This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 14:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Somebody please include Goolsbee recent fiasco with the Canadian officials and NAFTA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.66.42.88 ( talk) 06:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Someone please include that he is a member of SKULL & BONES if this information is correct. Also is he a member of CFR or other subversive cults? Eliot Bernstein Eliotbernstein ( talk) 12:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
This doesn't read much like a wikipedia article. Contralya ( talk) 16:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
In the Obama project to cover Obama44 officials, there seems to be no understanding of Obama execs as Goolsbee, (see NAFTA critique above); and place in context their doings as a troop of ? clowns, which pinpoints an extreme Obama failing - he relates to , hand picks, as his most senior advisors, those who can motor mouth a blue streak, but who like Goolsbee and Geitner are truly badly inexperienced to be in their positions and Obama44 has no clue as to that key factor , as he also is the same, badly inexperienced.
(recall Obama key foreign policy advisor during the casmpaign, the lady atty who went to Harvard Law School with Obama44, who had studied genocide, but nothing else in foreign policy, but was his overall key foreign policy advisor; and recall her massive faux paux.
And esp recall that Geitner announced publically that he would NOT give ANY loan to AIG but the next day did loan to AIG, ONLY after the why was explained to him because he did NOT know, that why being that not lending to AIG would collapse global markets, a fact Geitner had no clue about and why he was not going to lend AIG a dime and that clown / Geitner is NOW, even with that pitiful zero recommendation running the USA Treasury)
Yak, Yak, Yak and you will be an Obama44 cabinet member; but have a real thought using in depth understanding and you wouldnt get the time of day from the mity Obuma, esp as he would NOT FOLLOW anything you said.
Optimus Prime, (we are here , we are waiting) aka AO 69.121.221.97 ( talk) 05:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
The Obama administration must acknowledge the existence of an independent investigation into former White House senior economics adviser Austan Goolsbee’s alleged unauthorized access to the Koch brother’s tax returns, a court ruled Tuesday.
A federal judge ruled the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) must disclose to watchdog group Cause of Action whether records of an investigation exist.
Cause of Action filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit after TIGTA refused to confirm or deny the existence of the investigation in what is commonly known as a “Glomar response.”
Former White House Council of Economic Advisers chairman Austan Goolsbee sparked a mini-scandal in 2010 when he told reporters during a background press briefing that Koch Industries—the company of libertarian philanthropists Charles and David Koch—paid no income taxes.
Conservative lawmakers and activists said Goolsbee’s statements not only unfairly singled out the president’s political opponents but also used confidential IRS documents to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AZRickD ( talk • contribs) 14:52, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
For the second time in three months, I have changed Goolsbee's birthplace in this article from Abeline, Texas to Waco, Texas, because profiles of Goolsbee on the NNDB and WhoRunsGov websites list his birthplace as Waco, Texas, after my first attempt to do so was reverted without comment. While I realize that some Wikipedians may question the validity of these two websites as reliable sources, I feel that based upon this information a reasonable attempt should be made to verify which city is his correct birthplace. -- TommyBoy ( talk) 02:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm removing this section (the subject of what appears to be a "slow-motion" edit war) per WP:WEIGHT and WP:SYN. The author of the section has used synthesis to suggest "a media firestorm" (see edit summaries passim), when there is in fact no evidence in reliable sources that this has been the case. Moreover, Goolsbee was only tangentially involved in the incident and, as such, it is not a biographically-significant detail. Anyone wishing to reintroduce any or all of this material into the article must first seek a consensus to do so on this talk page. Edit warring will not be tolerated. -- Scjessey ( talk) 17:14, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Good to see that there has already been a discussion on
assuming good faith and that
WP:3O is amicably being used for dispute resolution. If Goolsbee's involvement was later unsubstantiated, is this notable for his biography and if so, why? If it does belong, I agree that it needs to be toned down, regardless if other parts of the article need expansion (
expansion templates can be used to identify those areas). Not wanting to
lose valuable content for Wikipedia, a good question to ask would be "Does this content belong in a different article?" In fact, it is already mentioned in
Democratic_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_2008#March Is there any of this content that should be moved/copied to that article? Would a
See also to the Democratic Party article section be sufficient for the Goolsbee article?
