Google, Xerox CEOs on Obama economic team

Google CEO Eric Schmidt

(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET News)

Google CEO Eric Schmidt and Xerox CEO Anne Mulcahy will bring some tech experience to an advisory board for President-elect Barack Obama, according to press reports about an announcement from the organization.

The 17-member Transition Economic Advisory Board (TEAB) also will get a dose of technology experience from Richard Parsons, chairman of the board at AOL parent company Time Warner. Schmidt, who already had been an adviser to the Obama campaign, endorsed Obama in October.

The board is set to meet Friday before Obama's first press conference as president-elect. A report in The Guardian, among others, carried the full list:

• David Bonior (member of the House of Representatives from 1977 to 2003)

• Warren Buffett (chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway)

• Roel Campos (former Securities and Exchange commissioner)

• William Daley (Midwest chairman for JPMorgan Chase; secretary of the U.S. Department of Commerce from 1997 to 2000)

• William Donaldson (chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission from 2003 to 2005)

• Roger Ferguson (president and CEO of TIAA-CREF; former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve board of governors)

• Jennifer Granholm (governor of Michigan)

• Anne Mulcahy (chairman and CEO of Xerox)

• Richard Parsons (chairman of Time Warner)

• Penny Pritzker (CEO of Classic Residence by Hyatt)

• Robert Reich (professor at University of California at Berkeley; secretary of the U.S. Department of Labor from 1993 to 1997)

• Robert Rubin (chairman and director of the Citigroup executive committee; secretary of the U.S. Treasury Department from 1995 to 1999)

• Eric Schmidt (chairman and CEO of Google)

• Lawrence Summers (professor at Harvard University; managing director of DE Shaw; secretary of the U.S. Treasury from 1999 to 2001)

• Laura Tyson (professor at Haas School of Business of University of California at Berkeley; chairman of the National Economic Council from 1995 to 1996; chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers from 1993 to 1995)

• Antonio Villaraigosa (mayor of Los Angeles)

• Paul Volcker (chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1979 to 1987)

[_Random_Button]

More of the same old, same old. Many of these folks were part of the problem to begin with, back in the Clinton admin. when the administration wrongfully pushed Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac to make all of those bad loans to encourage home ownership by otherwise unqualified buyers. What's the old saying? The problem can't be solved by the same mind that created it!

Apparently being creative in winning a campaign does not translate to creativity in approaching problems. Just another disappointment to those who expected Obama really meant what he said and could actually execute.

[brettze]

Oh, you forgot to blame Big Oil for $145 oil barrels, dont you? Oh you own oil stocks so you dont blame them??

[J. Blow]

Brettze - big oil didn't "push" oil to $145 a barrel, consumer demand did. I'm so tired of stupid and ignorant comments like yours. Get a clue about how an economy works. Note that oil is now $60 a barrel. Gift from the bad old oil companys? No, less demand. Duh.

[Renegade Knight]

Speculation in the commodities market pushed oil to 145. If it were just suppy and demand the rise and ebb of price would be much slower (unless there is a panic).

[brettze]

JBlow
Ok sure have it your own way.. maybe you are too slow to blame Big Oil until you get tired and sick of $145 oil barrels. You are too quick to forgive Big Oil because the high price lasted only a couple months.. Wait until oil prices come back up and stay up there long enough, you will trade blame from old ones to Big Oil for sure!! It is so easy for you to use the demand argument.. Just an expedient denial on your own behalf, you are an oil sucker simpleas that! You are a sucker for Big Ol!

[universeman]

Amen to Random_Button, these guys are all going to push for the same old tired policies...Keynesian stimulus, monetary expansion, and income taxation. The same stuff we've been doing for the last 40 years at least. Oh well, so much for "change"

Change would have been to bring in someone like Bill Bonner, Richard Timberlake, or yes even Ron Paul, all of whom would at least bring a "different" perspective to the table

[brettze]

Oh , you forgot to blame $4 tomatoes?

If you think we have been running Keynesian economics for the past 40 years you must be living pre 1980. We are currently in 2008 where supply side economics (reagonomics) have been the defacto economic policy of our govt.

[Pointedly]

This is a "transition" advisory board. It is a nice mix. From it, the President elect will be able to obtain a detailed picture both of where we have been and where we need to go.

[complex09]

There are some very good people on this commitiee, though I have to wonder about some of them chiefly - Volker. The way the Fed has been falsely creating wealth chiefly started with Volker.

