It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Geithner Asked to Resign For the Good Of the Country

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 10:01 PM
It is sad watching a man in denial. The lies on the Recovery web site are close to the final nails in the coffin. Honest people have no need to lie. Clearly this Administrations economic team has plenty of reason to lie.

Cap and Trade appears to be dead thank God. I still have faith our system is working and these people who are trying to recreate our system without our approval are going to fail. What they have done will extend the suffering but the patient is not terminal.

Its a shame the whole world is watching and laughing at our leaders incompetence. It will take decades to get back our credibility. Its amazing how many have their heads buried in the sand.

posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 10:02 PM
reply to post by Rockpuck

Actually with mid term elections coming around the corners the Democrats that are holding seats in congress and about to change, are trying to distance themselves from Obama fiasco politics.

After all the way things are going Obama will be a one time wonder and congress will be in the hands of whatever crocks have majority next time.

So Obama is only 4 years congress is 6 and I can tell many Democrats see Obama gone after this term.

posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 10:06 PM
reply to post by marg6043

I'd still be affraid to vote Democrat.. imo, they have proven that they cannot be in charge of the entire House and Presidential seat.. they tried to force through every hot topic they could, and I think that's going to shift the fence sitting moderates. (I voted Democrat for Legislature in 08) I'd like to see Reps even out the House, so at the very least NOTHING can get passed.
My favorite kind of Congress is a Congress that does nothing.

posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 10:16 PM
reply to post by Rockpuck

You want me to tell you the truth I will vote just to take congress away from the Democrats even when I know that I will be replacing one evil with another one.

posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 10:17 PM
reply to post by rnaa

Of course there was an ideological component. There always is. The facts are frankly immaterial in this discussion. One indisputable fact that Brady repeated and is the only thing that matters is absolutely true. And that is that the American's have lost confidence in this economic team. An economy runs on confidence and absent that, there will be no economic recovery. Other things Brady said are absoloutely true. The TARP money has yet to be made transparent, the stimulus money has not been spent, the government has consistently made stupid errors in reporting the results of the stimulus. Those are all true. Those things lead folks to think the team is incompetent. Perhaps you think that this team can suddenly engender confidence in the American people. I think it is too late for that. When retail sales are terrible over Christmas and another 1M jobs are lost by February, looking at the November elections only 9 months away, the entire economic team will be kicked to the curb. They need to create jobs. Not government jobs, real jobs. In my town, there are stimulus jobs right now. A bunch of jokers who put cones down on the road and put up signs "your stimulus dollars at work". Great. Problem is that the cones have been up for 6 months as have the signs. Not a day of work done, yet have the street is blocked off. The entire town is laughing about it and this kind of foolery is happening all over the US.

posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 11:49 PM

Originally posted by genius/idoit
reply to post by HotSauce

Really I didn't see that.If the liberal media turns on the obamical it's really gonna get ugly.They probably will since G.E.=MSNBC will gain nothing if cap and trade doesn't pass and that looks probable to me.And did you here about the global warming summit?

If the "liberal media" turns on Obama? You people are so deep into the delusion that you can say overtly contradictory things within the same sentence and it does not phase you one bit. Here's a wild idea: if the media both praises and attacks Obama, perhaps it's not so liberal after all. In contrast, Fox News only attacks him 24/7. It's the "fair and balanced" conservative media you need to watch out for.

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 12:48 AM
reply to post by Eurisko2012

I find this rather hilarious, all the "democrat/republican, liberal/conservative" rhetoric about Geithner. He is a brotherhood "made man." He led the IMF and NY state federal reserve. "They" will decide what, when. where and why in regards to his capacities.

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 03:27 AM
Now THAT was refreshing. We have a Secretary of the Treasury that doesn't even pay his taxes. What did you expect? This guy is at best incompetent, at worst a criminal. Boot his ass out. World needs plenty of bartenders!

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 03:38 AM
reply to post by Eurisko2012

I can agree with that.

Dude needs to get out of there. We need someone who can run Treasury right.

