understand it, many of these people that engineered the demise of our economy have committed prosecutable crimes. They could go to jail. All we have to do is indict. So, why aren't we? Isn't that the real question here? Nothing like 5 to 10 to garner support for industry regulation! So why didn't President Obama pull the trigger and let the AG go after them? That's what we need to be asking. I just don't get it. The past administration commits what are probably war crimes, etc. and nothing happens. Wall Street destroys the economy and nothing happens. Wall Street has abandoned Obama this election, so what does he have to lose. Besides, no Republicans are arguing that prison time would limit Wall Street's ability to make money. So forget the regulations and start prosecuting. Eventually they will get the message. Maybe by talking through their prison toilets, but they will get the message.
Would be nice to hear more from Chris's guest and less pontificating from Chris. He has fascinating guest, but we never get to hear from them!
Seems to always been all about Chris!
Please learn to moderate and not to dominate!
Too many on the panel, but we always hear mostly from Christ. Let's have intelligent moderated discussions instead of another form of screaming TV.