I'm going to stay positive that they can work something out, though it is just fundamentlay impossible for the problem to go away with-out allot of pain (housing values to drop another 20-30% and many other market and personal re-alignments). Though it will be tough, I'm hopeful for a population mindset that will change people for the better of society and the world - "Ubuntu"

[thomasm23]

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac do not make loans. The loans are made by commercial banks and savings and loans. Fannie and Freddie buy these loans from the banks and S&L's. You have been drinking too much right wing Kool-Aid.

[_Random_Button]

The point is still the same and the assertion about these retreads is still accurate. The only thing Obama missed doing is adding Barney Frank to the panel. That would have sealed the deal for failed economic thinking.

[universeman]

They buy and guarantee the loans, thomasm23, which causes more loans to be created. (Hey I just made a loan and now you want to buy it from me? OK - guess I better make another loan! Wow you want to buy that one too? Crazy! I'm going to make a bunch of loans if you'll keep buying them!)

See how it works? No Kool-Aid required.

[J. Blow]

Echoing Universeman - Fannie/Freddie are government run institutions that guarantee loans. Democrats reduced the loan requirements so that banks were leveraged by a 33/1 ratio. This would have never happened in the private sector but democrats (always with good intentions) wanted more people to "realize the American dream". Financial institutions have always bought these loans because they were gov't backed. Since the loans were packaged and bundled institutions couldn't see the depth of the bad loans.

Bottom line - had normal loan practices been in place we wouldn't have the problem we have now. The reason we have the problem? The government tried to "help".

[globalist_agenda]

Where's Joe The Plumber? I fail to see how having corporate fatcats with golden parachutes on an "economic" team will yield any stellar insights. The problem is pretty simple. Decades of living beyond your means in a sham economy. Need to pump up the GDP to make the public think there is economic growth? Easy, overspend by $5 trillion.

? Jennifer Granholm: Yeah, Michigan's economy is something we should all aspire to
? Robert Reich: Never met a Socialist he didn't like
? Antonio Villaraigosa: Let's create a sanctuary city and give unlimited public aid to illegals. Meanwhile gang warfare is out of control and taxes and fees must be hiked to pay for exploding social services.

You guys have no clue how this is supposed to work? Bring Joe the Plumber in to his cabinet? Only retarted impulsive bushwacks would push for a nobody to be on the economic advisory board of one of the largest economic powerhouses that has ever been. Thanks but I'll stick to the advise of Warren Buffet and Eric Schmidt and the mayor of LA and Governor of michigan who can tell us what the problems are.

[scdecade]

History has shown the WORST propenents of capitalism are successful capitalists. The ego of these people doesn't allow for the possibility their own accomplishments will be matched and superceded. They do not view their role in the world as optional or changable. They view competition as an unnecessary disruption to the natural order, i.e. their own success.

More of the same old same old. Which member of this comittee is going to stand up and tell Obama the US is bankrupt and it was caused by profligate government spending? Who is going to object to a central bank which taxes the money workers have already earned? Who is going to take moral exception to an entitlement mess which is paid for by stealing food off the table of working families?

Who is going to bailout otherwise hardworking and responsible citizens when they finally give up toiling for the benefit of others in disgust? No, Obama thinks they can "give" a little more. Just a little more... Just a little... MORE MORE MORE! You'd hope Obama would have more appreciation for the rights of minorities.

[brettze]

Wall Street had been using shareholder's money to other accounts because shareholders never asked for stock certificates either in paper form or electronic form (not available yet). Stock certificates protect your shares from short sellers, brokers, con artists, etc.... Stock certificates entitles you to your number of shares that you bought through your brokers and that your shares cannot be used for other accounts like short sellers, real estate speculators, venture investors, investment bankings, etcetra! Your shares is static in your name , unmovable by any means. If your mutual fund managers do not hold stock certificates for every stock they hold in their portfolios, they are not doing their jobs right! They are careless with your money. You can call your mutual fund representative or customer service dept and ask them whether they dutifully hold stock certifcates or not... If they cannot answer straight enough to satisfy you, I recommend you sell your mutual fund shares immediately. Put them in CDs. Then you call the next mutual fund you like and ask the same question until you get a satisfactory answer with proof that the managers do hold stock certificates, then you can proceed in buying shares in those mutual funds. Stock certificates is a critical defensive tool against the gargoyles of Wall Street! If you dont think it is important , then you go riding in a merry-go-around!

