We Talk to CNNMoney About Geithner Plan, Bank Nationalization Posted on February 12, 2009 by Yves Smith Hope you enjoy this chat. Click here to view. Post navigation ← Links 2/12/09 China Showing Signs of Recovery? → Subscribe to Post Comments 100 comments Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 4:10 pm First time hearing you speak Yves. Very well articulated (as I knew would be the case!) Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 4:17 pm Yea Yves! Well done! I thought you were “just” a good writer. Better get an agent soon.Earl Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 4:21 pm The HEROIC Yves! Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 4:22 pm yves for treasure secretary..PLEASE Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 4:23 pm Good job now if we could just get you in that Treasury secretary position we would have something. Bravo. darkcloud February 12, 2009 at 4:28 pm Yves, Wonderful! Finally, a face with the name – intelligent, classy, and lovely, too! Thanks for all you do for all of us. Best regards, always. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 4:30 pm Yves, I thought you came off very well in an inherently frustrating format. What really struck me, though, was how “management” was reduced just to a couple of well known CEOs. We’re talking about behemoth institutions with assets under management roughly comparable to the combined annual GDP of India and Russia. The implicit assumption embedded in flashing up graphics of grinning CEOs that wiping out management would just mean switching in new front men is really deeply disturbing. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 4:35 pm Who’s “we”? I only see one of you in the video. Stop with the pretentiousness. tk6910 February 12, 2009 at 4:40 pm Yves, I have been a fan of you and your blog. I was gratified to see that you are as attractive as you are smart. I was bothered, however, by the interviewer preventing you from fully articulate your thoughts with irrelevant remarks. Thanks for all your efforts. Richard Smith February 12, 2009 at 4:40 pm Heh. Hi Dan. Stop with the trolling. Richard Smith February 12, 2009 at 4:46 pm Coool. Those Amazon goodies beckon. Bonus for drenching Taleb. Steve Diamond February 12, 2009 at 4:52 pm Well done, Yves. Of course I think their real fear is that nationalization could lead to a larger debate about the Anglo-American model of capitalism and they fear that more than anything. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 5:05 pm Yves is hot. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 5:12 pm I came to your blog this afternoon hoping to find, well, hope. And I did – thank you Yves – when are they gonna put you on CNN’s Campbell Brown? Heidi Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 5:15 pm Yves: Great try. At least you were allowed to utter on Air the second worse “N” word.You are about at the same place Roubini was when he started getting airtimeAs you seem to well understand it will take another trillion bucks flushed away til you can get MSM America to pay attention. Yes it is a shame that Geithner seems to have the same anatomical problems attributed in that old parody to Herr Gobbels. Finally and put even more delicately, the makeup used on CNN seems to do you less…justice… then the Yves seen on those internet videos.plschwartz Waldo February 12, 2009 at 5:26 pm “I was bothered, however, by the interviewer preventing you from fully articulate your thoughts with irrelevant remarks.” Agree. Yves you have got to be more energetic. Push that young professional back. Getting time on CNN Money is damn impressive. You have earned it. The “bite” in this blog must be articulated by you when you get air time. Otherwise we all get “herded” into a “corral of duds”. This cannot happen. You have attracted the intellectual capital; you must lead it when you are granted face time. I am impressed with your work. Entrepreneur stuff. Damn hard to do. Damn hard. Get more face time. Take insights from your intellect and from your bloggers for strength. Push forward! Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 5:28 pm Awesome job, Yves!!! You rock. …Can’t wait to hear your thoughts on the new “Uncle Sam Pays My Mortgage” plan. I want to barf. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 5:29 pm Yves Congratulations & please keep hammering away. You did a damn fine job! Raver SedaliaSteve February 12, 2009 at 5:39 pm Yves,That was great. The interviewer really did not want to hear what you had to say but at least they gave you some airtime. Is it time to invest in rice, beans & ammo?Steve ndk February 12, 2009 at 5:43 pm Just posting to add my congratulations to all those already present. :D dearieme February 12, 2009 at 5:49 pm Top stuff, Yves. But the poor interviewer really needs some elecution lessons. David February 12, 2009 at 5:55 pm Why stop at banks. Maybe it is time for us citizens to nationalize the US Treasury and wipe out the bondholders! Re-nationalization. