Matt Yglesias

21 Responses to “Some Recommended Reading”

1. Don Williams Says:
   February 13th, 2009 at 10:29 am

   The major problems is that the Progressives — or even just those with some feeling of loyalty to the People of this country — have NO way of disseminating information to reveal the deceit, lies, and self-serving malignancy of our oligarchs. The Mainstream News Media is a pack of contemptible whores –devoted more to coverups than to providing information.

   Yes, we have blogs but only the faithful read them. Plus, The Right wing funds it own blogs — and they refuse to admit any contrary evidence or arguments. They are one-way propaganda megaphones — like Adolf Hitler’s speechs.

   We badly need some kind of public forum in this country that is run with the discipline of a court — where parties can make the arguments but a judge enforces order and ensures that parties stick to what is relevent. WHere deceit can be cross-examined and exposed.

   After pissing away $2 Trillion in Iraq, we’re pissing away another $10 TRILLION to pay Wall Street’s gambling debts. And I bet you 99 percent of our news consumers can not tell you why.

2. strasmangelo jones Says:
   February 13th, 2009 at 10:53 am

   Two questions:

   1. In the first Douthat link, Douthat includes this sentence:

   “Yes, maybe when the Obama Administration fails to deliver the eschaton, there will be renewed interest on the American center-left in a libertarian-infused ‘liberalism that works.’”

   Who wants Obama to “deliver the eschaton”? Don’t most of us, or at least most of us who haven’t bought all the Left Behind novels, want to prevent the eschaton?

   2. Why, for the love of fuck, are you still linking to Ross Douthat? You don’t work at the Atlantic anymore; you aren’t getting paid to promote this idiot.

3. Econobuzz Says:
   February 13th, 2009 at 10:55 am

   Simon Johnson: “… whatever you can say about the IMF and the World Bank, … they usually had the power to dictate solutions. And that very often meant overruling political elites who either would not face problems or had vested interests in not facing them.

   Current bank management cannot be intimately involved in Geithner’s “stress test,” its findings, or in the determination of what the next steps are for the bank.

4. Ed Smithe Says:
   February 13th, 2009 at 11:41 am

   On the popularity of the stimulus, that’s going to change over the next few months when the economy doesn’t get any better. Moreover, you’ve got a shit storm developing in Europe that’s going to drag things down that much more.

   If the administration really wanted to change the dynamic on all of this, they would get rid of the mark to market accounting that’s been a key cause of this mess. As soon as that’s gone, you’ll probably begin to see traction in a very short period of time.

   The unfortunate thing is, that given this idiotic quest for “transparency,” this is probably going to be the very last thing that they do…which means continued tough times ahead.

   Oh, and as for this stupid idea of nationalism of banks…I think the President said it best:

   “Sweden, on the other hand, had a problem like this. They took over the banks, nationalized them, got rid of the bad assets, resold the banks and, a couple years later, they were going again. So you’d think looking at it, Sweden looks like a good model. Here’s the problem; Sweden had like five banks. [LAUGHS] We’ve got thousands of banks. You know, the scale of the U.S. economy and the capital markets are so vast and the problems in terms of managing and overseeing anything of that scale, I think, would — our assessment was that it wouldn’t make sense. And we also have different traditions in this country.

   Obviously, Sweden has a different set of cultures in terms of how the government relates to markets and America’s different. And we want to retain a strong sense of that private capital fulfilling the core — core investment needs of this country.”

   I think the administration made a huge mistake on this package…and I hate to say it, but I largely agree with that fool “the architect.” It’s difficult to say how that will translate for Republicans in 2010 or even 2012…but it’s a gift horse that the dems have handed to them.

5. Ed Smithe Says:
   February 13th, 2009 at 12:19 pm

   DTM,

   I think that in situations like this, people are not going to turn around and say…’well, the President gave it his best try.’ He’s going to be hurt in terms of the polls and it will be an issue that the Republicans (as stupid as they are) can gain some traction on. After all, nearly everyone of them have said that this won’t work. In 3 months time, they’re going to be repeating that to a public that will have realized that this was a bad idea.

   Moreover, when the economy doesn’t get any better, how will the administration and the Congress react? Are they going to sit there and let all of this just bleed them dry? Probably not. But trying to fix things with another huge capital infusion a third time around isn’t going to be looked at positively…especially when that in essence admits that your previous effort wasn’t well thought out.

   Which brings me back to mark to market. I think that the phony “transparency” hysterics are going to be run over. Mark to market doesn’t cost anything and it has immediate benefit. Watch…They’re going to get rid of it because they’ll be desperate at that point.

   Which brings me to my final point. Why are we wasting time and money when we could have an immediate positive fix for the economy? The answer is politics…So much for change that we can believe in.