[brettze]

I had experimented with stock certificates before and I have proof that stock certificates protect your shares... Listen, I was amazed to learn that after I called my broker to buy some shares of XYZ stock without asking for certificates.. My next statement showed that I own XYZ stock which was fine with me. Then I called my broker to send the stock certificate for my XYZ stock and he did for a fee. I got the next statement to my amazement that my XYZ stock was no longer listed in my statement... Where did it go?? Inside my stock certificate! My broker no longer hold my XYZ stock for me in "street name" or so called clearinghouses. The biggest clearinghouse name is State Street among many others. When I called my broker to sell my XYZ stock, my broker said that he dont see my XYZ stock. I explained to my broker that I have stock certificate. If you do not understand the meaning of my story above, it means that my broker dont hold my XYZ stock for short sellers or real estate speculators to borrow from while I get monthly statements and wondering why my XYZ stock is not performing well.. Any of you can ask that question to financial experts like Suze Orman or Jane Bryan Quinn, if you can. You can ask like "Do stock certificates protect my shares from short sellers and other undesirable players who may be affliated with my brokerhouse?". Say it with courage, anybody?

[brettze]

Do I mean that my broker has the right to sell my XYZ shares for his own accounts while masquerding as a broker holding my XYZ shares in "street name" in my monthly statements?
Answer: Yes, if you dont hold any stock certificate for your XYZ shares, but there is certain regulatory requirments that your broker not to sell all of your XYZ shares. It is similar to your bank that is required to maintain cash reserves for depositors who may need to withdraw funds for daily needs like shopping and paying bills... Now back to your broker , I am not sure what percentage of your XYZ stock that your broker are required to hold in real physical form as in stock certificates... Lets suppose that your broker has clients buying same XYZ shares in aggregrates of about 10,000 shares ( Yours , 150 for example) The SEC and NASD regulationsmay require that your broker hold 1,500 or 2,000 shares of XYZ stock in stock certificates and is free to sell 8000 of XYZ stock if your broker think XYZ stock is not performing well and is a waste of time. Your broker may know better choices for himself and is free to use (abuse) your XYZ stock for other stock pickings or lending to short sellers and collecting interest on short loans to short sellers . Sure , anything can happen to XYZ stock, your broker, short seller, or even yourselves, can be wrong about your choices. The basic point for stock certificates is that they build real value and foundation for XYZ Corporation . If you take stock certificate for your 150 XYZ shares, your shares will be totally building support toward XYZ valuation without being compromised by your broker or short sellers or any other affliated players .It is a complex fact that you have to spend time thinking about the real implications and consquences for your stock holdings without any stock certificates in your possessions. It is a real funny money fact! For sure!

[YankeePoodle]

? Jennifer Granholm (governor of Michigan), this name is noteworthy. See cannot do a thing for her own state, now she is a national adviser?
Expect rebates and free money to Detroit, whose business model is broken. Once electric cars become a practical solution they would be done forever.

[brettze]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10085881-38.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
Wall Street had been using shareholder's money to other accounts because shareholders never asked for stock certificates either in paper form or electronic form (not available yet). Stock certificates protect your shares from short sellers, brokers, con artists, etc.... Stock certificates entitles you to your number of shares that you bought through your brokers and that your shares cannot be used for other accounts like short sellers, real estate speculators, venture investors, investment bankings, etcetra! Your shares is static in your name , unmovable by any means. If your mutual fund managers do not hold stock certificates for every stock they hold in their portfolios, they are not doing their jobs right! They are careless with your money. You can call your mutual fund representative or customer service dept and ask them whether they dutifully hold stock certifcates or not... If they cannot answer straight enough to satisfy you, I recommend you sell your mutual fund shares immediately. Put them in CDs. Then you call the next mutual fund you like and ask the same question until you get a satisfactory answer with proof that the managers do hold stock certificates, then you can proceed in buying shares in those mutual funds. Stock certificates is a critical defensive tool against the gargoyles of Wall Street! If you dont think it is important , then you go riding in a merry-go-around!
I had experimented with stock certificates before and I have proof that stock certificates protect your shares... Listen, I was amazed to learn that after I called my broker to buy some shares of XYZ stock without asking for certificates.. My next statement showed that I own XYZ stock which was fine with me. Then I called my broker to send the stock certificate for my XYZ stock and he did for a fee. I got the next statement to my amazement that my XYZ stock was no longer listed in my statement... Where did it go?? Inside my stock certificate! My broker no longer hold my XYZ stock for me in "street name" or so called clearinghouses. The biggest clearinghouse name is State Street among many others. When I called my broker to sell my XYZ stock, my broker said that he dont see my XYZ stock. I explained to my broker that I have stock certificate. If you do not understand the meaning of my story above, it means that my broker dont hold my XYZ stock for short sellers or real estate speculators to borrow from while I get monthly statements and wondering why my XYZ stock is not performing well.. Any of you can ask that question to financial experts like Suze Orman or Jane Bryan Quinn, if you can. You can ask like "Do stock certificates protect my shares from short sellers and other undesirable players who may be affliated with my brokerhouse?". Say it with courage, anybody?
Do I mean that my broker has the right to sell my XYZ shares for his own accounts while masquerding as a broker holding my XYZ shares in "street name" in my monthly statements?
Answer: Yes, if you dont hold any stock certificate for your XYZ shares, but there is certain regulatory requirments that your broker not to sell all of your XYZ shares. It is similar to your bank that is required to maintain cash reserves for depositors who may need to withdraw funds for daily needs like shopping and paying bills... Now back to your broker , I am not sure what percentage of your XYZ stock that your broker are required to hold in real physical form as in stock certificates... Lets suppose that your broker has clients buying same XYZ shares in aggregrates of about 10,000 shares ( Yours , 150 for example) The SEC and NASD regulationsmay require that your broker hold 1,500 or 2,000 shares of XYZ stock in stock certificates and is free to sell 8000 of XYZ stock if your broker think XYZ stock is not performing well and is a waste of time. Your broker may know better choices for himself and is free to use (abuse) your XYZ stock for other stock pickings or lending to short sellers and collecting interest on short loans to short sellers . Sure , anything can happen to XYZ stock, your broker, short seller, or even yourselves, can be wrong about your choices. The basic point for stock certificates is that they build real value and foundation for XYZ Corporation . If you take stock certificate for your 150 XYZ shares, your shares will be totally building support toward XYZ valuation without being compromised by your broker or short sellers or any other affliated players .It is a complex fact that you have to spend time thinking about the real implications and consquences for your stock holdings without any stock certificates in your possessions. It is a real funny money fact! For sure!