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 06:21 AM
reply to post by rnaa

If the Fed raises interest rates they also better plan on reducing money in circulation as well.
They can start by adjusting off, the 55 pallets of "lost" dollars in Iraq, then move to the 45 trillion scammed by Clinton/Bush and the Chinese currency boxes that were stored at Fort Hood.
This along with hr1207 and the continued push for a regional NOA money, had better be enough of an obvious indication that there needs to be a plan in development by CONGRESS to replace the FED before the dismantling begins, or you certainly WILL be subject to getting involved with a monetary system designed for you but not constitutional AGAIN.
I'm very wary of any action without a spoken plan, its too too great of an opportunity for the puppet masters to use this man made fiasco to achieve their end result intended, actually, it just looks like PART of the plan.

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:46 AM
I'm sorry to be almost the only voice to interrupt this hate-fest (actually I'm not sorry at all) but . . . . .

Geithner is mostly right.

The stimulus, which began with Bush and was continued by the Obama administration, is not even all spent yet. You have to give it time to work. The administration has said that unemployment would continue to rise for some time yet and that the economy would pick up only gradually. They have not lied or misled. You have to think about how bad it would have been if we had done nothing.

According to Nobel-Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman and other economists, we have already avoided a world-wide depression (I posted a thread on that a couple of months ago). Yes, we have a bad recession but a depression would have been much, much worse. Nobody thinks about that because it has been averted.

FDR got the U.S. out of the Great Depression through massive government spending, which stimulated the economy. That, and the enormous spending on World War II combined to end the collapse. In addition he created massive employment through the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Works Progress Admin. and other government programs.

To state it briefly and simply: Massive spending means more dollars are circulated, borrowed, lent and spent. That keeps the economy humming. To cease spending and lending causes fewer and fewer dollars to be in circulation. Businesses lose money and cut production and employment, the unemployed have less money and buy less, which means more businesses collapse and ad infinitum.

Herbert Hoover, who was president at the beginning of the Great Depression, used the opposite approach--the approach many are now advocating. He drastically cut government spending and told the people to save. The result was less money in circulation etc. and the depression got worse. He failed miserably. The tent cities of the armies of the unemployed which sprang up all over the country were called "Hoovervilles" in his honor. He is barely remembered in history.

The one risk of the massive stimuli is the possibility that too little was infused too late to do that much good. Not that too much has been spent, but too little. However, economic indicators show the beginnings of recovery. Slow at first, but picking up.

The Obama administration cannot make the stimulus work completely in ten months.

As far as Geithner is concerned, it is unwise to change generals in the midst of a battle.

[edit on 20-11-2009 by Sestias]

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 10:26 AM
reply to post by Sestias

and you are correct, given the SYSTEM we're using, but then thats the problem.
And Timmy wasnt thrust into this, he was a part of it, under the Bush Administration as well.
You can see that, right?
This is Timmy's rodeo, not just Hanks and Georges.

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 10:30 AM
reply to post by Sestias

That sounds like text book hopeful analyst rhetoric, now the stimulus is gone and the only ones been stimulate here is China.

Most of the money is unaccounted for, the lies that spending is going to boost the economy has run rampant, but unemployment rates and lack of jobs tells a different story, we are importing more than consumers can spend because is not money.

The trade deficit is hurting our nation but is boosting like I say our foreign debt holders.

Temporary jobs with the stimulus are just that, additional stimulus to keep any of those jobs created will have to be ongoing.

We are adding more to the national debt and the burden of the tax payer in the nation.

This nation is in trouble and the government knows it and they are just been moronic and following moronic advise from those that actually cause the problem to begin with.

Don't trust what it comes of the mouth of the corrupted puppets in Washington like everything in America you can buy statistic with the right amount of money.

Hundreds of billions in bailouts to the financial pirates that had no specific conditions attached have fattened their capital balances but have done little to nothing to help homeowners and small businesses that are struggling to survive. The Stimulus Plan to create jobs is no more than a band aid at a time when the patient needs a complete transfusion.

Thoughts about America's greatness or superiority are now irrelevant and totally unproductive. This is a critical time in our history in which a myriad of overwhelming problems are threatening to tear this nation apart. This is a time when we must use creativity, innovation, strength and resolve to restore stability in America.

If we have the courage and conviction to find ways to do just that, then we can certainly feel very proud of our accomplishments and feel good about our place in the world.

In America is not accountability for abuses and excess, waste and corruption goes hand in hand.

