“There will be time . . . . to make profits, and there will be time . . . . to get bonuses,” assured President Obama after criticizing the “irresponsibility” of a few bad apples who had brought another public relations nightmare to the newly inaugurated Obama administration. Headlines this week included:

- former Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain and the $1 million spent to renovate his office (including $1,405 for a trash can)
- Citigroup ordering a $50 million corporate jet (later cancelled after being pressured to by the administration)
- Financial sector employees receiving $18.4 billion in bonuses last year, which while down 44 per cent from 2007 was still the sixth largest payout in history.

The administration has the difficult task of convincing Americans that Wall Street deserves to be saved since its woes are a result of the “greed and irresponsibility” of a few and not a logical institutional outcome. On top of that, the American taxpayer should foot the bill, given that the financial crises is also partly a result of our “collective failure,” and to do otherwise is to risk catastrophe since Wall Street in general is “too big to fail.”

Obviously, national headlines featuring robber barons gorging themselves at the public troughe is bad PR and forces the administration to speak out.

“We shouldn’t have to do that, because they should know better,” said Obama, speaking of Citigroup, which donated $633,418 to the Obama campaign.

One Wall Street executive who has taken part in talks with government authorities told the Financial Times that “[t]he political climate is such that there is a need to punish Wall Street.” Public chastizement is often necessary when one exceptionally greedy individual creates bad publicity for the whole system. The necessity naturally grows when the system is in such dire straits.

Another financial executive complained: “Attacking Wall Street is like fishing out of a barrel at the moment,” though he understood that “Obama is in the middle of a tough political battle to get the stimulus plan approved. He has to say these things.”

Obama, who received $37,482,833 in campaign contributions from various financial, insurance, and real estate interests (plus an additional $42,774,560 from theirs and other’s lawyers and lobbyists), has pleaded for “restraint” on the part of Wall Street’s vested interests, at least until he can restore solvency and public confidence in the profit-making system. Where Obama differs from his more ideologically reactionary counterparts is in the understanding that a truly sustainable form of institutionalized robbery and exploitation requires a strong government role. Corporate “executives . . . . understand that without wise leadership in Washington, even the best-run businesses can’t do as well as they might,” the president explained.

Last week, Obama met with various executives to discuss the Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Corporations represented included Google, Xerox, Motorola, IBM, Honeywell International, Aetna, Eastman Kodak, and other major companies.

“Their ideas and their concerns have helped shaped this recovery package,” Obama said. “All we can do, those of us here in Washington, is to help create . . . an environment in which business can prosper” and “[t]hat’s exactly what I intend to achieve — soon.”

In addition to the initial $700 billion in troubled asset relief program (Tarp) funds, and the $825 billion stimulus package, the Obama administration is expected to ask for an additional $1 trillion in funds for banking institutions in the coming months.