Charlie Rose

rojelio  08/30/2010 01:35 AM Report

And one more thing. How are we going to achieve this needed economic growth when supplies of cheap oil are declining, not increasing? We're not going to get $2/gallon gas from deep ocean drilling and we've never grown over the last 100 years without using increasing amounts of fossil fuel. How we gonna change that paradigm now? Maybe there's a good answer for this, but I'm frustrated that this doesn't even seem to be on the radar of our "brilliant" economists. Why not?

rojelio  08/30/2010 01:18 AM Report

Timothy, you cannot hide the facts. Too big to fail banks got BIGGER under your watch. The differential between the rich and the poor has gotten BIGGER under your watch. The middle class is disintegrating under your watch. We're grinding asphalt roads back into dirt. Foreclosures are up. Commercial real estate is about to crash. Unemployment is worse. Wages are becoming more in tune with the 3rd world, except for your banking buddies. The USA now has 110 trillion dollars of unfunded liabilities and 13.4 trillion dollars of national debt. It will NEVER be paid. When the current bubble bursts, you guys won't be able to bail out a lemonade stand without rioting in the streets. What "moderate steady recovery" are you talking about? We're in a transition all right, straight into a depression, and you've been one of the main architects for the last couple of decades. Thanks a lot, dude.

NeilMacCallister  07/28/2010 04:42 PM Report

Dear Mr. Geithner,

This morning, as I was pushing my lawn mower down the street to the $10 California job I had available to me, I had to veer around a large display machine parked at the curb which advised me to "Keep my speed below 25 mph, lest I incur a cost of $275 dollars".

I wondered, ..do you, our President, and our Congress have an equal governance placed upon the rate at which our tax-money spending is racing down the freeway to the future?

What is the penalty if you do exceed our budget?

***

Just before I got to the house which had called me, I stood at a traffic light next to a guy in short jeans who had this large something strapped around his ankle, and quite visible through his sock.

He must have violated one of those traffic rules at some point.

Did you ever pay up your taxes?

Will Charlie Rangle also have to wear an ankle bracelet?

***

Excuse me now, ..I have to go mow that lawn, ..I need the ten bucks.

doodah  07/26/2010 06:44 PM Report

Where's the bottom? When will it bottom?.. It hasn't happened yet. And it ain't gonna happen for quite awhile. .. That's what the real money is doing,.. and the fake money (financial services aka government aka financial services) is what keeps it from the bottom for those on the bottom. . So SLOW growth as our skills erode. Except for the shysters aka bankers (because they know they get paid, REGARDLESS.). .. That's OK, as soon as the currency is rendered useless, we will burn the bankers in effigy. Mark my words.

JAC  07/25/2010 01:21 AM Report

Charles, please ask any guest on your show who states "the government does not create jobs" to prove it. If it were true then we would not have a deficit.

I worked with the Government for over 28 years. The U.S. Government creates and saves jobs. It does research and development in science and technology to benefit the private sector...we all know these facts.

Christopher  07/24/2010 04:26 PM Report

I do not see how another treasury secretary could have done better in the last 12 months. Especial with the congress and senate as is. Some rules past are better than no rules. And I do believe he did drop his eyebrows on his way to the studio!(funny post salgadoce)

Though I do think that Liz Warren the best candidate for the Consumer Protection Agency. If ever Tim opennly works against that nomination, he will discredit his own reform.

charlizecourriers  07/23/2010 05:27 PM Report

Why does Tim drop letters from the words he is speaking, and sometimes, even syllables? Perhaps the same reason he drops his head so as to avoid scrutiny from those who are listening and watching him.(Daddy must have been a very harsh taskmaster.) Obviously Tim is getting coaching,but he needs more coaching. As to the content. "No shortage of ideas." Ideas are not imagintion. Geitner/Obama are trapped in the past-the dilemma of all reformers. While conservatives want the future to resemble the past, liberals want the future to resemble their past notions of the future. But that is not what the future will be. This show is another example of political word soup orchestrated by the maestro of liberal gibberish. "Rust, moss, break back, dismember, do what's best...." Tim is a minor thinker,just right for his job. And now it's time to sip some more tea....

fengqin821021  07/23/2010 02:18 PM Report

In October 2003, Timothy Geithner was named president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. In 2006 he also became a member of the Washington-based financial advisory body, the Group of Thirty. In May 2007 he worked to reduce the capital required to run a bank.

