Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Using the Power of the Presidency

If there's anyone that's been frozen out by this Administration over the last two years, it's CEOs:
WASHINGTON — Hiring is anemic but corporate profits are up, and President Barack Obama is having 20 CEOs over to talk about how to tap that cash to boost jobs.

But don't count on the president to reprise the "fat cat" scolding he gave bankers a year ago. No, this is not a woodshed moment.

For Obama and the business sector, Wednesday's meeting is a wary embrace.

With new tax and trade deals as enticements, Obama is taking yet another step toward the political middle as he moves to confront a still-weak economic recovery and the capital's new political alignment.

Both sides come to Wednesday's session with their respective wishes: Obama wants the private sector to use its record profits to increase employment; executives want the administration to ease regulations they perceive as onerous.

Since the election, Obama has been holding private meetings with individual executives to discuss potential job growth strategies. But the higher-profile meeting Wednesday also serves a larger public relations purpose: It shifts attention from past confrontation to rolled-up-sleeves cooperation.
What exactly does the Administration think having Obama publicly blow these Captains of Industry will accomplish?

Isn't there something more important we could have a "summit" about, you know like our 9.8% unemployment rate or the always rising rate of forclosuses?

What the fuck is wrong with these people?

1 comment:

  1. I'm all for getting people hired, but wasn't the low-regulation thing what got us into this mess? And the plan is less regulation in exchange for hiring... um... wait what?

    1) is there even a way to tie those together, other than back-room promises that the business community can't be held accountable for? i mean Hiring --> tax break I could see being coupled legislatively. But company A increases hiring --> regulatory rules are changed/repealed? How the hell does that work?
    Regulatory rules will now only be enforced while unemployment is above X%?
    Any change in regulation will necessarily be global, whereas to actually encourage companies to hire the incentive has to be awarded on an individual basis. Otherwise the largest benefit goes to the company that did the least to deserve it.

    2) why do they have to be coaxed into hiring people during an upswing in profits? Doesn't it usually make sense to expand under that circumstance? Or are their profits going up BECAUSE they're laying people off?

    3) you want less government intervention in your business, and in order to get it you're making your business more involved in government. Someone please explain to me how this makes any logical sense.