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 5:57 pm First saw Yves on bloggingheads.tv … probably my favourite *episode*? and is how I found NC. She was allowed to talk for a full hour.Highly recommended and I hope she does it again. Doug February 12, 2009 at 5:58 pm Great job, Yves. And I think some of the “bite” of this blog did come through, as much as can reasonably come through in a short interview, with your comments on Tim Geithner not being willing to rein in the banks, and his “plan” or lack thereof. Here’s hoping this leads to more appearances. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 6:03 pm Think I’ll e-mail Pim Fox at Bloomberg and see if he will invite Yves onto his show ( if she’s willing ). I like Pim’s Taking Stock because he lets guests talk ( uninterupted Larry!) and he’s no fool. Early Withdrawal February 12, 2009 at 6:13 pm No good pesky Blogger! Good job Yves! Some friendly constructive criticism… when explaining ideas, make sure you don’t use a term that can mean two different things. The “bad bank” term is owned by the government and it clearly must mean “giving money to banks at no cost by over playing for assets”. Your attempt to explain an alternate “good bank, bad bank” formula only confuses things for views – they may think a “bad bank” is a good idea. For an issue like this, if there is an alternate construction pick a new term. Here “cram down” or “pre-privatize” would have set a clear difference between your proposal and the govt’s “bad bank” idea. You’re doing important work! Waldo February 12, 2009 at 6:34 pm Commerce pick Gregg just stepped back from the nomination. He is such a dud!! It gets tough and he gets going. So Republican sh*t behavior like we have seen from Bush. Republicans are falling apart. I am a Republican. Maybe when all of this settles out the Republican “thugs” will drain into the piping system of our society and younger Republicans (Phoenix) will fill the void (not before justice is dealt to these thugs) like we are getting with the Dems. mock turtle February 12, 2009 at 6:37 pm Yves forthright interview, gutsie, well said teleb and roubini share some of you views regarding temporary nationalization and getting the bad leadership out of there (see youtube interview tittled dr doom and black swan) thanks for your blog and the work you do Matt February 12, 2009 at 6:37 pm Great work, Yves. I thought the interviewer’s interjection about how the bankers are already under “great” scrutiny was an apt demonstration of the cluelessness of MSM. If she’d read your shredding of the “audit” of the banks started yesterday, she might not have been so complacent. Keep it up — at a minimum, it’s encouraging to see them bringing in some alternative voices. I wrote a letter to the editor of Newsweek after their abomination of a bailout article by Fareed Zakaria, suggesting they should have had you and Michael Shedlock write the story. Great work! Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 6:40 pm Gosh, for a moment I thought that was Greta Garbo. Thus, highly appropriate to use the royal “we.” Excellent job articulating such difficult material with both clarity and conviction. Outstanding TV presence paired with an especially shrill, combative interviewer. Don’t let them rush you. And don’t hesitate to give a gentle smile or two, like Nouriel does when asked a stupid question. Agree with Early Withdrawal that you’re doing important (and enlightened) work.JCF Markel February 12, 2009 at 6:46 pm Great job! Just sharpen those elbows to pierce that blow-dried hair on the talking head! OT: Yves, what do you think of this critique of Geithner’s plan:http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/10/news/companies/geithner_plan.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2009021017 I’m starting to hear more varied proposals all of a sudden, now that we know timmy boy is an empty suit. Just guarantee deposits and let the banks fail. Limit home mortgage rescues to the unemployed, not the overextended. For instance. doc holiday February 12, 2009 at 6:53 pm Ahh shit, now I need a total make over; I feel out of me league now, versus my mind! What next, and WTF is going on here anyway? Martin February 12, 2009 at 6:56 pm It may be the right thing to do but does the government have the actual capacity to do it? In Iceland for example the banks were just too big. Perhaps the insolvent banks should be liquidated though it’s extremely difficult to do politically. From what I see this administration has the same strategy as the previous one, namely trying to keep the system afloat until the housing market rebounds and then there will be a market for the toxic bonds. Might work and might not. Currently it’s tolerated by the people (though only marginally) but if unemployment gets to 20-25% people will lose patience. DoctoRx February 12, 2009 at 7:07 pm Congrats Scary that the MSM just doesn’t want its viewers to hear the obvious truth. Dan Duncan February 12, 2009 at 7:26 pm Hey Richard Smith, This isn’t the first time you’ve attributed an anonymous