Robert Naiman <[email protected]> wrote: >> I realize that for many people who spend a lot of time in academia, the idea >> of being invested in the consequences of government policies becomes passe.<<
BTW, I can't speak for "many people who spend a lot of time in academia" (who hardly seem to be a homogeneous bunch), but I care a lot about the "consequences of government policies." (Thus, for example, I argued against leftist lobbyists putting resources into backing Chuck Hagel for DOD chief.) Any complete analysis of the current situation that stays at a completely abstract level is pretty worthless. Thus, in-fighting within the power elite (e.g., the Yellin camp vs. the Summers camp) can be as important as the big picture (though whether or not it can have that effect does depend on that big picture). I agree with Marv that "the antagonism directed at Summers is mostly personal ... or based on unsupported speculation that he is more disposed to tighten than Yellen. There's no indication that either Yellen or Summers or another appointee will represent any meaningful departure from the Bernanke Fed." BTW, I've signed a petition against Summers, but it's because I don't like the fellow, because it would be good for women to have one of their number run such a powerful institution (if only to poke a couple of holes in the "glass ceiling"), and because Yellin is the wife of a friend. Also, if Obama appoints Summers, that adds extra evidence for my non-flattering theories about him. -- Jim Devine / "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." -- Philip K. Dick _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
