Wall Street didn't want Summers. The Left got played!
Ah, cynical intellectual dishonesty... where would we be without you?
I have been informed (repeatedly) that the nasty 'ole leftist left got snookered into opposing progressive giant Larry Summers, thereby promoting Wall Street's preferred choice, Janet Yellen.
What is wrong with that analysis?
Well, for starters, it assumes the listener is an utter idiot, in that it suggests that there is some logic to opposing whatever it is Wall Street wants. This is easy to deal with... Wall Street does not want Republicans to refuse to raise the debt ceiling. Believe it. Wall Street very, very much does not want that. So unless you want the USA to start defaulting on our debt you have somehow been snookered into wanting what Wall Street wants, blah, blah, blah.
And unfortunately there probably are some folks who actually analyze policy in terms of what Wall Street doesn't want. And they're silly. Consider them zinged.
Now, for the remaining folks...
Wall Street wants current Fed policy of maximum economic stimulus via monetary policy to continue. Their reasons for wanting that are self interested. They like the stock market going higher. Wall street thinks, for whatever reason, that Janet Yellen is a safer choice than Summers to maintain current Fed policy.
The liberal view on the matter is.... drumroll... current Fed policy of maximum economic stimulus via monetary policy should continue.
This is why Paul Krugman prefers Yellen. (Among the population of people who could possibly get the job.) She is a monetary policy "dove," meaning someone who is relatively more oriented toward reducing unemployment than reducing inflation and is likely to continue current Fed policy of maximum economic stimulus via monetary policy.
That doesn't mean Summers would not do so. But Summers has a history of mistakes when he gets close to power, making him a dumb choice for the least accountable and among the most powerful jobs on Earth.
Now then... why exactly should some liberal type feel played in favoring the candidacy of the candidate generally most expected to reliably maintain the liberal policy?
= new reply since forum marked as read