I recommend discussing content that would be better placed in another article, and proposing a revised toned-down version if any mention is considered worthy of remaining in this article.—— Bagumba ( talk) 21:01, 30 March 2011 (UTC) |
Further to the WP:3O above, I have a proposed restructuring of the article which includes a brief paragraph on the Canadian diplomatic memo that received media coverage in March 2008. I have taken the "academic and public service" and "media" sections and adjusted them to "academia" and "public service" sections with each including his relevant media activities during those periods. Here are the changes tracked against the most current version on a subpage of my talk page. What do you think? - Pictureprovince ( talk) 17:16, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
With further research, this statement does not hold up very well on its own. Looking into this matter in more detail, it seems clear that if there is to be any reference to this sentence, it really must add the qualifier that immediately following the public citation, the allegation was refuted by a statement from the Canadian government, the Obama campaign, Goolsbee himself and by later press examinations and that Canadian television ran a follow-up report saying the original story had not been reported accurately. These were referenced in an old paragraph deleted some weeks ago when it was placed in the wrong section of the bio. Given that this was an issue in one primary somewhat early in the campaign and he had an extensive continued role in the campaign for all the months that followed with no mention of any of his statements or activity in this regard, it hardly seems accurate to list this alone. As a compromise, the sentence about the allegation has not been removed but the questions regarding its accuracy are also included as is a summary of the continued role in the campaign after this episode. But if people think the entire canadian reference should be removed, that would also seem appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 235bender ( talk • contribs) 01:33, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
References
This article states that the subject is an economist yet gives next to no information on his economic beliefs. I can't even tell from the article whether he is an orthodox or a heterodox economist. He might even be an a Marxist or an Objectivist for all that I can tell. The article certainly isn't giving any clues. Can anyone add something to give us some idea of what sort of an economist he is? -- Derek Ross | Talk 06:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
What he said. --- Dagme ( talk) 03:23, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on Austan Goolsbee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:38, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 14:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Somebody please include Goolsbee recent fiasco with the Canadian officials and NAFTA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.66.42.88 ( talk) 06:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Someone please include that he is a member of SKULL & BONES if this information is correct. Also is he a member of CFR or other subversive cults? Eliot Bernstein Eliotbernstein ( talk) 12:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
This doesn't read much like a wikipedia article. Contralya ( talk) 16:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
In the Obama project to cover Obama44 officials, there seems to be no understanding of Obama execs as Goolsbee, (see NAFTA critique above); and place in context their doings as a troop of ? clowns, which pinpoints an extreme Obama failing - he relates to , hand picks, as his most senior advisors, those who can motor mouth a blue streak, but who like Goolsbee and Geitner are truly badly inexperienced to be in their positions and Obama44 has no clue as to that key factor , as he also is the same, badly inexperienced.
(recall Obama key foreign policy advisor during the casmpaign, the lady atty who went to Harvard Law School with Obama44, who had studied genocide, but nothing else in foreign policy, but was his overall key foreign policy advisor; and recall her massive faux paux.
And esp recall that Geitner announced publically that he would NOT give ANY loan to AIG but the next day did loan to AIG, ONLY after the why was explained to him because he did NOT know, that why being that not lending to AIG would collapse global markets, a fact Geitner had no clue about and why he was not going to lend AIG a dime and that clown / Geitner is NOW, even with that pitiful zero recommendation running the USA Treasury)
Yak, Yak, Yak and you will be an Obama44 cabinet member; but have a real thought using in depth understanding and you wouldnt get the time of day from the mity Obuma, esp as he would NOT FOLLOW anything you said.
Optimus Prime, (we are here , we are waiting) aka AO 69.121.221.97 ( talk) 05:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
The Obama administration must acknowledge the existence of an independent investigation into former White House senior economics adviser Austan Goolsbee’s alleged unauthorized access to the Koch brother’s tax returns, a court ruled Tuesday.
A federal judge ruled the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) must disclose to watchdog group Cause of Action whether records of an investigation exist.
