Obama has won me over completely with the economic speech he gave today.

[Zynx]

In addition to all of the regulations he proposed, he also advocated something I have wanted for years, if I may borrow:

"Sixth, we need a process that identifies systemic risks to the financial system. Too often, we deal with threats to the financial system that weren’t anticipated by regulators. That’s why we should create a financial market oversight commission, which would meet regularly and provide advice to the President, Congress, and regulators on the state of our financial markets and the risks that face them. These expert views could help anticipate risks before they erupt into a crisis."

The financial markets, particularly the public and private credit markets, are not some abstraction we can just ignore. They have real and tangible effects on the real economy and as such we need to maintain a vigilant watch over them to correct imbalances before they become unmanagable. This is one of the first times I've ever heard a politician propose a system of ongoing oversight of the markets. If people think that the SEC is sufficient, they don't understand how the system works. There is much more to worry about than just illegal activity.

I know some focus more on the banking regulations and oversight of those who borrow from the government, but this particular item is what really caught my eye. The government right now is ill-suited to properly administer order in the financial markets, which I have previously said are critical to this country's economy. This sort of reform goes a long way to bringing government up to speed.

This marks the first time in a while I have been genuinely impressed by something a politician has said about economic regulation and correcting economic imbalances. This is so much better than all of those rants from Lou Dobbs and countless politicians about outsourcing and foreign trade that are not the root problems facing our economy today, but make for easy targets for an angry public.

[scheming daemons]

1. And you've been a strong advocate for Hillary.... so thanks!

[Zynx]

6. Lukewarm more than anything.

I simply don't think most of the criticisms landed at Hillary are completely fair and some Obama supporters really piss me off when they show no understanding of the electorate. I never really had anything against Obama personally, though I think he is a bit smug at times, but we all have our faults.

[Catherina]

2. He's a brilliant man. I hope our country doesn't blow it

I still need to read the speech but I wasn't expecting anything less.

Thanks for the excerpt and for your thoughts :hi:

[Coexist]

3. some financial-mind stuff for you;

http://obama.3cdn.net/6eeb319f6baadbfd3c_ic6mv22hk.pdf

[Catherina]

39. Thank you. I just printed if off

I like to scatter these around. People lap it up at work.

[Coexist]

42. happy to help!

[babylonsister]

15. Compliments of DeepModemMom, here's the text:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=108x128053

[Catherina]

40. Thanks. I K&R'd ;) n/t

[Zynx]

28. At the very least he has some sharp economic advisors around him.

[Catherina]

41. One of the things I really like about him is the caliber of people

working with him. He's put together a first rate team that really seems to care and has a record to back them up.

[gateley]

4. HuffPo (I think) had an economist's take on it -- and it was positive. nt

[Zynx]

8. I myself am an economics major with an emphasis in banking and finance.

It impressed me.

[gateley]

29. I'm so glad to hear that -- thanks. nt

[Voice for Peace]

75. I am really ignorant about economics, and was amazed by his speech,

so much of it made sense to me -- which says a lot about his communication ability -- and it just struck me as sheer brilliance overall. I am more and more impressed with this man. I was imagining him debating the economy with McCain and it just seemed like McCain would throw up his hands and concede (not likely I know).

[Shakespeare]

5. I was impressed. He's calling for some profound changes (re-regulation, etc.).

Undoing some of the harm that goes all the way back to the Reagan years. Good stuff. :thumbsup:

[redqueen]

7. Butbutbut... he's nothing but happy feel-good talk of ponies and magic wands!

Empty suit! EMPTY SUIT!

:sarcasm:


Glad to have you onboard. :hi:

[Zynx]

13. I'm not sure everyone appreciates how big this change in our handling

of the economy is. This is a significant departure from the deregulated Wall Street excesses we are now choking on.

[redqueen]

19. I'm sure many would rather not think about it.

It might interfere in their spreading of the meme.

