John, Paul Singer’s contribution provides a welcome respite from the strawman arguments on both sides. The Democrats contend that Republicans want free markets with no regulation, the Republicans claim Democrats want to stifle markets altogether. Democrats led by the president point to “deregulation” as the source of our current problems, when the only real deregulation in the 1990s was in commercial banking. (The real failure was in failure to devise new regulations for derivatives, an action which many supposed experts resisted vigorously.)
We’ve had plenty of regulation, but it has been woefully inadequate and inept. The SEC allowed Bernie Madoff to operate under its nose and Tim Geithner should plead guilty to fiddling while the economy burned. None of that is to say that regulation isn’t needed, only that it is not easy to get it right.
We have seen some very troubling moves in the wake of the crisis, most specifically the acquisition of tremendous authority in the Fed, which is shedding its image as an independent entity and losing its focus as watchdog of the nation’s money supply. There is good reason to place these powers elsewhere.
So the problem is not just a technical one; it is one of confidence and trust. Just as private businesses have lost the respect and confidence of the public so too have public institutions lost their luster. Conservatives and the public at large have every right to be wary of technocrats bearing regulatory gifts.
But conservatives have every reason to engage in the debate and help devise, to the extent they are able, a sane and workable system. The alternative is a highly personalized, ad hoc system of intrusion by Geithner, Obama and Bernanke. One is reminded of the current state of Constitutional law, which boils down to “What does Justice Kennedy think?” Now we are at the whim of three individuals’ judgment as to the viability of firms and the rules under which they are to be governed. Far better to return to the rule of law — objective ground rules that don’t change daily and that aren’t dependent upon the personalities of those who inhabit government posts.
Huh? There they go again – words, just words – meaning nothing, but taking up time and air space – verbal pollution, I should say.
Another howler from Robert “The Family Guy” Gibbs on Jake’s blog:
At his daily briefing today, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the stock market “can be a lagging economic indicator.”
The economy itself can be kind of a lagging economic indicator.
Ms. Rubin,
Your postings since the inauguration have gained an extra level of energy and sarcasm. I enjoy them very much. Yours and Glenn Reynolds are my daily must reads. Congrats.
RK
High-larious! I might have to actually tune into a White House briefing on CSPAN one these days to enjoy the comedy gold.
And big “Never mind!” to Robert Gibbs for ignoring the main import of Warren Buffet’s recent remarks that were far more directed to the Obama administration than Republicans:
“And you can’t expect people to unite behind you if you’re trying to jam a whole bunch of things down their throat. So I would–I would absolutely say for the–for the interim, till we get this one solved, I would not be pushing a lot of things that are–you know are contentious, and I also–I also would do no finger-pointing whatsoever. ”
http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2009/03/09/obama-buffetted.aspx
“My friend Warren Buffet” — that’s precious. Yep, ole Rob n’ Warren have been making billions together for years.
GIBBS: “. . . working together would include sharing ideas on — on both sides of the aisle about what has to be done. There’s, you know, co-equal branches of government.”
Um . . . er . . .Wait a damn minute! Did Mr. Gibbs just argue that the the Republican and Demoratic Parties in Congress are co-equal branches of government? That would make, let’s see, four branches.
Help me here. . . . Someone! Anyone!
I’m probably just a yokel, but it seems to me a huge waste of money for a guy to be trotted out every day to answer questions from the same group of reporters (using part of their work day) toward . . . what end exactly? I mean, when something important happens, for sure do it. Once a month anyway, no problem. Once a week? Maybe. But every single day? What does this accomplish other than giving internet blogs stuff to write about?
my friend, Warren Buffett
Wonder if he knows my wife, Morgan Fairchild .. yeah .. that’s the ticket
jdp: Truer words were seldom spoken. I think this waste of time is meant to provide what the msm call “news.”
Well, of course they went after Rush. But so many of their supporters are doing the same type of thing. Olbermann, Sullivan, Klein, Dionne, Gail Collins – rather than discuss what’s happening right now, they repeatedly do nothing but say “Wow! Republicans sure are awful!” Bread and circuses. Nothing but bread and circuses.
After watching Cramer’s sniveling to Jon Stewart, I think Democrats have their own Rush Limbaugh.