'HOPE' WILL BE AN INFLECTION OF THE LOOMING ECONOMIC CRSIS
Well, if you listen to George Will on the weekend, Conservatives have nothing to hope for except ... failure of the new Administration's policies.
(And no one better than Newt knows how to set the trap.)
BIGGEST ECONOMIC PLAN SINCE TOTAL WORLD WAR
400+ people put together for the Obama-Biden inaugural committee, based on cable news reports this morning.
Does Christina Romer or Tim Geithner have 400+ people working with them? Peter Orzag?
It's not their fault completely, if not. Bush-Paulson and the GOP have had no plans beyond giving the banks money (neither did the Congress that voted "targeted, timely, and temporary" last April...).
LARRY SUMMERS TO THE RESCUE
I give a lot of trouble to Larry here, because he can shoulder it, but one should give credit, too, when it is due. He's got media and communication skills (and I'm not sure Geithner has ...).
He's out saying the right things (I think), as he did on Face the Nation. Of course, it is Christina Romer who is the chieftain, so it's unfair to single out ...
Meanwhile, there are those talking about the economy like it is some kind of technical exercise, still.
Things I don't like hearing:
On the first, someone needs to describe accurately what is 'taking time'. Markets move fast. What is expected to take an extended period of time to "adjust", exactly? One can clean-up a bank balance-sheet overnight, if you have to. Even re-financing 1 million mortgages is doable within a short time, so ...
On the second, ...
Excuse me, but when you spend over $800 billion, do you really, honestly think that you get any kind of a "second chance"? What's more, we have but one 'historical simulation' of the economic policies that *may* work (the 1930s), so ... for planning, at least, let's think more in terms of a one-shot from the free-throw line, not 'fits and starts' or time-and-money-enough to re-work it, if needs be.
Bottomline: America is vulnerable, as is the World's economy.
More things I don't like hearing:
These numbers are way, way too low, depending on what is proposed, and the priority on these items seems accordingly set far below what is key.
Put another way, what is the analysis, even back-of-envelope, that supports these figures? What is the context for that analysis? How much should we be thinking about a gradual remake of the entire residential mortgage market, with new mortgage products?
Put another way (more picante?), I'm very happy Senator Schumer wants to continue to support higher education (why, though, isn't he is willing to socialize it?). But, tax-rebates aren't going to do the trick when the demand for education is fixed by the number of students of age and the tax-payrolls are shrinking. Yes, it will have some effect, but I wouldn't want to bet the future of economic growth on this kind of spending, would you? What am I missing? I know a person who cannot even get their 9% student loans refinanced ... why doesn't he attack those 'consolidate once' provisions, so long as we are giving billions to the banks to 'shore them up'?
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
GOP Give Democrats Rope to Hang Themselves