[Zynx]

24. There is an awful lot of substance in what he said today. Maybe too much

for those who only thrive on 2-word statements.

[dana_b]

38. exactly what I thought.

There's so much in it that people who don't have some kind of grasp of economics may blow it off. I'll admit that I'm no economics genius but I am trying to understand it. It's more important to people's lives than some may realize.

[Voice for Peace]

76. In all areas, he continually is making the connection -- I think in a compelling way --

between how the success, the welfare, of everybody depends on the success & welfare of the other. It's a pretty simple truth, when it comes to all these issues -- race, education, economy, foreign policy -- kind of like a big "doh!" for America. His talent at doing this is outstanding.

[Nightjock]

34. LOL!

That was great! ......Go GUNNERS! (They better win this weekend!)

[redqueen]

37. Oh... please let it be so!

Four draws in a row... and then a loss... I was in some shape last Sunday let me tell you!

And we face Liverpool in the CL next! Eek!

[sandnsea]

9. "bottom up economies"

Those are the 3 words that get my attention. I haven't read today's speech yet, but he has spoken of bottom up economies before and that's the key to returning power and justice to the people.

[Zynx]

17. I guess I am a bit of a technocrat. I appreciate the broader vision of favoring

workers and small business(Main Street) over Wall Street that he has been pitching for some time. However, the details here are what got my attention in a hurry.

[redqueen]

25. So very true.

That was the thing I loved most about Clinton. He understood and backed "bubble up" economics.

:thumbsup:

[Zynx]

31. I'll say this about supply-side(trickle down). It is 1 part truth for every 1000 parts BS.

[sandnsea]

32. I hope Obama means the actual bottom

as opposed to Indian outsourcers and the Mariana's, Willie Tan, and water privatization in third world countries, and the like.

[redqueen]

33. Hahahahaha

:hi:

[Rubiconski2009]

10. Great post!! Thanks!!

:hi:

[TwilightGardener]

11. This speech, combined with his Iraq/foreign policy speeches, combined

with his beautiful speech on race, should be enough to convince any Dem fence-sitters that Obama is just a really, really bright guy with lots of substance, ideas, and a keen grasp of history. The meme that there's "no beef" really needs to die.

[GarbagemanLB]

12. Awesome! K&R

[BumRushDaShow]

14. But will the M$M pause from their Wright-bashing long enough to cover this?

The answer is obvious due to what they think will give them more ratings. :eyes:

[Zynx]

18. The MSM hasn't done decent coverage of issues in years.

The last time I saw decent coverage of issues was in 2000 when I saw a good report outlining the differences between Bush's plan for SS and Gore's on CNN's Inside Politics.

[MadMaddie]

43. No they will continue on with their crap....but I sense a shift

people are not paying attention the MSM like they were.....more people are educating themeselves with alternate news sources.

The fear mongering has lost it's effect on a majority of the public.....so the MSM can continue screaming Wolf no one is listening to them anymore....

[stlsaxman]

73. Even Diane Rhem's Friday Round-up ignored this speech for the Rev Wright gossip.

I, for one, am totally disillusioned.

[slinkerwink]

16. thank you for your post

[MethuenProgressive]

20. I liked it when Bill Clinton gave it the first time.

Did BO give BC credit?

[stray cat]

35. Its the economy stupid? or some other phrase....

As long as he doesn't quote "I did not have sex with that woman"

[SammyWinstonJack]

69. .

:thumbsup:

[goletian]

21. welcome to the club, brother.

bring it in for the real thing.

[Saturday]

22. Did you hear Hillary's speech today too? nt

[Adelante]

23. It was thrilling for me

I am not an economist, but I've been very troubled by the 1998 financial market reforms that repealed New Deal protections. I never thought I'd ever hear the words "Glass-Steagall" from any candidate. I've been longing for a candidate to talk about it and today one did, and it was my own candidate. So it was a thrill.

