Elizabeth Warren's aggressive plans to level the playing field for the American economy are drawing heavy fire from billionaires, even ones who acknowledge the system needs to be fixed https://t.co/WCt04LU64N
— CNN (@CNN) November 6, 2019
Jamie Dimon realizes that this is only going to help Warren, right? https://t.co/cBeUbE8oYI
— Julia Ioffe (@juliaioffe) November 6, 2019
Paul Waldman, in the Washington Post:
… Hedge fund managers warn that if Warren is elected, the stock market will tank. Wall Street Democrat Steven Rattner insists that “a Warren presidency is a terrifying prospect,” lamenting Warren’s targeting of “Many of America’s global champions, like banks and tech giants,” not to mention the effects her policies would have on “Private equity, which plays a useful role in driving business efficiency.” Horrors!
Meanwhile, billionaire investor Leon Cooperman told Politico, “I believe in a progressive income tax and the rich paying more. But this is the f—ing American dream she is sh—ing on.”
As Anand Giridharadas notes, when plutocrats push back on proposals to increase their taxes, they never say what really motivates them, which is simply that they don’t want to pay higher taxes. Instead, the argument is always about how, if we tax them more, then we will only be depriving ourselves of the fruits of their beneficence….
But it’s clear in the venomous reactions Warren produces from the plutocrat class that they want not only to be able to be taxed and regulated as lightly as possible, they want to be told they deserve every bit of wealth and power they have.
Warren does not offer that reassurance; quite the opposite. She says that the system has been shaped by the wealthy to advance their own interests, and if you’re one of them, you have an obligation to contribute more. And she’s happy to mock or insult the billionaire class along the way…
— New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) November 5, 2019
… Objectively, Obama treated Wall Street with kid gloves. In the aftermath of a devastating financial crisis, his administration bailed out collapsing institutions on favorable terms. He and Democrats in Congress did impose some new regulations, but they were very mild compared with the regulations put in place after the banking crisis of the 1930s.
He did, however, refer on a few occasions to “fat cat” bankers and suggested that financial-industry excesses were responsible for the 2008 crisis because, well, they were. And the result, quite early in his administration, was that Wall Street became consumed with “Obama rage,” and the financial industry went all in for Mitt Romney in 2012…
What, after all, does modern finance actually do for the economy? Unlike the robber barons of yore, today’s Wall Street tycoons don’t build anything tangible. They don’t even direct money to the people who actually are building the industries of the future. The vast expansion of credit in America after around 1980 basically involved a surge in consumer debt rather than new money for business investment.
Moreover, there is growing evidence that when the financial sector gets too big it actually acts as a drag on the economy — and America is well past that point.
Now, human nature being what it is, people who secretly wonder whether they really deserve their wealth get especially angry when others express these doubts publicly. So it’s not surprising that people who couldn’t handle Obama’s mild, polite criticism are completely losing it over Warren…