[lbo-talk] Discussing the Crisis/Bailout

[John Thornton]

Jordan Hayes wrote:
>> Can you point me to a "very good" argument against the bailout?
>
> I've been following Paul Krugman, and while I don't agree with 
> everything he says, he's made some good points along the way.  It's a 
> blog format, so it's easier to keep current and get his points 
> reinforced than it probably is to sit down and read the whole thing 
> from, oh, Sept 1 ... but it boils down to basically it's a bad deal 
> and it probably won't work.  He stops short of saying that it's worse 
> than doing nothing, but it's pretty clear that he'd be doing it 
> differently. He gives lots of supporting evidence, and sometimes gets 
> a little geeky with the graphs.
>
> http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/
>
> I have it in my RSS reader, so it's an easy skim if he's talking about 
> other things, but on the whole I'm glad to be reading it than not.
>
> /jordan 

I've been reading Krugman on and off for years and I do agree with him a 
good deal of the time. I don't follow his blog however.

I doubt anyone on this list doesn't have different ideas about how a 
bailout could be done but a different and better option wasn't on the table.
I didn't know PK thinks the likelihood of this helping was low but as 
you say he stops short of saying doing nothing is a better option.

That's what I'm actually looking for, a Dmytri supporting argument that 
not passing this bailout package (doing nothing) would be the better 
option and why.
Since all Dymtri has done do is bloviate about why supporting the 
bailout is "bad" and something about sustenance/nutrition without 
actually telling anyone what he believes will happen without this 
bailout and why that is the better option.
If Dymtri believes that a much better crafted option was realistically 
available then he obviously knows little about what's happening in the US.

John Thornton