[Zynx]

26. My biggest complaint about Bill Clinton was always the fact he endorsed the

deregulation of the financial services sector and we weren't even supposed to question it. The free-market mantra of the '90s got drilled into our head so much that many forgot why we had put in place such an extensive series of regulations in the first place.

[tishaLA]

27. I'm like McCain

I have Economic Personality Disorder: I understand the basics, but then I recognize I'm out of my depth. So my opinion of the benefits and drawbacks of Sen Obama's economic proposals have to be weighed by people other than me. Your post is very helpful in that regard.

[Zynx]

30. I could be more specific, but I wanted to keep it general.

I've spent every weekday of my life for the past eight years following the financial markets and learning their ways. The first thing that everyone has to realize is that the have significant influence over what is commonly called "the real economy". Companies go to the credit markets and issue commercial paper(really short term bonds) and longer term bonds every single day to finance ongoing operations whether that is financing inventory or accounts receivable, or in the case of a bank providing financing to ongoing lending activities. The stock market is not as important in terms of everyday functioning, but stability there is important for preserving the general order of the markets.

In terms of direct economic impact, the stock market could be plunging, volatile, and unpredictable for a year and not really hurt the economy that badly. If the credit markets went through a similar period of plunging prices(which would send interest rates higher), volatility, and unpredictability, the economy would contract severely. We are also finding out that rampant speculation in commodities is hurting the economy directly through higher raw prices.

[grantcart]

68. If you have time I for one would be interested in a detailed analysis of his key points

(and I for one have no problem with investors being democrat and making money despite the ritual hazing they get here)

[stlsaxman]

72. here you go- Analysis of Obama's economic speech, point by point

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5283223

[AGirl]

36. I am glad u are impressed.

Because I don't know a thing about economy.

[amandabeech]

44. If he thinks that folks from the investment world are going to cough up their secrets to regulators,

I want to know what he's been ingesting.

Those folks make their money by staying three steps ahead of the regulators. They won't talk until they've been subpoenaed.

I understand that this speech was "well received" by the Wall Street crowd in attendance.

That's bad news for the average citizen.

This is from someone who has dealt with some of the slime, unfortunately.

[Zynx]

63. The investment world is not some ghoulish secret society.

There are altruistic people who work within it.

[amandabeech]

71. Good. Unfortunately, I haven't met many of them.

Right now the folks at the SEC try to get the inside info on the latest investment vehicles by hiring mid-level associates from the law firms that paper up the transactions.

If the big folks are willing to talk, that would be great. However, I'm not counting on it.

[OzarkDem]

45. He didn't say anything specific

and since he praises Reagan and falsely blames Clinton for our economic problems, one can only assume his actual economic policies will reflect Reagan's.

Obama has praised privatization of Social Security

Obama is opposed to Universal Health Care

Obama is a big supporter of "globalization", ie shipping US jobs overseas

No, thanks.

[FrenchieCat]

47. Blaming where the blame belongs! How novel!

Clinton, Republicans agree to deregulation of US financial system
By Martin McLaughlin
1 November 1999

An agreement between the Clinton administration and congressional Republicans, reached during all-night negotiations which concluded in the early hours of October 22, sets the stage for passage of the most sweeping banking deregulation bill in American history, lifting virtually all restraints on the operation of the giant monopolies which dominate the financial system.

The proposed Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 would do away with restrictions on the integration of banking, insurance and stock trading imposed by the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, one of the central pillars of Roosevelt's New Deal. Under the old law, banks, brokerages and insurance companies were effectively barred from entering each others' industries, and investment banking and commercial banking were separated.

