Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Tim Duy will be wrong, but is correct
by Ken Houghton
Dear Tim,
This is the Fed that chose triple-witching day (August 17th) to give the bank a "Get Out of Risk Management free" pass. This is an Administration that talks about stock market gains and tax cuts, not jobs, growth, or inflation.
And this is a Lame Duck Administration: what comes next is at best the All-Too-Loyal Opposition, at worst (one hopes) a transition from the Democratic Republic of my ancestors, relatives, and, one hopes, descendants.
I'm not saying that 2:45pm tomorrow is going to feel as if it undermines 376 years of family history; that would be hyperbolic. But an Administration that plays style over substance, appearance over reality, and "us[es] 1984 as an operations manual" (h/t DeLong).
I haven't been so certain there would be a Fed rate cut since the first month Wayne Angell came to Bear. I hope I'm wrong, but, as Mark Thoma notes, that's not the way to bet.
Tim Duy nails the reality, but missed the overriding rule of the Failed Paulson Treasury:
In my mind, the argument for a rate cut hinges on one crucial assumption – that the market is expecting a rate cut, and the Fed will not want to disappoint.
Dear Tim,
This is the Fed that chose triple-witching day (August 17th) to give the bank a "Get Out of Risk Management free" pass. This is an Administration that talks about stock market gains and tax cuts, not jobs, growth, or inflation.
And this is a Lame Duck Administration: what comes next is at best the All-Too-Loyal Opposition, at worst (one hopes) a transition from the Democratic Republic of my ancestors, relatives, and, one hopes, descendants.
I'm not saying that 2:45pm tomorrow is going to feel as if it undermines 376 years of family history; that would be hyperbolic. But an Administration that plays style over substance, appearance over reality, and "us[es] 1984 as an operations manual" (h/t DeLong).
I haven't been so certain there would be a Fed rate cut since the first month Wayne Angell came to Bear. I hope I'm wrong, but, as Mark Thoma notes, that's not the way to bet.
Labels: Brad DeLong, Economics, Economists View, monetary policy, Politics
