Citibank had nothing to do with getting reelected.

I have my Masters degree in international relations, banking job experience with Citibank, and I have also worked in developmental organisations.

Those 3,000 jobs in Sioux Falls, based on our population back then in Sioux Falls, would have taken 300,000 jobs in New York City to equal it at Citibank.

No company should depend on one person no matter how that person is smart or genius, whether it's Apple or News Corp, or Citibank or any other company in the world.

What did Citibank get out of it? It got the ability to reverse the arbitrage. Actually, what they got was the ability to give themselves a profit, and that saved the bank.

When Occupy Wall Street happened, I took my money out of Citibank. I already had problems with all the banks - Citibank, Bank of America - but I was kind of just too lazy to take my money out until I saw how Citibank responded to Occupy Wall Street.

The deal we made was that if we would change our law to invite them to come to South Dakota - that's what they wanted, the invitation - if we would change our law to invite them to come to South Dakota, he would guarantee South Dakota 400 Citibank jobs.

American business would be run better today if there was more alignment between CEOs' interest and the company. For example, would the financial crisis of 2008 have occurred if the CEO of Lehman and Morgan Stanley and Goldman and Citibank had to take a very small percentage of every mortgage-backed security... or every loan they made?

Share This Page