The certain result of repeal of Glass-Steagall will be a wave of mergers surpassing even the colossal combinations of the past several years. The Wall Street Journal wrote, "With the stroke of the president's pen, investment firms like Merrill Lynch & Co. and banks like Bank of America Corp., are expected to be on the prowl for acquisitions." The financial press predicted that the most likely mergers would come from big banks acquiring insurance companies, with John Hancock, Prudential and The Hartford all expected to be targeted.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/nov1999/bank-n01.shtml

[FrenchieCat]

48. It may have gone over your head....but Obama stated plenty!

Obama's plan to change the economy

So for liberal critics of capitalism as currently practiced in the United States, there was much to admire and appreciate in Barack Obama's speech Thursday morning at Cooper Union in New York. The address provided yet another example of what the senator from Illinois does best: It was an eloquent, nuanced, smart defense of the pressing need to roll back decades of government irresponsibility and ensure that the interests of, as he put it, "Main Street and Wall Street" are better aligned.

"Our free market was never meant to be a free license to take whatever you can get, however you can get it," said Obama. He reached all the way back to the first secretary of the treasury, Alexander Hamilton, in his effort to argue from first principles that government has the right and responsibility to intervene in the economy to ensure that the few do not benefit at the expense of the many. He referenced the 1999 repeal of the provision in the Glass-Steagall Act that previously separated commercial and investment banking. He even declared that it was "time to realign incentives and compensation packages, so that both high level executives and employees better serve the interests of shareholders" -- a broadside unlikely to win him a lot of votes in downtown Manhattan (or at the fundraiser at the investment bank Credit-Suisse that Obama headed to after his speech, as was helpfully pointed out by the Clinton campaign).

The comparison with Sen. John McCain's speech on Tuesday could not be more stark. Obama's jibe -- that McCain's "plan ... amounts to little more than watching this crisis happen," is not off the mark. McCain took great pains to stress his intent to intervene in the workings of Wall Street as minimally as possible. For those deluded souls who might still think there is no significant difference between the two major parties in the United States, a review of McCain's and Obama's speeches this week is in order. They are like bookends at opposite ends of the economics shelf. Obama snuggles up to John Maynard Keynes, while McCain seeks the warm embrace of Milton Friedman. Obama sounded like he understood what he was talking about. McCain sounded like he was reading a speech designed to make him look like he understood what was going on.

more....
http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/index.html

[amandabeech]

50. I absolutely was not impressed.

I have seen nothing from him that suggests that he has a populist bone in his body. There is no red meat, no connection with a distressed voter. If Wall Street likes it, the average voter won't.

I'm waiting to hear from your candidate.

Might she criticize the deregulation of Glass Steagal? Will she suggest a huge build-up in the SEC enforcement division? Will she enforce existing laws?

Will she threaten to enforce MFN for China? Back out of Nafta?

[Shakespeare]

52. So...when you talk out of your ass, does it feel kind of like a fart? I've always wondered.

Several threads have posted analyses of his speech and proposals; you might want to peruse them before you say anything else so breathtakingly stupid. Lots of red meat there.

[amandabeech]

53. I've prerused them. Grow up, Shakespeare.

Your attitude isn't going to get your candidate more votes.

Or are you more interested in being impressed with yourself than winning an election?

[Shakespeare]

54. He's not my candidate.

I do, however, think he gave an excellent speech today and offered proposals for more profound change than Hillary did in hers. If you really did peruse some of the analyses, then you would know that Obama did, in fact, offer a concrete set of proposals, and showed an impressive breadth of knowledge on the country's economic history.

I'll support the eventual nominee; I was an Edwards supporter, and currently have no horse in this race.

[amandabeech]

55. I have prerused his proposals thoroughly, and I disagree with your conclusion.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

On edit: I had written something politely answering your question, but I have erased it because I do not want to reward your appallingly rude comments with any kind of reasoned response.

Good night, and good-bye.

[Shakespeare]

56. My first response was snarky; my second was not at ALL.

So you can stow the outrage elsewhere. You can, of course, have the opinion that you don't LIKE his proposals, but the fact that he does, indeed, offer a series of detailed proposals (just as Hillary does) is not something that's debatable. I hope you can understand the difference.

[amandabeech]

57. deleted.

[Shakespeare]

59. "Appalling rudeness?"

