Comments on: Can Obama Lead the U.S. Out of Recession?

By: Mr. Econotarian

Mr. Econotarian — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 07:04:50 +0000

We needed the contact gold clause ban in 1933, as we needed to devalue the dollar but not put everyone who was a debtor way underwater through contracts payable in gold. There is one example of Federal expansion of power that actually worked, in a Macro sense.

Rare, though they are!

By: Mr. Econotarian

Mr. Econotarian — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 00:04:50 +0000

Rare, though they are!

By: Freddie

Freddie — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:51:05 +0000

So it’s a time for humility rather than hubris

By: LarryM

LarryM — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 19:02:19 +0000

No, that isn't the thrust of his concluding point, at all. His point is that the initiatives could slow the recovery. That is altogether different from saying that it could make the finanical crisis worse.

It seems to me that either we are using very different definitions of "financial crisis," or you are conflating two very different things. By financial crisis, I assume we are talking very specifically about the problems facing the banking/financial sector, and the risk that these problems could become even more acute. The recession is a related but distinct problem. Sure, many people are saying that the stimulus package, etc., could "slow down any recovery," but that is not the same thing as saying that it could specifically make the financial crisis worse. Apples and oranges.

I probably should have been more specific, but I was refererncing your post from a few days ago when you quoted, and agreed with, criticism from Europe of the handling specifically of the financial crisis. So let me put it this way - setting aside vague statements about the approach being faltering or opaque, what, specifically, would you have the adminstration do specifically with regard to the finacial crisis?

As for "not minding" the cautious approach, that would seem to undercut your post from a few days ago (the European critic was criticizing just that approach). Moreover, I would think that, given your policy preferences, many of which I share, you would not merely "not mind" the caution, but you would actively applaud it.

By: Will Wilkinson

Will Wilkinson — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:30:24 +0000

Plenty of people are claiming that the stimulus package and other initiatives make the financial crisis worse. They create a context of uncertainty that stymies the coordination of capital. That's the thrust of Russ's concluding point.

I don't mind if Treasury is moving cautiously. I do mind the administration's faltering and opaque approach.

By: LarryM

LarryM — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:05:33 +0000

I think that this is largely true, but it's at least a little jarring to read this after some of your previous comments suggesting that Obama hasn't done enough with regard to the financial crisis. Bracket the stimulus package and the other initiatives. True, from a libertairian perspective there is a lot there not to like, but no one is claiming that those initiatives are going to make the financial crisis worse. Shouldn't a libertarian, especially one who believes what you say here, applaud the fact that Treasury has been moving slowly/cautiously? I mean, it's a bit jarring to hear a libertarian criticizing the government for not doing enough.

By: uknowbetter

uknowbetter — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:58:51 +0000

Government is not efficient. The more it does, the more inefficiency it creates.

By: Glen

Glen — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:48:18 +0000

This post is a study in mixed metaphors. But I like it.