Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Notes on Lehman Bankruptcy
Very interesting post on a blog that I never heard of before. This is the kind of information difficult to know unless one is an insider or one who researches the minute details of regulations and laws.
Monday, December 27, 2010
Krugman on Scrooge
Paul Krugman had a column shortly before Christmas in which he compared Scrooge to many Republicans. He notes that Charles Dickens' Christmas classic is actually a left-wing tract. However, I wonder if he endorses all of Dickens' work. According to the excellent book, HOW THE DISMAL SCIENCE GOT ITS NAME, Dickens wrote BLEAK HOUSE as an antidote to UNCLE TOM'S CABIN, with the purpose of showing that the suffering of white factory workers was more severe than the suffering of black slaves. Like Thomas Carlyle, who coined the term "dismal science" in an article entitled, "On the Negro Question," Dickens believed that whites were superior to blacks and that enslavement of blacks apparently was fine. I recognize that endorsing one opinion of a particular writer doesn't imply that one endorses all the opinions, but since Krugman is so quick to tarnish with a broad brush, maybe it is justified in this case.
Monday, December 6, 2010
Current Policy as Reason for Concern
Christina Romer's column in Sunday's New York Times offers her judgment on the affect that uncertainty is having on the economic recovery. She discusses several concerns that are in the popular press and on shows like SquawkBox. These concerns are the fate of the Bush tax cuts, and environmental regulation. (I think she leaves out some though). She argues the biggest concern is uncertainty over the health of the economy. Her solution for resolving this uncertainty is a reaffirmation from the president, Congress, and the Fed that they will do whatever is necessary to create jobs. Fiscal and monetary policy must be expansionary, but a plan for tackling the long-term budget problems should be developed also.
It appears she is calling for additional fiscal stimulus. She is sticking with a Keynesian approach for the current state of the economy. But, she is ignoring the housing market. The wealth of most households is impacted more by changes in the value of their homes than in their portfolios. Further, housing is part of the real economy. The inventory of houses still exists, defaults and foreclosures continue to occur, and many others are still under water. The housing market is no where close to a new equilibrium as yet. I believe both Romer and those still in the Obama Administration are focusing on the wrong solutions because they misinterpret the problem.
Ben Bernanke was on 60 Minutes last night. He defended Fed policy, including the current round of quantitative easing. He noted that the Fed can change interest rates on very short notice so that they can reverse their policy when the time is right. When asked how confident he was that the Fed could achieve the necessary reversal at the right time, he replied, "100 percent." I hope and trust that this comment was for the sake of public confidence. If he literally is that confident in the Fed's ability to turn quantitative easing around and that they can know when the proper time to do so, then I am very nervous. Economists have no reason for such hubris. When we think that we can control the economy or fine tune the economy, or act like engineers, it is time to panic.
It appears she is calling for additional fiscal stimulus. She is sticking with a Keynesian approach for the current state of the economy. But, she is ignoring the housing market. The wealth of most households is impacted more by changes in the value of their homes than in their portfolios. Further, housing is part of the real economy. The inventory of houses still exists, defaults and foreclosures continue to occur, and many others are still under water. The housing market is no where close to a new equilibrium as yet. I believe both Romer and those still in the Obama Administration are focusing on the wrong solutions because they misinterpret the problem.
Ben Bernanke was on 60 Minutes last night. He defended Fed policy, including the current round of quantitative easing. He noted that the Fed can change interest rates on very short notice so that they can reverse their policy when the time is right. When asked how confident he was that the Fed could achieve the necessary reversal at the right time, he replied, "100 percent." I hope and trust that this comment was for the sake of public confidence. If he literally is that confident in the Fed's ability to turn quantitative easing around and that they can know when the proper time to do so, then I am very nervous. Economists have no reason for such hubris. When we think that we can control the economy or fine tune the economy, or act like engineers, it is time to panic.
Labels:
economic policy,
Fed,
fiscal policy,
housing market
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)