Cause of Action filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit after TIGTA refused to confirm or deny the existence of the investigation in what is commonly known as a “Glomar response.”
Former White House Council of Economic Advisers chairman Austan Goolsbee sparked a mini-scandal in 2010 when he told reporters during a background press briefing that Koch Industries—the company of libertarian philanthropists Charles and David Koch—paid no income taxes.
Conservative lawmakers and activists said Goolsbee’s statements not only unfairly singled out the president’s political opponents but also used confidential IRS documents to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AZRickD ( talk • contribs) 14:52, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
For the second time in three months, I have changed Goolsbee's birthplace in this article from Abeline, Texas to Waco, Texas, because profiles of Goolsbee on the NNDB and WhoRunsGov websites list his birthplace as Waco, Texas, after my first attempt to do so was reverted without comment. While I realize that some Wikipedians may question the validity of these two websites as reliable sources, I feel that based upon this information a reasonable attempt should be made to verify which city is his correct birthplace. -- TommyBoy ( talk) 02:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm removing this section (the subject of what appears to be a "slow-motion" edit war) per WP:WEIGHT and WP:SYN. The author of the section has used synthesis to suggest "a media firestorm" (see edit summaries passim), when there is in fact no evidence in reliable sources that this has been the case. Moreover, Goolsbee was only tangentially involved in the incident and, as such, it is not a biographically-significant detail. Anyone wishing to reintroduce any or all of this material into the article must first seek a consensus to do so on this talk page. Edit warring will not be tolerated. -- Scjessey ( talk) 17:14, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Good to see that there has already been a discussion on
assuming good faith and that
WP:3O is amicably being used for dispute resolution. If Goolsbee's involvement was later unsubstantiated, is this notable for his biography and if so, why? If it does belong, I agree that it needs to be toned down, regardless if other parts of the article need expansion (
expansion templates can be used to identify those areas). Not wanting to
lose valuable content for Wikipedia, a good question to ask would be "Does this content belong in a different article?" In fact, it is already mentioned in
Democratic_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_2008#March Is there any of this content that should be moved/copied to that article? Would a
See also to the Democratic Party article section be sufficient for the Goolsbee article?
I recommend discussing content that would be better placed in another article, and proposing a revised toned-down version if any mention is considered worthy of remaining in this article.—— Bagumba ( talk) 21:01, 30 March 2011 (UTC) |
Further to the WP:3O above, I have a proposed restructuring of the article which includes a brief paragraph on the Canadian diplomatic memo that received media coverage in March 2008. I have taken the "academic and public service" and "media" sections and adjusted them to "academia" and "public service" sections with each including his relevant media activities during those periods. Here are the changes tracked against the most current version on a subpage of my talk page. What do you think? - Pictureprovince ( talk) 17:16, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
With further research, this statement does not hold up very well on its own. Looking into this matter in more detail, it seems clear that if there is to be any reference to this sentence, it really must add the qualifier that immediately following the public citation, the allegation was refuted by a statement from the Canadian government, the Obama campaign, Goolsbee himself and by later press examinations and that Canadian television ran a follow-up report saying the original story had not been reported accurately. These were referenced in an old paragraph deleted some weeks ago when it was placed in the wrong section of the bio. Given that this was an issue in one primary somewhat early in the campaign and he had an extensive continued role in the campaign for all the months that followed with no mention of any of his statements or activity in this regard, it hardly seems accurate to list this alone. As a compromise, the sentence about the allegation has not been removed but the questions regarding its accuracy are also included as is a summary of the continued role in the campaign after this episode. But if people think the entire canadian reference should be removed, that would also seem appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 235bender ( talk • contribs) 01:33, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
References
This article states that the subject is an economist yet gives next to no information on his economic beliefs. I can't even tell from the article whether he is an orthodox or a heterodox economist. He might even be an a Marxist or an Objectivist for all that I can tell. The article certainly isn't giving any clues. Can anyone add something to give us some idea of what sort of an economist he is? -- Derek Ross | Talk 06:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
What he said. --- Dagme ( talk) 03:23, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on Austan Goolsbee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:38, 21 October 2016 (UTC)