For quite some time I have been giving Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner passes, every bit as much as I did not give passes to Alan Greenspan. I believe that Team Obama—Larry Summers, Christina Romer, Ben Bernanke, Tim Geithner—see the error of their past ways, AND are savvy enough to guide us, in concert with others, however painfully into the next era of regulated finance.
I am not yet ready to declare capitalism dead. Still, I am very glad to see the gleeful "free market screech-monkey" chatter quieted.
But I just watch this stuff. I'm no expert. I glean advice and seek wisdom from post-Keynesian and other economists, from financial historians, and from those who dabble in complex system theory. I am first to recognize that what I hope to be true will likely not be—In this case trusting my (and your) fate to Team Obama.
If Paul Krugman is right, then I'm wrong to trust in Team Obama. If Jamie Galbraith is right, then I will be most certainly proven wrong if only for this reason:
I am not yet ready to declare capitalism dead. Still, I am very glad to see the gleeful "free market screech-monkey" chatter quieted.
But I just watch this stuff. I'm no expert. I glean advice and seek wisdom from post-Keynesian and other economists, from financial historians, and from those who dabble in complex system theory. I am first to recognize that what I hope to be true will likely not be—In this case trusting my (and your) fate to Team Obama.
If Paul Krugman is right, then I'm wrong to trust in Team Obama. If Jamie Galbraith is right, then I will be most certainly proven wrong if only for this reason:
…The most likely scenario, should the Geithner plan go through, is a combination of looting, fraud, and a renewed speculation in volatile commodity markets such as oil. Ultimately the losses fall on the public anyway, since deposits are largely insured. There is no chance that the banks will simply resume normal long-term lending. To whom would they lend? For what? Against what collateral? And if banks are recapitalized without changing their management, why should we expect them to change the behavior that caused the insolvency in the first place?End Note on Free Market Fundamentalism: While looking for a good source on Free Market Fundamentalism, I found this note (5/23/2007) I dropped into Yves Smith's naked capitalism:
[W]e Americans have gravitated to a faith-based society/culture. And a big part of that "faith" transfers directly from religious fundamentalism to free-market fundamentalism (Wiki link): Government sucks, markets do it best/right.
If that thesis is correct, then American politicians (whether pandering to the religious right or themselves "true believers" in free-market fundamentalism) tend to shy away from redistributive policies/practices.
What will shake the faith, I don't know. I've been a believer for quite some time that we've got a hell of a problem here in the US with theological Millennium fever. Free-market fundamentalism is symptomatic of the bigger problem.
See also Market Fundamentalism v. Sustainable Development and my Economic Fundamentalism: Too Many False Prophets.
{Update, 3/24/07}: Better Still, read Steve Keen's recent Neoclassical Economics: Mad, Bad, and Dangerous to Know
Great site, I am bookmarking it!Keep it up!
With the best regards!
Posted by: Business Affiliate Program | October 30, 2009 at 09:39 AM