Give Geithner a Break (from site 538)

[Are_grits_groceries]

1. Nobody, absolutely nobody, has more incentive to get this right than the Obama Administration. If the economy collapses -- well, more than it already has collapsed -- then the Democrats get slaughtered in 2010, Obama is a one-termer, health care doesn't happen, the poverty rate increases by a couple orders of magnitude, and the imperative to fix the environment gets put on the backburner. To suggest that Obama or Geithner are tools of Wall Street and are looking out for something other than the country's best interest is freaking asinine. Maybe their ideas are wrong -- but their hearts are in the right place.

2. If the banks fail, then rich people lose a lot of money, and poor people lose a lot of jobs (and also much of what money they have). But I swear to God, there's a lunatic fringe out there that would take this trade and call it "progress".

2a. At the end of the day, a great deal of the debate between liberals and conservatives is about how to apportion wealth. It seems so banal to talk about it that way, and so we put all sorts of window dressing on it, but that's really what it's all about. But on this issue of the banking crisis -- and to a lesser extent this was true of the stimulus -- there is a much larger delta on the aggregate amount of wealth that the United States stands to gain (or lose) than on how that wealth is distributed. Over the next 6-18 months, the outcomes for everyone from the top of the economic ladder to the bottom rung are very strongly correlated.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

I don't think anybody really knows what shape the economy is really in or how to fix it.

[lxlxlxl]

1. generally agree...that is some exceptionally clear and lucid thinking

people are being forced to think out their own personal economic apocalypse story when we start talking about insolvent banks and foreign debt. personally, this is more frightening than any particular terrorist attack. this is making the debate incredibly complicated, and i agree that some 'progressives' are stuck in old habits of thinking and debating.

i also know for a fact, that most progressives could not be bothered to pay attention to how batshit insane Paulson was, especially when he was speaking in front of Congress last year. Geithner is getting unfair flack because people are paying attention now, but if you think Geitner is unable to explain the crisis and solution clearly, i urge you to dig up the old Bernake/Paulson House appearances and listen to how out of touch they were...

[ozu]

2. Nate Silver rules

Mostly for his PECOTA forecasting system in Baseball Prospectus, but 538 was a must read leading up to the election.

[KharmaTrain]

4. Nate Knows His Shit...

His political anaylsis is just as spot on as his baseball forecasting. He all but nailed last year's election and his observations were some of the best during the election.

I am in total agreement with Nate on this...people are expecting a lot to happen overnight. It took nearly 30 years for this mess to happen, it's not going to vanish overnight and it's going to take a lot of "stimulus" packages before it's all said and done.

Bottom line is I feel a lot better knowing it's a President Obama at the helm in these times than the alternatives.

[pansypoo53219]

3. the republikkkans NEED obama to 'fail'(with republikkan help)

otherwise 2010 WILL be bad for them. 60 + democratic senators for sure and it will be FDR all over again. they will only have jabba the rush on their side. and teevee gnews.

[PA Democrat]

5. Geithner ran the New York Fed. When I worked for one of the biggest banks in the country

bankers did not consider people from the Federal Reserve their buddies. There was always a constant tension between the two, with banks fighting regulation and the Fed trying to enforce regulations and enact tighter controls to prevent messes like the one we are in now. Unless something has drastically changed, I doubt that the big guys on Wall Street consider Geithner their "tool".

A big factor in econometric models is peoples' confidence in the financial system and the economy. Unfortunately, there is no sure formula to fix people's confidence in our future, but the constant whining from the Republicans who rewrite history and general principles of economics do not help.

People will start spending money again:

1. When they have it to spend
2. When they feel they are not in imminent danger of losing their jobs.

[Cha]

6. That's a damn good point ..and on so

many levels, too.

"Nobody, absolutely nobody, has more incentive to get this right than the Obama Administration."

And, it's ironic, too, 'cause if we get more repukes in 2010 things will only get worse.