I think Timothy Geithner is one of the key man created banking crisis. But it seems like the worse thing he done, the more promotion he would get......I guess the next step for him is running the Department of the Treasury go bankrupt......

salgadoce  07/23/2010 12:59 AM Report

I don't know what bothers me more - Geithner's economic policies, or the fact that he has no eyebrows.

They're both disturbing.

robdverity  07/22/2010 03:26 PM Report

Timothy bemoans the inevitability of moral hazard citing in essence the inventiveness of human ingenuity. Prob. true if left to trying to foresee all "mechanical" possibilities. So perhaps loophole closures should be foregone for "moral" or "fear-of-retribution" motivations for not doing-the-right-thing. In short civil punishments with REAL JAIL TIME (in lieu of obscene bonuses). This fear should extend to the inviolate pols and govt. officials. Malfeasance and wrong-doing is just that, officialdom notwithstanding. Case-in-point, Hank Paulson. His inviolability is obscene. His three-pg heist pushed us over the brink and if we recover at all it may take decades. The extending recession is proof the bailouts didn't work, but the debt remains nonetheless.

Real prison time would be the moral hazard preventer for the next round of too-clever-wise-guys, not the circumvention of some too arcane legislation.

The policy maker CEOs for starters should all be considered. Based on crimes against humanity alone if nothing else. The world-wide suffering they caused that will go unpunished will insure a repeat down the road.

REMant  07/22/2010 01:35 PM Report

Of course, there's a considerable difference between a bailout paid for by taxes, and one paid for by taxpayers, which is the import of what Fed, as opposed to the TARP did, and is still doing as long as it keeps interest rates below mkt levels, tho, of course if they were at mkt levels, the damage already being done, the piper would still have to be paid, as it will, when at some point, taxes have to go up. I'm afraid everyone in Wash still believes we will "grow" (i.e., inflate or depreciate depending on how you look at it) our way out of this. An analogy would be trying to disperse the oil in the Gulf instead of capping the well. Credit does not drive economies, productivity does. But the real question has been for the past two years WHO is going to foot the bill, not how to make it disappear.

We probably have around 15% unemployment all told, but depleted inventories have now been restocked and either unemployment benefits will have to be extended or taxes reduced. I think recovery will be faster the more spending is restrained and the budget in balance. I think we could benefit from a more progressive income tax structure at the present time, tho a healthy economy ought to have flatter taxes, as well as, lower natural interest rates.

I don't think Glass-Steagall had anything to do with postwar economic growth, which I believe was far below what it might have been had that been true, nor did it restrain govt from spending, or the Fed from inflating. This kind of analysis blames the financial sector alone for this crisis, which cannot be true. If we have grown in the past half century it has surely been in spite of what the govt and central bank have done. But the financial system has changed from local banks investing in local business, to distant banks investing in distant places, something the Jacksonians complained of when they went after the Monster bank. In that respect, it seems to me that this bill redresses an imbalance between Treasury and Fed that has existed in recent years, which will probably be to the good. Of course, I am, nevertheless, happy to hear him talk about Glass-Steagall and stress the need for higher capital requirements. I wish they were higher.

I do not understand the Republican position at this point, myself. They sound like they are trying to leverage the situation for political advantage, and cozy up to Wall St, like monetarists of old, writing off the Tea Party. I think they would be better off without McConnell and Boehner in leadership positions. Even when they say reasonable things they sound otherwise. On the other hand, the party in power, even if they were not Democrats, benefits politically from more spending and I am sure they will try that.