To: tntpal who wrote (6622 ) 2/11/2009 12:27:05 AM From: Hope Praytochange Respond to of 103300 roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com While each component has its pros and cons, taken as a whole, the plan leaves great uncertainty over its feasibility, cost, effectiveness, timing, and ultimate glide path back to normalcy from these immense, now ubiquitous, government lifelines. The financial markets voted a resounding no on the plan. The most encouraging thing Mr. Geithner said was that they will learn as they go. Mr. Geithner (and Mr. Bernanke) will need to learn fast. The current plan may best be described as an experiment. The many existing Fed facilities have a mixed scorecard (the commercial paper facility being a notable short-term success so far). On what terms will private capital be willing to partner with the public (thus far government restrictions have driven private capital out)? Nobody knows, although conceptually having private decision makers in charge is a good thing. The foreclosure relief will be devilishly tricky to implement without causing millions more delinquencies. A more direct, forceful, quicker resolution of the insolvent financial institutions analogous to the Resolution Trust Corporation that I helped create and oversee to resolve the savings and loan financial debacle would have been far better received, given its track record of success. We have a massive problem growing larger and a slow political dance over who among us, and when, is going to bear the cost of having socialized these losses. That may be understandable, even politically inevitable, but is only making things worse. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------