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 12:25 PM
reply to post by Sestias

I'll start with you're last statement first. When a general has lost the confidence of his troops, regardless of the status of the battle, you fire the general. George Patton comes to mind.

Obama stated that unemployment would not reach 8%. It is now over 10% and climbing. The technical calculation of unemployment is low by definition. It does not count those folks who have gone from full-time to part-time, the under-employed, those who have opted out of the workforce to go back to school who would rather be working, nor folks who have decided to stop looking for work. The unemployment rate in California has topped 12%, the highest in 25 years. California has the third highest. In Nevada, it tops 14%. Nevada is case in point. The unemployment is directly related to folks not going to Vegas. They have cut all discretionary spending due to a lack of confidence.

The stimulus is a joke. It is creating make work jobs that will by definition be eliminated in a relatively short time. Lets hope so. The last thing we need are thousands of jobs that create no value nor cause the economy to grow. The TARP funds are totally hidden from review by either the larger congress let alone the American people. Where did that money go and who has profited from it. If you don't think that investment banks are investing that money to generate huge profits, you are naive. One thing for certain is that they are not lending it. Because they are not lending it, ancilliary firms are not lending it. Case in point, GE Capital is the nations largest leasing agent for technology. They will not lease equipment and have not for two years. They won't lease it because their clients can not get capital to cover the lease payments. That one example has eliminated thousands of high-paying jobs from the economy. That those technical jobs are critical for the long-term economic success of the country is another bit to chew on.

Paul Krugman is a socialist. He won the Nobel Prize for Economics. The body of his work was "Analysis of trade patterns and locations of economic activity". It is an econometric study of the flow of the economic factors that influence the geography of economic activity. It is not a public policy issue, either in the macro or micro economic sense. As it relates to public and social policy, he is a huge government socialist and proud of it. He believes that we should be pumping much more cash into the economy right now, when the majority of economists think we need to support the dollar and get the deficits under control.

FDR was a disaster. He was a good war time president, but his economic policy was the first step on the road to socialism. Sure his work projects put people to work and there were many valuable things that came out of it that benefited the country and still do, such as parks and dams, etc. The legacy of FDR is a set of expectations that govenment will take care of folks and institutions that are no longer needed but due to political nonsense are still in place 70 years later. The Tennessee Valley Authority which was created to supply electricity to the rural parts of the south still exists. It exists despite the fact that the infrastructure to supply electricity to that part of the country has been in place for 50 years.

The general has lost the faith of his troops. As I mentioned above firing him in the middle of battle is the right and appropriate thing to do. Another general worth considering is Stonewell Jackson who in the Civil War was shot in the back by his own troops. When the polls keep dropping and the Democrats envision losing the 2010 elections the same thing will happen to Timothy. They will take him out.

Thats OK for Tim. He'll get a job either as a Managing Director at Goldman or as the dean of a top business school. He'll be OK

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 05:57 PM
scape goat he may be fall to save them all

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 06:08 PM
reply to post by Sestias

As far as Geithner is concerned, it is unwise to change generals in the midst of a battle.

He sat on the New York Federal Reserve and should have known long before that this was going to happen...yet somehow he didn't see we put him in charge of the damn treasury...with Bernanke leading the Fed?

Both of these men should have known what was happening and we put them in control of it?


posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 06:40 PM
Once we all start seeing eye to eye,


posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:01 PM
reply to post by David9176

Indeed, Bernake is supposed to be one of the World's leading historians of the Great Depression.. he built his reputation on his research of it.. and yet he failed to see the crisis we are in now when it followed almost to a T the exact time line of the Great Depression???

Then again, I suppose he would be one of the World's leading advisers on how to .. create a depression....

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:57 PM
reply to post by Rockpuck

Speaking of the Great Depression, guess how many people were
unemployed in 1931?
8 Million People
Of course the population was only about 125 million back then.
We are up around 300 million now.
Still, we have over 15 million people unemployed. That's a lot
of people.

posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 03:02 AM
reply to post by HappilyEverAfter

Yes, it's true that Geithner was part of the Wall Street gang that got us into so much trouble in the first place. I'm not that fond of him. Obama would have done better to appoint someone with fewer ties to Wall Street, but IMO he was trying hard to include Republicans in his administration.

Just saying that Geithner's analysis is right on a number of points.

[edit on 21-11-2009 by Sestias]

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in