After Summers, Who Next?

In the best financial news for America since Obama took office, Larry Summers is leaving at the end of the year and has probably been shown the door.  Could Obama finally be wising up and learning that having foxes in charge of the chicken coop was a mistake?  I certainly hope so, but the proof will be seen in whom Obama appoints to replace him.

Now that Larry Summers is leaving, the President has a decision to make. His choice of a replacement will send a signal about the next two years of economic policy. That signal can restore consumer confidence and reinvigorate the electorate, or it can lead to even more discouragement and despair. Today unnamed Administration officials floated the idea of naming a corporate executive to the position. That’s a trial balloon that should be punctured immediately.

The thirty-year-old law school graduate who asked the President yesterday, "Is the American dream over for me?" might interpret a choice like that as a ‘yes’ — unless he also happens to be a Fortune 500 CEO.

There’s some confusion around today’s news about Summers’ end-of-year departure. Was it a rushed announcement? Did Summers choose to leave, or did he get the axe? Bloomberg News observed that Summers’ departure leaves Tim Geithner as the sole remaining member of Obama’s original economic team, which adds up to something that looks very much like a shakeup…

…Here’s what we do know: For middle-class Americans in search of economic relief, Summers’ departure is hardly what you’d call a setback. According to all reports it was Summers who insisted on introducing a smaller stimulus package, back when Obama had the political clout to get whatever he needed to fix the economy. We’re seeing the results in today’s "jobless recovery." Ezra Klein quotes Stephanie Taylor of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, who said his departure is "a big victory for anyone who voted for change in 2008 only to see Summers work from the inside to water down Wall Street reform, block President Obama’s promise to protect Net Neutrality, and urge other pro-corporate positions."…

…The President could start by considering the economists who were right from the start — about deregulation, about the housing bubble, and about the need for stimulus. And for academic credentials, he could go straight to the top of that group by seeking out a Nobel laureate. Imagine the spike in consumer confidence we’d see if Paul Krugman or Joseph Stiglitz got the nod. (Hey, a guy can dream, can’t he?) Since the Republicans won’t work with the Administration anyway, there’s no downside… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Huffington Post>d

I agree that a corporate executive is a terrible idea.  I’m not saying that they are all criminals, but the only ones with enough experience in the workings of the economy as a whole are the Wall Street banksters, who along with health insurance executives and fossil fuel executives comprise the most criminal class of executives.  The post demands an economist.

That said, I agree that an economist who was right would be best, and prefer Stiglitz.

Obama needs to take one more step as well.  Dump Timmy too!!