Michael Wolraich's picture

    Open Thread on Obama's Speech

    By Michael Wolraich on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 8:09pm | Politics

    You know that you want it...

    My immediate take:

    1. Right tone. Making America "great again" has resonance (albeit slightly backhanded). Obama staked out the optimistic position in contrast with Republicans' pessimism--generally a good strategy.

    2. Clarity, at least relative to the cloudiness of his past 2.5 years. He pretty clearly delineated the ideological differences.

    3. Substance. I must have missed it. I tuned in ten minutes late, so maybe he squeezed it in before I turned on the TV. I'll read about it tomorrow, I'm sure. Little of it will pass, and I doubt that it will make much difference.

    4. Good name for a bill.

    PS I noticed that Fox was the only network that did not cut immediately to the terrorist threat. Who knew that Fox was so blasé about terrorism?

    Topics: 
    Politics

    Comments

    Seemed to me like a whole bunch of reasonable ideas with a lot of "pass this tomorrow," so I'd call it a win.  He did a good job not only making concrete proposals that will actually help smaller businesses and people with, or looking for jobs, but he made them all seem non-radical.

    And, that makes sense because, of course, there's nothing radical here at all.  So my problem with it is that I think if he got 100% of what he asked for, it won't be enough to solve the problem.  Though, if he really strong-arms the banks into refinancing mortgages at 4% for everyone (not just people in trouble) that could do a lot of good.


    by Michael Maiello on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 8:31pm

    Y'mean we don't already own the banks? what an oversight. Surely we paid for them thrice over...

    by jollyroger on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 11:56pm

    I agree with Yglesias:

    All that said, in practical terms I think Ben Bernanke’s speech is a bigger deal. If the Fed gets serious about jobs, we’ll get some jobs.

    But the election politics is what this is all really about, isn't it? And the election politics and presidential vs. congressional politics horse-race games are far more popular to talk about. Carry on, then. Just know you won't convince moi, for one, that showing passion or not, or showing willingness to "fight" or not, or spinning great narratives (hat tip, Drew Western) will get practical things of much import accomplished on the economy. Those things will instead help people win or lose elections.


    by artappraiser on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 9:19pm

    I dunno about Bernanke being the arbiter here.  QE 3 or 4 or the QE prequels are not going to do much for the real economy.  Bernanke is basically begging the government not to tilt toward austerity too soon.  While there's a lot he can do regarding bank solvency and credit availability, his quiver is fairly empty on the jobs front, unless he wants to start making zero interest loans directly towards manufacturers and service providers (and... he won't do that, though he legally could!)


    by Michael Maiello on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 9:26pm

    My rule is to assume people mean what they say until I have good reason to think differently.

    So by me Obama would like Congress to pass all that stuff. Of course liking is different from actually thinking Congress will. Of course it won't

    I have autism in my family and remember the dire times in the 50s and 60s when the conventional wisdom was that it was caused by cold , rejecting mothers. Then a British psychologist ( Winnicot , I think, or something like that) did enormous good by coining the phrase " the good enough mother".

    It was a "good enough" speech.


    by Flavius on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 9:27pm

    Yglesias is the last of the die-hard monetarists.  The last three years have dramatically proved that the Fed actually has much less influence on economic activity than two generations of unfortunate college kids have been taught to believe in their macro classes.

    What's left?  QE3?  QE4?  Twiddling with interest on reserves?  Pious announcements of all kinds of targets that the Fed can't hit?    It doesn't matter.  The Fed has already been doing this kind of stuff for three years to almost no avail.   The problem isn't on the money and finance side.  Ben Bernanke can't turn a barren investment landscape into a blooming garden of opportunity.


    by Dan Kervick on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 9:38pm

    I liked the speech. It was direct and not frilly, with an imperative tone, an emphasis on practicality and the firm repudiation of radical right Tea Party anti-government libertarianism at the end.

    I like the parts of the package that consist in direct incentives to hire, and he increased the size of the ask from $300 billion to $450 billion - at least based on pre-speech leaks.

    I've got views on what is fundamentally wrong with the country and our economy that Obama just doesn't seem to share.  But Obama's basically a moderate Republican, so that's par for the course.  If they actually passed this package tomorrow, as Obama repeatedly demanded in the speech, I wouldn't beef and would count it a step in the right direction.

    It will be interesting to see if he actually has any success in drumming up public support for passing a package.


    by Dan Kervick on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 9:26pm

    I liked the speech, especially the tone. I think he showed Republicans a certain  toughness they havn'te seen for a while and frankly I think they looked more uncomfortable than disdainful. The Republicans are going to have a tough time turning down those small business incentives. The payroll tax cut for employers is found money. Obama estimated that a small business with 50 employees would save $80,000. For my business, for example, the tax savings plus the $4K credit would give me a free employee for a year if I hired someone who had been out of work for a year. But I suppose they would draw the line at my hiring one of my out of work grand kids.


    by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 10:48pm

    Not completely anonymous.


    by Oxy Mora on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 10:51pm

    I expected to be underwhelmed, and I wasn't. I was actually cheering at parts of it, and I loved the feisty demeanor. I wish we had seen more of it sooner. I hope it doesn't come under the "too little too late category."

    He chose the path of simple, can be done now stuff the repubs should be able to do, which, if implemented will help, rather than a bold "no way it's gunna happen" but gee doesn't it sound good path. I'm not politically savvy enough to know if it was the right move.

    After forcing myself to watch the repub debate, I can tell you my resolve to re-elect Obama is strengthened. Those people are scary ass idiots. I understand the desire to let them have the whole shootin' match and watch them destroy the country so we can get it back in 2016 with a different President, but it scares me how much damage they could do in 4 years.

     


    by stillidealistic on Fri, 09/09/2011 - 10:27am

    Latest Comments