Video surfaces of Hillary Clinton’s paid speech to Goldman Sachs, and it’s completely harmless
With Hillary Clinton now being singled out for having given the same kind of paid speeches during her time out of office that all politicians have generally given when they’ve had career gaps their own, curiosity has arisen as to just what Clinton was telling entities like Goldman Sachs during these speeches. There’s no longer any need to wonder, because video footage has surfaced. As it turns out, Hillary was speaking to Wall Street to try to make the case for gender equity in the business world.
The wild conspiracy theories coming from those who oppose Hillary Clinton in the Presidential election have never made logical sense. If Clinton were preparing to deregulate Wall Street and give the big financial institutions what they want, she would logically already be singing the praises of deregulation in order to soften the ground for it, as the republican candidates are currently doing. There is no such thing as a Presidential candidate running on a platform of Wall Street reform, as Clinton is, and then getting into office and suddenly going the opposite direction.
Nonetheless, supporters of Clinton’s opponent have convinced themselves that her speeches to Wall Street were part of some secret plot against mainstream Americans. Those individuals would do well to watch the actual footage of her speech, which is all about promoting women in entrepreneurial roles. Even when Hillary Clinton was addressing Wall Street, she was pushing for gender equity, not some kind of pro-corporate agenda. Watch her 2014 Goldman Sachs speech below:
Hillary Clinton begins speaking at the 3:50 mark If you enjoy Daily News Bin, consider making a contribution:
Video of Hillary Clinton’s speech to Goldman Was terrific! Really impressive. A Good marketing tool.
I’m still for Bernie Sanders but I was impressed with Hillarys knowledge, presentation and her look.
About the video. First off I think it is important to point out that the figures the speaker at the beginning mentions tell us nothing concrete on the success of the initiative to sponsor 10,000 women. He says that “60% increased their revenue”; yes but by how much (mean, median, variance, etc. are important measures to have). He then mentions that 70% of them found a new job; a new job doing what? How much are they making? Are they contributing to good causes? How long did they keep these new jobs? He then mentions that 90% of the 10,000 women decided to mentor other women; how successful was this mentoring? What does it mean to mentor another woman? How long did they support these other women? I am not saying the initiative was in any way a bad one, in fact those are quite promising numbers, but they are incomplete. And to the speaker’s credit, this is only an introduction and I don’t quite expect him to give all the details in a few short minutes. That being said, if someone has a link to that study which he mentions, that would be nice.
As for Clinton’s speech. First off, people like talking about GDP growth. But perhaps a more important measure of the economic health of people within a country would be: salary minus cost of living, GDP per capita (GDP divided by the size of the population), salary variance, etc. If someone tells me that Mexico’s GDP has gone up (I have no idea about this, I’m just using it as an example), I do not jump to the conclusion that the Mexican economy is doing well. There can ben enormous disparity despite a growing GDP. That being said, I don’t know whether the GDP growth predicted by that group that Clinton mentions would actually result in the good of a large portion of the population or not, but would certainly like to think so.
Now, I completely agree that women should have just as many opportunities as men to thrive economically, and in life in general.
That all being said, this speech does seem rather innocuous. Now, if someone were capable of providing a reliable source detailing where various candidates get their donations from (not in number of people, but in actual sums of money), that would be greatly appreciated; I have not been able to find a source providing this information that seems reliable.
I want to end with this: I have written this lengthy comment to encourage you all to think critically. Don’t take “statistics” at face value. Ask yourselves; what does this number represent? How was it obtained? How accurate is it likely to be? What are the causes leading to this and what are its consequences? And please, try to be open-minded, and research all sides of issues, not just the one side you have believed in in the past. I remain undecided as to whether Clinton and Sanders would be good candidates, and I think there is much to be gained by both pro-Sanders and pro-Clinton people from healthy, open-minded discussions and unbiased investigation (assuming that you have the time to engage in these things…). Cheers!
Hillary is always held to a different standard. Let’s see every candidate, Republican and Democrat, release their speeches to various wall st, banking, corporations. political groups etc. Let’s require all candidates to meet the same requirements including the release of tax forms and other information that would help the voters decide. It’s time for fairness to all.
[…] Source: Video surfaces of Hillary Clinton’s paid speech to Goldman Sachs, and it’s completely ha… […]
[…] Video surfaces of Hillary Clinton’s paid speech to Goldman … – Apr 16, 2016 · Video surfaces of Hillary Clinton’s paid speech to Goldman Sachs, and it’s completely harmless […]