This is just chatter, Gabby. What could have been done differently would have been to appoint people who did not have the best interest of Wall Street (and thus, in their interest to stack the deck against Main Street) at heart. Obama had Volcker at his disposal, and then buried him in favor of the guy who continued the same problematic Fed policies that Greenie did. The guy who said "the housing crisis would be contained" in 2006. The guy who was labeled "Helicopter Ben" after a speech that he specifically mentioned dropping dollars from a helicopter if need be to stave off deflationary threats. I could go on and on. Another thing I can lay at the foot of Obama - why have there been no real prosecutions for any of the crimes that caused the crisis? Where is Holder? What the fuck has he been doing? If I were Obama, I'd have put my boot in Holder's ass over this. Instead - nothing. No crimes get punished, just continued. As for Bush, well he was as corrupt as anyone. And Cheney? Don't get me started. But Bush isn't up for re-election. We can't punish Bush by not electing him again. Obama will have to be the one where the buck stops now - he will be judged for this economy - regardless of what he did (or did not do) to cause it.
Unemployment falling because people dropped off being counted by the BLS does not mark an improvement. I have schooled you before on the U-3 and U-6 methodology that the BLS uses. Must I do it again, or will you yield that saying "unemployment has been improving" is not really accurate? There are >some< stats that might be considered to be showing improvement, but they are very sketchy. Come on, I've got a lot of time here today and I'm raring to scrap.
qe and the deficit is the life-support keeping this economy above ground. QE2 recently ended, hence the downturn across the board. Until the FED injects another round, the slowdown will accelerate and we could see more job losses. It's not a coincidence the recent slowdown just happened to occur within weeks of the FED withdrawing stimulus and asset purchases. The US economy is done. We are in serious trouble. Equilibrium GDP is at least 13% below where we stand right now, with no deficit or QE. And that doesn't include ripple effects. Anyway .
It is impossible to say for sure, but if we had not bailed out half the world in 2008-9 and just let the painful recession take it's course, we would have probably been better off now. Instead, we have kicked the can down the road and made the day of reckoning so scary that no one wants to face it anymore. The US Economy is structurally deficient. Wall Street cannot save it, nor will it even try. The day is coming when more QE won't do anything except cause massive inflation - beyond anything any of us have ever seen.
You're avoiding the point. I already commented on his personnel selections. We are in agreement there. What remains to be determined is what different policies could have had better results. Even Volcker commented that he didn't remember any time that things had gone doen so fast, not even during the Great Depression. He is also a proponent of a stronger regulatory environment. And in March 2010, Volcker said it was too soon to withdraw the stimulus measures and interest-rate cuts used to fight the worst slump since the Great Depression. Has he opposed any of Obama's policies since? So tell me, what would Volcker have done differently? http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/09/22/volcker-obama-isnt-antibusiness/
I'm not avoiding the point. I'm also, in regards to Volcker, not going after Obama. Where Obama was (is) mistaken is allowing Bernanke to continue his direction - a direction Volcker has gone on record many times to oppose. There is no way Volcker would have allowed ZIRP or any of the QE. Not someone who worked so hard to get the inflation genie back into the bottle decades ago. The money hasn't gone anywhere it has been needed. Banks aren't lending - don't fool yourself. They're speculating. Driving up asset prices into another big bubble like before, because they can. Volcker wanted to end the investment/speculative desks at the big banks. Benny didn't, and neither did Obama.
To be honest, America procrastinated D-Day since Regan. You're right on, the economy is structurally deficient. But that deficiency has been around since the 80's, and was covered up by increased government borrowing. I think if 08 crashed, we may have recovered by now, in the sense the economy would be growing. But as far as GDP, I can't agree. I think US GDP is at least 18-20% below where we are right now. I don't think Paulson or Bernacke were kidding about an economic Apocalypse. Offshoring and bubble economics has really destroyed a huge chunk of this countrys savings and productive capacity. It's the deficit that's offset the hole and carried the economy, all these years. Exactly the same story playing out in Europe, too.