Oh for chrissakes. Grow a sense of humor. :eyes:

I stand by my previous point. Don't like his proposals? Fine by me. But to suggest that he offered nothing concrete is nothing but intellectual dishonesty.

[amandabeech]

58. Your first post was sufficiently snarky to cover any succeeding missives.

I have a short ignore list, but somehow, I just have to put you on it, not just for your rudeness, but for your gall in taking the Bard's name as yours.

[Shakespeare]

60. I have an M.A. in English Literature, specializing in Shakespeare.

I'll use any name I please as my DU handle, including the bard's. Deal.

[OzarkDem]

66. I had the flu yesterday

but am pretty sure she mentioned most of those in her speech yesterday.

The benefit of electing Clinton is that you can count on her to do what she says.

[trekbiker]

77. you think Wall st liked that speech??? u must be joking

all of us little retail investors loved that speech. but Wall st??? the Hedgies, the CEO ruling class, the big investment houses... Thier days of robbing us blind are numbered if Obama gets elected. and Hillary?? that two faced corporate Bitch.. no meaningful change in our financial systems will come from her

[apocalypsehow]

51. Wow, so many falsehoods packed into one post.

1. Obama never "praised" Reagan.

2. Obama never "blamed" Clinton for any economic problems.

3. Obama's stated positions on economic policy are about as diametrically opposed to Reagan's as one can get.

4. Obama has not "praised" any such "privatization" of Social Security - I defy you to provide a link proving this assertion.

5. Obama is not opposed to Universal Health Care - that is simply laughable.

6. Obama is not a "big supporter" of this strawman you call "globalization." He supports a trade policy that is squarely in line with the vast majority of Democrats across the board.

Does making that much stuff up ever tucker you out?

[TahitiNut]

62. Visitors from CloudCuckooLand get tiresome quite quickly.

Invented "facts" and delusion-based beliefs. It take solice in observing that the compass is reacting properly even if reacting to misplaced magnets and skull-sized hunks of iron.

[OzarkDem]

67. Keep dreaming

All true. Do a google search and you'll find his remarks about Reagan when he was sucking up to an editorial board for an endorsement.

Google Obama and globalization and you'll find many mentions in his speeches (prior to the Ohio primary when he dishonestly changed his message).

Ditto for his positions on privatizing Social Security. He "was for it before he was against it".

In the meantime, I'm waiting for you to offer some proof of action Obama has taken (not just getting his name on a bill) that proves he is a populist and worked hard for some kind of economic reform.

Obama supporters are so easily hoodwinked. You take him on word and faith alone.

[apocalypsehow]

79. So, no proof to back up your false assertions, huh? About what I figured: typical of HRC boosters.

:thumbsdown:

What happened to that "Boycott," btw?

:eyes:

[SammyWinstonJack]

70. Obama=republican-lite? Figures.

x( Me too, no thanks. Damn all those who allowed Edwards to be marginalized,ridiculed and forced out of the primaries! WTG! :mad:

[David Zephyr]

46. Hello Zynx! I liked the speech, too. I hope he can stay on point more.

It's amazing what can happen when one isn't beholden to K Street, lobbyists and P.A.C.'s. One can speak without fear of losing that donation.

It's breathtaking.

And thanks for your comments.

On to victory!

[Colobo]

49. Welcome aboard!

[dailykoff]

61. He's the only one ready to revive the New Deal

and I don't doubt that he will, barring tragedy.

[thoughtcrime1984]

64. Very detailed, and on point.

He OWNS McCain. So much smarter, so much more leadership capability. Very much focused on the health of the consumers' bank accounts driving the economy.

[Zynx]

65. I'm more interested in vision than "capability".

There are very capable people with a bad set of policies because they are also ideologues.

[Scurrilous]

74. K & R

:thumbsup:

[JackDragna]

78. If Obama is going to be a watchdog for our financial system..

..then why has he taken significant campaign contributions from financial institutions that have floated subprime loans or SIV's?