> What is the outcome of "working" vs. "not-working"?
Sorry for using shorthand: I believe that it can't work without addressing the issues raised in Michael's post. Since those issues haven't been addressed, taking that route would be a giant leap into the unknown (for the record: I think giant leaps into the unknown are bad). Since the reason stated by proponents is that it's a giant leap into the *known*, I think you have to resolve the two first.
Maybe it would work, I don't know. It seems to be a daunting task. But I know that unless you know how to get around the problems identified, it's just hand-waving. And I suspect that this is widely known at Treasury, but it's too technical to bring up on ABC News.
It's not too technical to bring up here, however; or is it?
/jordan