Both Oars In The Brashness of Bull

Dec 18, 2009

While we may be living in a post-racial era, we are evidently not beyond profession bashing as evidenced by President Obama’s less than flattering description of bankers on Wall Street.  Mr. Obama not only called the group a bunch of “fat cats;” he drew a target on their backs by saying, “You guys are drawing down $10, $20 million bonuses after America went through the worst economic year that it's gone through in -- in decades, and you guys caused the problem.”  I appreciate the personal touch of the use of you rather than they, but that does not hide the fact that the President of the United States singled out a group of people on national TV as the problem. Fortunately, he stopped short of suggesting a final solution.  

How many Wall Street Bankers are there? Is it possible for a group that only numbers in the thousands to bring down the economy of a nation of over three hundred million people? What about the overzealous real estate developers, the politicians who loosened banking regulations, the unions who argued for unsustainable benefits packages, the car dealers who offered seventy-two month car loans, and us, the everyday consumer, who overextended ourselves on cheap credit—don’t we all have a part in the tragedy?  Not according to the President. It’s the bankers.

Furthermore, are the fattest cats who continued to take home big paychecks in 2009 even on Wall Street?  Neither Buffet nor Gates nor any of the Hollywood moguls work there. Neither Kobe nor Tiger punch a clock there. Of course, the President was only talking about people earning $10 to $20 million, not $100 million like Mr. Woods.  Nobody from these sectors turned in their paycheck for 2009, though at least one banker did and many others saw their salaries capped.

It is quite clear that Mr. Obama’s statement was politically slanted, not economically based.  I suppose that is to be expected. Afterall, he is a politician, not an economist. An age-wizened workout friend set me straight on this as I fumed over the President’s comments in the locker room.  He pointed out that politicians commonly put up straw men to oppose.  He reminded me that Roosevelt had done the same thing with big business after the last crash.  But does this excuse singling out a certain group for public ridicule?

While the President is most assuredly not an economist, he did intern at one of the largest corporate law firms in the world.  This firm, besides being the meeting place of the First Couple,  boasts seventeen thousand lawyers in sixteen countries. It is recognized as a premier handler of everything Wall Street, especially hedge funds and SEC handlings. Evidently, the family aversion to Wall Street developed later in life. But, it still begs the question: How does a man who obviously understands big business and leads the largest economy in the world diss [to borrow a phrase from the younger generation] Wall Street—one of our nation’s cornerstone industries? It rings a bit disingenuous.

For me, there has only been one really genuine comment on wealth management. It was delivered by the only really believable Salary Czar. When asked what to do by a rich young man, he said, “Sell all you have and give it to the poor.”  Short of that, all other suggestions seem a bit hollow. Especially those coming from a man who has made millions writing about a career that has yet to occur.

Mr. President, you should keep in mind that each banker is somebody’s brother or sister, father or mother. They are workers in the national vineyard, too. Sometimes they earn a lot, but they also support local causes and distant mission and even political candidates like you with those earnings. Most importantly, they are humans.

History is filled with populist leaders who have pointed their finger at one group or another to blame them for the woes of the people. But, their reputations have not fared well, nor have their countries. Mr. Obama, you are the President of a great nation, not the chief of a populist political party. Speak accordingly.