“I think they know how big it is, but they don’t want to say how big it is. It’s so big they can’t acknowledge it,” said John H. Makin, an economist at the American Enterprise Institute, referring to administration officials. “The lesson from Japan in the 1990s was that they should have stepped up and nationalized the banks.”
- From today’s NYT.
Freddie deBoer calls bullshit on a few of them.
The answer may surprise you.
How Karl Marx was right and Ben Bernanke is wrong.
Is offering new tax breaks to homebuyers and carbuyers really a sound way to pull us out of our current recession? Some Senators seem to think so. Not everyone else is sold, however:
Adam Posen, deputy director of the Peterson Institute of International Economics, said that homebuyers would have trouble getting access to mortgages because of the continued tightness in the credit markets and that the car buyer incentive fell short by not focusing on fuel-efficient vehicles, and that the money might be better directed at mass transit.
“They are also structurally unsound,” Mr. Posen said of the two provisions, “reinforcing the attempts of industries that are too large – housing construction, automobile production – to survive based on government distortions.” He called them both “terrible, pandering ideas.”
More commentary here.
Idea #1: Don’t try something like this.
Always listen to the man on television:
“Peter writes: ‘Should I be worried about Bear Stearns in terms of liquidity and get my money out of there?’ No! No! No! Bear Stearns is fine! Do not take your money out. … Bear Stearns is not in trouble. I mean, if anything they’re more likely to be taken over. Don’t move your money from Bear! That’s just being silly! Don’t be silly!” —Jim Cramer, responding to a viewer’s e-mail on CNBC’s Mad Money, March 11, 2008
Governor Paterson is planning to hit me where it hurts:
Gov. David A. Paterson will propose a $4 billion package of taxes and fees on a range of items, from sugary soft drinks made by Coca-Cola and Pepsi to luxury items like furs and boats, when he unveils his plan to close a deficit that has ballooned to $15 billion, people with knowledge of the plan said on Sunday.
When you lay down with rattlesnakes you’re bound to get bit.
Making the most of my unemployment, I took a bike ride out to the half-destroyed Shea Stadium and nearly finished Citi Field earlier today. Riding up 126th St. it’s impossible not to notice the odd juxtaposition of the sparkling, upscale entertainment complex that is Citi Field on one side of the street and the row of sundry auto repair shops on the other. I was amazed that these businesses were still there, and can’t imagine they will remain there much longer.
A quick search of the internet indicates that they won’t. The city has already bought up over 60% of businesses in the few blocks adjacent to Citi Field and the city council has voted to permit the use of eminent domain to seize property from any remaining holdouts. This is all part of a $3 billion development plan that is supposed to revitalize the area, although these promises of revitalization from politicians smack of the same hooey that the city used to try to shove the Atlantic Yards down our throats here in Brooklyn. They also talk about the new Yankee Stadium being the centerpiece of a plan to revitalize the South Bronx. Don’t hold your breath on that one.
While my observations are admittedly casual and unscientific, it seems that any type of sports or entertainment complex serves as a poor centerpiece for an economic revitalization project. The most reliable foundation of any economic revitalization is the availability of good-paying jobs, and these types of projects don’t provide that to the surrounding community. People will come to Citi Field, yes. They will drop a lot of money there and probably in whatever chichi bars, restaurants and shops spring up in the area immediately surrounding the stadium, but once you get beyond that tiny enclave the impact of this influx of cash will be negligible.
