The Ousting of American CEO’s

Just a few weeks ago GM’s CEO, Rick Wagoner, was forced out of his job by government. He seems to be the first major casualty of government intervention by the Obama Administration. GM stocks plummeted 89% off it’s yearly high causing shareholders to cut and run. There seems to be a nice show going on where the government is appearing to be helping GM and replacing the CEO is a last-ditch effort to save the world and get the car industry back on track. But what seems to be apparent from my point of view is not a last-ditch effort to save the world but a last-ditch effort for government to own the car industry.

Let’s move on for a minute to a new industry. In the banking industry we have a terrible crisis where we needed to throw trillions of dollars into the system to stimulate and revive the economy to get credit flowing to our businesses. It comes at no surprise that the crux of our economy stems from the entire banking system. Most all large businesses are totally dependent on the fractional reserve banking system. If you have control over your leading bank giants you ultimately control all financial business operations across the nation, and since America does business all over the world, it is safe to say you have a lot of control over the financial flow of operations across the globe.

If I were to own one of the top 10 banks in America, I could ultimately shut off credit to anyone I pleased. Now it might not be beneficial as an owner to do this as it could really cause problems for my business loyalty and trust. But it is safe to say, there is a lot of control and power over your clients. Wouldn’t it be interesting if the U.S. government decided to perform stress tests and find many of these top banks insolvent. In response to these findings the government would then oust a leading bank’s CEO and flood the bank with government agents in a show of “more oversight” and “saving the economy”. In reality they are gaining control over all business flow of financials across the nation, and the world. Now of course the government would need to prove they could save the insolvent bank industry and appear as a hero, ultimately leading to a false form of trust from the citizens of this country. Heck most people don’t care as long as they have a job and they can feed their family.

Sounds like quite the conspiracy doesn’t it? Well last week the government performed stress tests on the top 19 banks in the nation to determine how they would perform under stress. After putting each bank under the microscope there came an announcement saying they were to delay the results of the tests in fear of causing panic on Wall Street. Gee, let’s not blow our cover. There is much confusion as to how these bank tests were done and intentionally so. This is to disallow reaction from the public.

Regulators have said they do intend to make some information about the result of the stress tests public, but neither market participants nor bankers themselves know specifics about the disclosure.

The details regulators collected are confidential information about the banks’ own assumptions about loan losses and capital needs. Banks never disclose such information, if only because they don’t want their competitors to know. If such information leaked, or even false information become a matter of market speculation, bankers might be forced to disclose or correct the information. It’s not clear how the Securities and Exchange Commission, which is the regulator concerned with disclosure to shareholders, would react to bankers’ disclosure, or lack thereof, about stress-test results.

It gets a bit more interesting now. Citigroup CEO, Vikram Pandit, is in the crosshairs. No, not by Dick Cheney but by something more lethal… the Obama Administration.

With the bank stress tests wrapping up, sources tell The Post that regulators think they might have to make the bold move of removing Pandit to signal Washington is taking as hard a line with the banks as it did with General Motors when it effectively ousted GM CEO Rick Wagoner.

This seems to be a move that has been in the making since Geithner was appointed and had gone to meet with Pandit. Pandit took over as CEO of Citigroup only a year ago, back in December of 2007. Pandit told Geithner he was committed to”breathing life into the troubled bank”, and is widely viewed among his co-workers and peers as not being part of the problem. However, Geithner criticized Pandit for not moving fast enough to clean up Citi’s balance sheet. Interesting how the CEO’s are being targeted and replaced by the magic wand of government. Despite Citi’s CFO Ned Kelly’s plea, “Replacing [Pandit] would be dramatically de-stabilizing both for Citi and the system,” and one from a spokeswoman of Citi, “Our recent quarterly results reveal the underlying strength of the franchise and Vikram Pandit’s strategy at work to restore Citi to profitability,” Geithner is standing firm on this one.

Geithner and other regulators have said that they would boot CEOs if the government had to rescue them further.

As you can see, politicians from our government know best and may need to come to rescue us all because we are all too incompetent. Instead of allowing a free market to exist, and businesses to fail, the government needs to come in and take over. This is the process of seeking socialistic outcomes through the process of taking over businesses by the means of ousting CEO’s from large firms. Socialism usually takes on its form and purpose through instituting laws and regulations. Communism has the same outcome but is done mostly through force. I would have to say that ousting a CEO is force, and the ability of our own government to just remove CEO’s of businesses shows we are well beyond Socialism and are bordering on straight up Communism.