On Monday, Jamie Dimon, Chairman, President, and CEO of JPMorgan
Chase, and therefore one of the most important bankers in the
world, had some not so kind
things to say about economic policies of recent years.
Dimon, whose strong early support of Barack Obama was often
termed a “bromance,” recently had a private
meeting with Mitt Romney, perhaps emblematic of Wall Street’s
sense of betrayal by a candidate they supported aggressively with
votes and cash. They should have known better, but at least they’ve
learned their lesson: Barack Obama is what he is, and your cash
doesn’t change that.
Dimon dodged the question of his not supporting Barack Obama in
this election season.
Dimon’s comments make no partisan references and his frustration
seems bipartisan, including with the “debt ceiling crisis” and with
the lack of certainty around tax policy. He also notes how many
complaints there are about Dodd-Frank and how damaging current
over-regulation is to small banks, and makes a specific point about
the damaging impact of Washington “denigrating business.”
Still, most of these issues are the fault and policy of
Democrats and the Obama administration. Even if Dimon doesn’t come
right out and say it, it’s hard to miss his anger and frustration
with our current government and their persistently anti-business
approach.
See a clip of Dimon’s interview with Fox Business
here.
Oldefarte| 2.16.12 @ 10:15AM
It's truly sad that Dimon and his fellow bankers [along with the Catholic Church, the Jewish community, etc] are now finally waking up to the reality of Barack Obama's truth. Many of us GOT IT/HIM well prior to 11/3/08, but the USA is now paying supremely for these so called [should be] semi-intelligent people. WAKE UP AMERICA! What this country has had to pay in governmental cost/expense, prestige, etc from the radical nature of this man and his administration is simply astounding and dumbfounding. How could people be so GD STUPID has me shaking my head in pertuity!!!!!
Ross Kaminsky | 2.16.12 @ 10:43AM
Of course, you're right, but Obama fooled a lot of smart people. Not you, and not me, but plenty of people.
W| 2.16.12 @ 11:22AM
They could not have been very smart if they were fooled by Obama. Maybe they knew a lot of facts but they were unable to analyze those facts to make a sound rational judgment.
Drek| 2.16.12 @ 1:09PM
I concur with W.
How bright can they be if they didn't see right through obama? Didn't they see in the memo that part where he spent twenty long years in the pews of a raving lunatic.
Why then did they support.
A mania.
They wanted to be with it. Conservatism has always required a level of courage, a certain sense of being contra mundum.
JmsA| 2.16.12 @ 3:16PM
Hear! Hear!
Trinacria| 2.16.12 @ 1:47PM
Mr Kaminsky,
With respect, you've mistaken wealth, prestige, and/or career achievement for intellect. No one with even the most modest intellectual gifts could objectively evaluate candidate Obama's resume and policy positions and fail to conclude that he was anything other than a shockingly under qualified, underwhelming, and unsophisticated amateur whose social, economic, and foreign policy positions were utterly lacking in depth and nuance.
This wasn't a case of a shrewd and brilliant candidate managing to obscure his extreme limitations; there was never any "there" there. Anyone who who failed to see that (and accepted "hope" and "change" as a plan) cannot be referee to as "smart".
Ross Kaminsky | 2.16.12 @ 4:34PM
Where did I say anyone was intellectual? But to say that the big shots on Wall Street aren't smart (which is different from intellectual) is just foolish.
Lots of people (such as my life-long Republican father, who is a very smart and intellectual guy) were fooled by Obama.
People who didn't do a lot of homework, and who pretty much learned what the media and Obama said about Obama were fooled. Maybe they got what they deserved, but that's mostly irrelevant to my point.
Again, you and I knew what he was before the election because we looked at his friends and his writing, and heard his words. But most people didn't. It doesn't make them stupid, however.
In most cases what they did would fall into the category of "rational ignorance." In fact, the bad outcome still doesn't prove that at the time their ignorance was irrational or stupid.
albert constantine jr| 2.16.12 @ 5:13PM
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
DRed| 2.16.12 @ 11:23AM
Yesterday you wrote an article suggesting the democrats were the tool of wall street. Today you're complaining that Obama betrayed wall street. Which one is it? Yesterday it was bad that the democrats were doing wall streets bidding-it was crony capitalism. Now it's bad when Obama upsets wall street?
Ross Kaminsky | 2.16.12 @ 1:00PM
DRed,
I simply don't see any conflict.
One main point yesterday was that Wall Street (and Goldman in particular) has much closer ties to Democrats than the media wants people to think. Wall Street and politicians of both parties, but esp. Democrats lately, have worked hand-in-glove to benefit each other at the expense of economic and political liberty, and at great expense to taxpayers.
And, I'm not "complaining" that Obama betrayed Wall Street. I'm just pointing it out as the reason that people like Dimon are not supporting Obama right now.
Also, Obama didn't betray Wall Street by abandoning crony capitalism, but rather by demonizing them at every turn and calling them the enemy in public.
DRed| 2.16.12 @ 3:09PM
But if Wall Street is using its influence to benefit itself at the expense of taxpayers, shouldn't they be demonized?
Ross Kaminsky | 2.16.12 @ 4:35PM
They should be demonized for that, but that's not what they're demonized for by the left. They're demonized for "greed" and for making profits.
DRed| 2.16.12 @ 5:56PM
Not really, Ross. I mean, yes, there are some people who just don't like rich people. But the heart of the anti-wall street protests is not that people on wall street got rich, it's that they got rich playing a rigged game and when their game went bad, all of us paid to get them back on their feet again.
tonypal| 2.16.12 @ 10:46PM
Sorry DRed, but that's your OWS fantasy. The heart of the anti-Wall Street protests was anti-capitalism and grievance. Most of it was incoherent drivel, sprinkled with calls for free college education, debt forgiveness and a whole host of other goodies.
Nick| 2.17.12 @ 12:01AM
tonypal,
On top of everything that you listed (all true, by the way,) the dirty, smelly hippie protesters wanted to defecate in public and rape at will.
Bill| 2.16.12 @ 1:07PM
Nonsense...the 6 money center banks should be broken up into 3-4 pieces each and Glass Stiegel should be reimplemented to get the investment arms away from the banking arms of all banks. Then Dimon and Blankfein should be put in jail.
We then need to institute the death penalty for any financial actions that result in anyone losing their home or their retirement or pension.
aware| 2.16.12 @ 3:14PM
Bill for president.
Todd S| 2.16.12 @ 4:09PM
Off to the guillotine says Bill! Tell me exactly what Dimon should be in jail for? Something tells me you don't care, you just want heads to roll like revolutionary France. Turned out great for them after all right?
Conservative Bob| 2.16.12 @ 5:42PM
Can we start that policy with Barney Frank and Chris Dodd?
PattyMor| 2.16.12 @ 1:18PM
Isn't is rich that the very same people who donated generously to put the Redistributionist In Chief firmly ensconsed in the Oval Office, now suffer at his feet? Don't like the Occupy Wall Street and the constant anti-banking barrage? Wait until SEIU shows up at your house to picket your family. Watch while Obama passes his wealth taxes. And, now these supposed "smart people" are whining. You got what you paid for. Lock, stock and barrel (so to speak). So quit yer bellyachin' and enjoy the pilloring.