Comments on: Timothy Geithner Has to Go, and Two Additional Mini Rants

By: Why Did AIG Give Bonuses With Government Money? | Weakonomi¢s

Why Did AIG Give Bonuses With Government Money? | Weakonomi¢s — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:00:49 +0000

[...] last week when I was all mad about Geithner and called for his ‘resignation?’ Well this week is the perfect example of why. But hold that thought for a second, first [...]

By: the weakonomist

the weakonomist — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:37:41 +0000

The Chicago School of Economics is a big supporter of the free market. They argue government intervention creates recessions. It’s a well thought out argument in the wake of the Great Depression, however this recession was simply caused by a lack of oversight. There was a failure of capitalism because the banking industry did not self-regulate.

I’m not saying government intervention is the way to go, but I lost a lot of respect for the chicago school after this recession.

It’s good to have well read readers, but Posner is not a macroeconomist, and as a judge and classically trained lawyer, he isn’t qualified to make these kinds of claims. This is nothing more than a cheerleader from a well respected team saying what he’s been trained to say.

By: The Personal Finance Playbook

The Personal Finance Playbook — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:00:34 +0000

I’d have to disagree with your assessment of Posner and who he is. Posner has been credited, across academic economics as one of the major contributors to New Institutionalism in econ. He’s applied economics to more practical settings than probably any person in history. An economist is an expert in the social science of economics. There aren’t many people who are more respected in economics than Judge Posner. He might be the greatest living legal mind in the US. I don’t know how much Posner you’ve read, but he’s at the epicenter of economics. I know there’s some sort of tension b/w the U of Chicago guys and everyone else, but I’ll take Becker, Posner, Levitt, etc. on my side in an economic argument. I don’t always agree (his humanitarian side as a judge is lacking) with the guy, but I don’t feel saying he’s not “an economist – he’s a freaking lawyer,” is the proper way to dismiss his ideas.

By: SJ

SJ — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:34:56 +0000

“I would bet money that global productivity was down 10% because the world was just watching the ticker all day.”
That was win.

Yea, I’ve been wondering about that w/ Citi, they haven’t included the “toxic assets” or what not right? So why in the world was it going up?

Ohwelz. The dead cat bounce is interesting…

By: Frank Curmudgeon

Frank Curmudgeon — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:36:04 +0000

Two mini-comments:

1) Geithner was a poor choice, if only because all Obama did was shrink the Paulson-Bernanke-Geithner trio into a duo. The convention for a while had been an economist at the Fed and a business leader (usually a banker, usually from Goldman) at Treasury. Even limiting the field to well known Democrats who used to run Goldman, you get two better candidates, Rubin and Corzine.

2) I’m not even sure this is the biggest zit on my back ever. (Thanks for choosing that particular analogy, BTW.) I’m just old enough to remember the ’73-’74 train wreck, and so far this isn’t as bad.