So overall I would give my national politicians a 'C' for handling the crisis, while Geithner is in for an 'F', as well because of a partially misdirected stimulus.
Another reason why it is reasonable to focus on US policy is, because if they would find a good handle on the crisis, it would very likely be copied here - while a good approach on the national European level won't be copied in the US. Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den MenschenVolker Pispers
And the different content of what comes from Brussels and the national capitals tells us as well, how much the EU buraucracy is detached from the EU population. They don't have to face the voters. Huge handouts to the banks are more and more difficult to get public support. La France en colere? Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den MenschenVolker Pispers
It is clear that after the huge amounts of public money already poured into the banking sector, it will not be easy explaining to taxpayers why we need to do more. If asset relief for banks is to achieve sufficient public acceptance, it is essential that the banking sector is seen to provide an adequate quid quo pro. This cannot just be limited to restrictions on executive pay. It must also include a commitment to maintaining lending to the real economy and to carry out appropriate restructuring.
And the old attitude to Europe remain: lok at how Sarkozy and Merkel, despite their continued antagonism, at least continue to make an effort to make it look like they are coordinating (and do in fact coordinate), whereas some other more euroskeptical countries continue to trash the EU. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Except that we have a common currency zone, a common market, free movement of capital, free movement of people... without a functional economic policy at the EU level. Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith
