Is it just me or am I missing something with regard to Obama's most recent push to concentrate on banking reform?
Is this his conversation in the oval office on his one-year anniversary in the White House: "Now that we've spent a year getting nowhere with health care reform, let's spend the next year on bank reform. Even my staunchest supporters, Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd tell me even if supported, it won't pass for four or five years. And my own Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, is against it."
Meanwhile, according to CNBC, on January 22, 2010, the day President Obama declares war on the banking industry, unemployment rose in 43 states with New York and New Jersey setting new multi-year highs.
And then we have statistics like these: "Michigan shed 15,700 jobs, but 31,000 people left the labor force. That caused the state's jobless rate to fall slightly, to 14.6 percent from 14.7 percent. Michigan has the nation's highest unemployment rate." That's right: Michigan's unemployment rate, the highest in the nation, drops 0.1 percent because 31,000 people left the labor force. The only way to explain the administration's war on bankers: President Obama wants New York and New Jersey to feel Michigan's pain. By regulating the banks, Mayor Bloomberg of New York City says jobs will be lost in his city and his state.
By the way, North Dakota had the lowest unemployment rate of 4.4 percent.
