Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE |
CONTACT: The Real News Network Taruna Godric, 416-916-5202 ext. 414 |
Obamanomics: Is This Real Change?
Timothy Canova: In selecting Clinton-era figures, Obama is embracing those who helped create crisis
WASHINGTON - November 25 - On
Monday, Obama announced the twin towers of his economic team, Tim
Geithner,
current head of the New York Federal Reserve, and Larry Summers, former
Treasury Secretary under Clinton, to head-up the Treasury and the White
House National Economic Council respectively. This coincided with the
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and President George Bush announcement
that
they would be committing $20 Billion in capital and guaranteeing a
record $306 Billion in risky assets now belonging to CitiGroup.
The
Real News spoke to Timothy Canova of Chapman University to discuss
Obama's selections for his economic team. Tim Geithner and Larry
Summers, are to head-up the
Treasury and the White House National Economic Council respectively.
According to Canova, Geithner and Summers had "been involved in
creating a lot of the conditions that led to this financial crisis"
through their roles in the late 90's and "failure in being rewarded".
Canova feels that one of the major problems is the necessity for regulation of the derivatives market, stating "there's so much uncertainty, not just in the market place but among policy makers" adding "I think we're in for a long tough ride" if some kind of regulation is not implemented.
For complete coverage of this story visit our website
3 Comments so far
Show AllAre you progressives who voted for Obama happy now?
thanks
Barack Obama was for single payer before he came out against it.
I doubt if anyone can argue that Obama's presidential win does not signify change! The very fact that an African American was elected to our highest office by a predominately White constituency underlines political change as never before! If he does nothing else, Obama has indeed brought change to Washington... and that change was buttressed by a majority of American voters, young voters, who were convinced he is an antidote for Bush Era Republicanism.
A majority of Americans seem to want: the war in Iraq to end; affordable healthcare; a job that pays a livable wage; affordable housing; low gas prices!
Bush's administration sacrificed healthy domestic policies to pursue what some pundits say was a personal agenda in Iraq. His obsession with finding and hanging Saddam Hussein engulfed the US war machine and increased Defense spending by billions. Our young soldiers gave, and continue to give their lives for a cause most Americans really do not believe in; and, seems to have nothing to do with 911.
The phantom Weapons of Mass Destruction materialized as justification for invading Iraq and paved the way for lucrative non competitive military contracts designed almost exclusively for Haliburton. And while President Bush basked in the glow of his Iraqi conquest, Henry Paulson and Steve Bernanke failed to raise the alarm when sub prime lending started to move the country towards economic disaster.
Seriously, faced with such a financial mess, I hardly envy Senator Obama as the incoming President. He faces a stiff challenge, the likes of which very few other President Elects have ever faced. His "change" can be defined by anything he does to rectify the mess he inherited from the outgoing Republican administration. If he uses old faces to do that, it does not redefine his vision or his determination to effect a solution to impending problems. In other words, change from the present to a Clintonesque past is still change! Change for the better I might add!
When are you all going to realize "Change" was a campaign Slogan ...you get a "change" of face in the White House...they'll throw you a bone or two but this country is not going to make major policy changes...regardless who is in power