6. Ed Smithe Says:
   February 13th, 2009 at 12:41 pm

   DTM,

   A good observation, but I think we live in different times. The average Joe in the 1930s didn’t have a basic understanding of financial markets, a 401k, and a cornicopia of pundits on the television and the internet telling him that the administration blew this one. Most importantly the average Joe in 1930 didn’t think that the federal government was completely incompetent…Although the folks that visit these forums seem to believe that this basic conservative impulse has disappeared thanks to ills of the previous administration.

   I think this will stick…and should the economy get better (certainly a possibility) that will stick positively to the administration. However, should the latter not happen…We’ll see how quickly they figure out how to manage that problem (mark to market).

7. rea Says:
   February 13th, 2009 at 12:54 pm

   Who wants Obama to “deliver the eschaton”?

   Maybe he means, “Fund Atrios’ website”?

8. Santa Says:
   February 13th, 2009 at 1:40 pm

   I’d also like to recommend a book – this just released from the Progressive Ideas Network (an impressive network of progressive think-tanks). The book is called Thinking Big and is a collection of brand new essays from leaders in the progressive movement. It’s like a pocket guide to the new progressive agenda and I’ve been really enjoying comparing the suggestions in the book to the changes that Obama is making (there is a lot of overlap!). Enjoy!

9. Mary Says:
   February 13th, 2009 at 2:56 pm

   Smithe;

   The mark-to-market accounting on the derivatives was triggered by Paulson’s letting Lehman fail. How do you like that?

   The question is, why did Paulson let Lehman fail when everyone knew it would trigger mark-to-market accounting under FAS 133?

   Sinister.

10. Ed Smithe Says:
    February 13th, 2009 at 5:14 pm

    Mary,

    I’m not saying that this is entirely a derivatives run problem. There are many reasons why this is happening, how one values these derivatives (or doesn’t because we can’t) is certainly an important variable. Frankly, I think that Fan and Fred are more to blame for this mess than anyone else. Providing the market for all of these terrible mortgages was not a particularly intelligent thing, no? But then again, what should we expect of Congressmen (Barney Frank) and crooks (Harold Raines)?

    As for Lehman…I don’t know how I feel about it. Given the enormously stupid risks that Lehman took over the years, it was probably necessary to send a message to every institution that no one with that kind of business model would be spared. On the other hand, there is a perfectly good argument to be advanced that much of the pain we’re going through now could have been avoided.

    Personally, I’d like the government to stay out of these types of things. But when the government creates some of these problems…and they’re the only entity out there that can provide a stop-gap…Then there’s certainly a role.

11. duBois Says:
    February 14th, 2009 at 9:27 am

    Providing the market for all of these terrible mortgages was not a particularly intelligent thing, no?

    Intelligent? No. But you seem to think that the 30 fold leveraging over and above the value of the mortgages was somehow more intelligent than the defective mortgages themselves. It’s an odd bird who thinks betting the ranch (and all current and future ranches) on a dubious value is a smart thing to do.

12. Richard Steven Hack Says:
    February 15th, 2009 at 6:06 am

    Josh Marshall: “The assumptions, the vested interests, the wealth, the political power are just too much to overcome.”

    Yeah, if you aren’t willing to do the thinking to overcome – or evade – them.

    In fifty years, none of the current problems – or the current players – are going to matter. Within fifty years, you’ll be dealing with the “di-morphic split” between humans and Transhumans.

    And Israel won’t exist, Marshall.

    Have a nice day.

13. Play Casino Games Says:
    February 27th, 2009 at 2:59 am

    Good posting.Do u want to see Play Casino Games ? u can visit my blog friend .ow yeah your blog has already bookmarked by me

14. viagra Says:
    March 11th, 2009 at 4:41 am

    If you have to do it, you might as well do it right

15. zyban Says:
    March 12th, 2009 at 11:29 pm

    I want to say – thank you for this!

16. tramadol Says:
    March 22nd, 2009 at 6:16 am

    tramadol
    I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!

17. buy viagra online Says:
    March 22nd, 2009 at 10:29 am

    buy viagra online
    I want to say – thank you for this!

18. brand viagra Says:
    April 2nd, 2009 at 5:20 am

    If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
    buy cheap viagra

19. viagra brand Says:
    April 3rd, 2009 at 4:12 am

    Great site. Good info
    cheap brand pfizer viagra

20. cheap viagra Says:
    April 9th, 2009 at 6:04 am

    Thanks for the review! viagra

21. Online Casino Says:
    April 20th, 2009 at 4:46 am

    A fantastic read….very literate and informative. Many thanks….where is your RSS button ?