sageofthpalouse (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} sageofthpalouse) wrote,@ 2009-01-04 12:06:00 |
|
Here is one page of guidance, dated January 2, 2009, from the US Treasury on how the “targeted investment” portion of the bank bailout money is to be applied. http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/h
Its concise statements cover:
Considerations (for decision) about which banks get the money -- factors, subjectivity, judgment, and influence;
Consideration (as in a contract) in the form of warrants or other compensation, limitation on bank executive salaries, etc – as terms and conditions of “participation;”
Justification or strategic goals – restoration of financial stability and restoration of confidence.
Absent in this brief and in the fundamental Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA) – an exit strategy.
It looks like a financing analogy to our military Iraq adventure. Strategic mumbo-jumbo, tactical focus, reactive, imaginary foes, lack of planning for unintended consequences, prone to bias favoritism and corruption, naïve assumption of infinite resources and good will, open-ended.
The chief difference between EESA and Iraq War seems to be, many other governments are doing similar things. March to socialism ... maybe or maybe not. I am merely arguing pragmatically it is a recipe for a fiasco.
To boil this down: where are the strategic goals, where are the objective benchmarks for achieving them, and where is the exit strategy?
I hope for public dialog in the congress and executive branches regarding sunsetting these extraordinary interventions, as a way to shape the interventions and make them more effective.
Its concise statements cover:
Considerations (for decision) about which banks get the money -- factors, subjectivity, judgment, and influence;
Consideration (as in a contract) in the form of warrants or other compensation, limitation on bank executive salaries, etc – as terms and conditions of “participation;”
Justification or strategic goals – restoration of financial stability and restoration of confidence.
Absent in this brief and in the fundamental Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA) – an exit strategy.
It looks like a financing analogy to our military Iraq adventure. Strategic mumbo-jumbo, tactical focus, reactive, imaginary foes, lack of planning for unintended consequences, prone to bias favoritism and corruption, naïve assumption of infinite resources and good will, open-ended.
The chief difference between EESA and Iraq War seems to be, many other governments are doing similar things. March to socialism ... maybe or maybe not. I am merely arguing pragmatically it is a recipe for a fiasco.
To boil this down: where are the strategic goals, where are the objective benchmarks for achieving them, and where is the exit strategy?
I hope for public dialog in the congress and executive branches regarding sunsetting these extraordinary interventions, as a way to shape the interventions and make them more effective.
