The question as to why Obama was so loyal for so long to the Geitner/Summers/Rubin troika needs to be answered. And who knows, they may still be calling the shots...I'd be much happier and would believe in a real change of heart on Obama's part if one or both of them 'moved on' and were replaced by some real reforms like Joe Stiglitz or Simon Johnson, both former head World Bank economists.
Did the Rubin clique adopt the young Obama several years ago when he was still running for Senate but showing signs of greatness, show him a good time in New York, and promise him the moon? It could be something as simple as that.
Rubin showed up in the post election picture of Obama's economic advisors last November. Volcker was also there but was basically ignored for much of the last year, in deference to Geithner and Summers and, one assumes, Rubin. (I noticed and criticized this a year ago here and here and here.)
Why did Obama need the fear of electoral defeat to get him to turn to the reformers? That hardly speaks of someone whose heart is basically set on reforming the system. It speaks of an Establishment, status quo, 'return to the 90s' President, which is not what I voted for.
I think the real Obama has yet to be assayed and described in this regard.
No comments:
Post a Comment