NYT: Tom Friedman's "Obama's Big, Bold Bet" (economy)

[MarjorieG]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/05/opinion/05friedman.html?_r=1

Obama’s Big, Bold Bet

Tom Friedman, not my usual favorite, talks of Obama needing to try different plans on the economy, like Roosevelt. If something doesn’t work, try something else, with quotes on different rationale.

I say first work with what we have, with those knowing how to finesse, before dismissing with ‘evil’ motives. (ie Geithner and Summers)


“From the left, Mr. Obama is being ripped for having too much of a market-based approach and not just bowing to the inevitability of nationalizing insolvent banks. From the right, he is being ripped for too much government intervention and not letting market forces play out.

My own sense is this: The Obama package represents the sum total of what was minimally necessary to prevent systemic breakdown, what was politically possible with a Congress that was in no mood to shell out another dime to bail out Wall Street, and what was operationally preferable — at this time — which was a strategy that did not require nationalizing Citigroup & Friends.

As Obama officials put it to me: If you’re certain that you have to do some radical surgery — nationalize the banks — do it sooner rather than later. But if you think you might have an option, and if you think that nationalization brings with it other huge problems — like who is going to run these banks and who will want to work in them if the government takes over — and if you think that Congress isn’t going to give you another cent, then you try other things first.


There is more about why and what’s next.

[Median Democrat]

1. I Thought It Was A Good, Fair Opinion

Obama is not an idealogue. I think he is extremely pragmatic, yet bold. I think many DUers would prefer an idealogue who reaches for an unattainable liberal ideal, but fails, over a pragmatic President who does push left of center, and actually achieves left of center results. So far, Obama has been very effective.

[SanchoPanza]

2. Too Much of a Market-Based Approach?

That's pretty funny. A massive subsidy to hedge funds so they can artificially inflate properly set the price of worthless undervalued assets is "market-based".

[GeorgeGist]

3. You can always find an excuse ...

to maintain Status Quo; even when it's brain is dead.