[brettze]

Is this possibly the reason GM and Ford stock keep on falling simply because GM and Ford shareholders didnt get stock certificates as should!!
ANSWER: Possilby yes, mutual fund managers hold a lot of GM and Ford shares and they can easily call their brokers for stock certificates. There is a good chance that GM and Ford stock will shoot up the next day! Short sellers will be kicked out of shorting GM and Ford shares immediately because brokers have to deliver shares to rightful owners. Brokers will have to buy GM and Ford shares from everybody else.. it depends on how many shares in all that all mutual fund managers hold now... They easily hold over half of each GM and Ford shares outstanding. This is a big chunk of shares that they are sitting on without stock certificates and they allow short sellers to fool around with GM and Ford stock for what reason , I cant imagine!

[brettze]

Maybe some of you readers may not care what happens to GM and Ford simply because you dont own them.. Well, I can tell you that it can happento other stocks that you are holding in your broker statements and they are not performing as well as they should . If you still dont think stock certificates matter much, it is your choice! Stock certificates is not obsolete by any wildest imagination... They are still there for your taking... Take it or leave it! Or call your mutual fund mangers to take them now and get the stock market move up again!

[brettze]

It is true that any stock with most of its shares held in stock certificates by mutual fund managers, shareholders and appropriate others, that stock will be very difficult to fall in stock price because of strong support. That stock will enjoy far more favorable terms and superior creditworthiness. That stock wll enjoy lower financing costs when it need to borrow funds for expansions .If this is what you like to hear about it, get busy and take stock certificates. Wall Street will notice it clearly !!!

[Renegade Knight]

Well heck. So much for positive change.

[brettze]

It is also possibly true that if most of us dont hold stock certificates, then our brokers are free to sell our stocks and buy stock in less competitive companies or deadwood companies. It is also equally true that stock certificates may concentrate holdings in fewer stocks if most of us choose similar stocks in herd mentalities... This is one big minus for stock certificates. If everyone hold stock certificates, there is possibilites that some stocks will crash because there was actually lack of shareholders but being kept propped up by brokers who may be trying to be egalatirians toward all companies just for the sake of jobs...Now some of you readers are complaining about subprime borrowers, well, you can do something about it by calling your brokers to get stock certificates. This may help , dont you think? You are simply wasting hot air as long as youare not holding stock certificates that is the backbone of the financial industry!

[Michichael]

Spamtastic there brettze. Do you work for a company that holds said stock certificates? I'd assume you do based on your comments. Seriously. Say it once - not three times. Annoying.

As to the article, thanks for the info - I wonder who he'll use for the final board?

[keeef091]

Dr. Eric Schmidt has very many mafia friends, some of whom produce p_rn, even child p_rn from captive women and children, which is how Google got sued for profiteering from deliberatly promoted child p_rnography & why they withheld the identities of child p_rn distributors from police. http://endmafia.com