I saw this editorial mentioned on Professor Greg Mankiw's blog this morning, so I thought I would take a look.
As I have mentioned in previous posts on this blog, I am trying very hard to avoid political statements (frankly, I think both parties share plenty of blame for our current fiscal mess). However, I think that David Brooks in today's New York Times makes some very good points in his piece this morning.
Here's the most interesting section, in my opinion:
The premise of the current financial regulatory reform is that the establishment missed the last bubble and, therefore, more power should be vested in the establishment to foresee and prevent the next one.
If you take this as your premise, the Democratic bill is fine and reasonable. It would force derivative trading out into the open. It would create a structure so the government could break down failing firms in an orderly manner. But the bill doesn’t solve the basic epistemic problem, which is that members of the establishment herd are always the last to know when something unexpected happens.Thanks for the heads-up, Prof. Mankiw!
Op-Ed Columnist - The Goldman Drama - NYTimes.com