Krugman blames the Obama people for tax bill, says "there wasn’t much alternative at this point"

[ProSense]

AIG

Preliminary thoughts on the tax bill:

1. It’s not the way you should make policy — it’s clumsy, and it will punish some innocent parties while letting the most guilty off scot-free

2. But — there wasn’t much alternative at this point. And for that I blame the Obama people.

I’ll leave to others the question of who knew or should have known that the bonus firestorm was coming; but it’s part of a pattern. At every stage, Geithner et al have made it clear that they still have faith in the people who created the financial crisis — that they believe that all we have is a liquidity crisis that can be undone with a bit of financial engineering, that “governments do a bad job of running banks” (as opposed, presumably, to the wonderful job the private bankers have done), that financial bailouts and guarantees should come with no strings attached.

This was bad analysis, bad policy, and terrible politics. This administration, elected on the promise of change, has already managed, in an astonishingly short time, to create the impression that it’s owned by the wheeler-dealers. And that leaves it with no ability to counter crude populism.

Here is what we know: Bush's role, potential fraud (more), and lies, lies, lies and more lies.

Also, the tax bill is Constitutional.

Obama: "We're going to do everything we can to get these bonuses back"



Edited to correct title.

[LaPera]

1. Obama should get rid of the republican corporate clown & shill, Geithner!

[BeyondGeography]

2. Team O does deserve a spanking for how this was handled

The President spoke about outrageous bonuses after Merrill, so he could have built on this to shame AIG before the fact, as the bonus payments were known about well before this past weekend. I know that's not the way he likes to govern, but the alternative was to make him look ineffective at best and an accomplice at worst.

[ErinBerin84]

3. If

the treasury was so worried about lawsuits, isn't the onus on them (or Obama) to have explained this? The lack of transparency is the thing that really sketches me out. Especially when there was reporting that the White House (Rahm/Axelrod vs Geithner) did clash over the executive pay issue, and Axelrod downplayed it. It would have been worth a public debate to see how the Republicans reacted/how it matched up with their previous positions on executive pay. I am also interested to know how the communication supposedly got so fucked up from federal reserve to treasury to Obama, if that's really how things went down. That being said, I wish that the "crude populism", as Krugman referred to it, by some people who are feigning outrage as well was being better called out by the MSM, and that the whole issue of this was being discussed by them in a more coherant way, but I know that's asking too much.

[ProSense]

5. It's as if people missed the extensive debate

that preceded the package being signed into law. The fumbling doesn't make sense. It's not that hard to track events that are on the record.

Several contentious provisions were tweaked in the waning hours of Thursday, reflecting changes from the leaked summary we'd showed you. But the biggest news is a question that was unresolved until the very last minute: the fight to keeping the Senate stimulus' strong executive pay limits resulted in one victory.

Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) lost their push to claw back bonuses paid to banks receiving government bailouts, but Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd's (D-CT) CEO pay limits did survive. It's not as stringent as the Wyden-Snowe limits, or Sen. Claire McCaskill's (D-MO) plan to cap bailed-out bank salaries at $400,000, but it's a win nonetheless.

more

[ErinBerin84]

6. true

[chill_wind]

4. You recruit guys like Summers and Geithner....

the outcomes are going to be somewhat predictable. Freakin shame. And now Obama will continue to dig his heels in to defend them at all costs.

[ProSense]

8. Wouldn't it be wild

if Obama succeeds despite the naysayers?

[chill_wind]

15. Pray that he does for everyone's welfare

because we're at critical mass and that's no joke.

[Uzybone]

7. The bitter Krugman is back

"This administration, elected on the promise of change, has already managed, in an astonishingly short time, to create the impression that it’s owned by the wheeler-dealers. And that leaves it with no ability to counter crude populism."


That quote smacks hard of bitterness. Krugman should let the primaries go.

[firedupdem]

9. He's definitely stuck there. n/t

[Frank Booth]

10. You know, Krugman's a smart guy.

But, not to trash the guy or anything, but I have a feeling he had a hard time in high school. A lot of people did, there's nothing wrong with that. But, I think he sees Obama, and he's intimated. Obama's a real smart guy -- maybe even as smart as Krugman himself. And Obama's tall and good looking, and the chicks probably dug him back in high school.

So, I have a feeling it kind of makes Krugman feel a bit resentful and inadequate. Maybe even angry. I can kind of empathize with Krugman. It's hard to be the smart kid that no one appreciates. It's a tough thing to live down.

But, maybe it's just time for him to give it up?

[johan helge]

11. This is a parody of the way some people "defend" Obama

- right?

I think these people should relax. Alwyays "defending" Obama is not the kind of loyalty Obama (or anyone else) needs. And "defending" Obama by talking about the psychology of Krugman or others instead of talking about the topic, is worthless (and similar to the way Bush was often "defended").

[Frank Booth]

12. Perhaps. Some (though not most) people on this site will

defend Obama no matter what.

On the other hand, almost nobody here dares question Saint Krugman.

Who knows, maybe they're both fucked? Maybe both are well intentioned but (despite how they present themselves) don't quite understand everything?

[johan helge]

17. A lot of people

question Saint Krugman, especially his motives! No one understands everything, but Krugman deserves more attention than perhaps everyone, I think. (My 5 year old son stops me from writing more! )

[GrizzlyMan]

13. Krugman falls under "those who can't do, teach."

Smart guy. But he's never run a damn thing other than an economics dept. at an Ivy League school. Very different from being "in the shit" as it were.

[amborin]

14. now there's an ad hominum attack

here's one back: you must be projecting your own experiences on to Krugman

[Frank Booth]

16. ok.

:toast:

[Dreamer Tatum]

18. Oh, bullshit

You don't understand the issues, so you attack people who do because they disagree with your guy. Your criticism is detailed enough to be fresh in your mind. Projecting isn't just for movies.

Krugman is a Nobel economist. If Obama were McCain, and the SAME idea came down the pike, with Krugman's SAME critique, you'd go out and get a Krugman tattoo and eat Krugmanoo's for breakfast.

[ProSense]

19. "Krugman is a Nobel economist. "

But he isn't the only economist. Remember he defended a gas tax holiday during the primary. On edit: He also declared the Obama administration a failure a two or three weeks ago.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.