comment to me. First off, anything I write on this blog has always had my name attached to it or “DD”. I don’t do anonymous posts…and Yves can attest to that. You’ve done this in the past…written some ridiculous response to an anonymous post that you thought was me…[For example, see Jan 30 Yves’ post about some blogger named Schiff—whom I’ve never ever heard of until her post!] Normally, I think it’s kind of funny…that you’re all huffy and puffy about posts I didn’t even write…what a dork… But I’m responding here because I tip my hat to Yves, on the interview. I didn’t hide behind some anon post to take a cheap shot at Yves over an interview she’s justifiably proud of. I must say, though: Normally I’d be flattered, Richard, that you’re thinking about me so much. [Hell, you seem to be thinking about me on posts when I’m not even writing in them!] But I’m not flattered…I’m kind of wierded out to tell you the truth. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 7:26 pm Yves, Roubini, Taleb, all in the same room all on prime-time national t.v. at the same time. That would definitely give Geithner and Summers one hell of a coronary. AM Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 7:45 pm Yves, heartfelt thanks! You are fast on your feet and very skillfully pushed the constraints of the venue to the max. Great job! i on the ball patriot burnside February 12, 2009 at 8:03 pm Contra St. Waldo, I’d say ‘pushing back’ would have initiated the CNN norm of dismissive interruption. Fine control of the medium, Yves, and quite effective to have gone one on one, as I’m certain you know. Vastly more substance got through. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 8:04 pm Nice job Yves. It’s hard to get anything across of substance in such a forum but you did. I agree with poster above about trying to re-define “bad bank” – too confusing. If I, a regular reader, had to think for 1/2 second about it, that’s a bad sign for Jane Sixpack. Again, really well done. – StewPDX nullpointer February 12, 2009 at 8:07 pm yves- congrats !! IF February 12, 2009 at 8:08 pm I remember a video of you with a fellow blogger. I think you did improve your appearance since then. I agree that you have to hold your position more firmly in the future. But I also wonder how much editing happened on CNNs side to get to the present clip (it didn’t look life at all and had a choppy feel). Advant Guard February 12, 2009 at 8:09 pm <sarcasm>Nationalization is obviously the answer. Iceland nationalized all their banks and now the citizens want to build statues of their leaders.</sarcasm> Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 8:21 pm I’m sure this mostly says things about my biases, but I’ve been reading this blog daily for the past few months and had no idea Yves was a woman. Surely I’m not the only one? A nice enough video, though familiar content to regular readers. Love the blog. Became a daily reader after “Finance Has Lost Sight of Its Role” eh February 12, 2009 at 8:39 pm You deserve the exposure. But I think full-blown nationalization is seen as the very last of last resorts, and will be surprised if it happens overtly. That said what look at AIG — what’s the difference? Keenan February 12, 2009 at 8:42 pm Yves: You make a good & credible impression not only personally but also for the NC community. When the interviewer begins to reveal air-headedness, consider using the Jack Nicholson line, though perhaps not in his tone: “You can’t handle the truth” Word Verification: “ablusee”and indeed I see you are able ! Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 8:42 pm Yves – great job. Hope you get a regular spot. Are you listening CNN? Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 9:01 pm Wow. Yves la difference! lineup32 February 12, 2009 at 9:03 pm Great Job Yves hope you continue to get MSM time!! Brad February 12, 2009 at 9:17 pm I am proud to be part of the ‘we’ at NC even if only in the featherweight class comment division. Yves rocks! Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 9:22 pm Good job in the forma. In that environment, it is smart to speak to the viewer and let the interviewer follow, rather than tangle with the host's ignorance & ego. Pose quick questions to draw the viewer in, "Is this just symbolic? Of course. It demonstrates the public's outrage and fixed-attention on these guys, which is helpful in shaking them into reality maybe, but let's knock a few zeros off and we see that this is the equivalent of (some money or metaphor a $100k household can understand — ordering delivery Friday night instead of cooking?) What it does say, is that Congress is responding to taxpayer outrage with symbolic superficial gestures when they should be involved in deep analysis and problem solving — which they certainly aren't." List all the economists that have correctly called this thing at nearly every turn thus far, and note that their scholarly assessment is that temporary nationalization is what's left to work with. Draw the line between Congress' posturing and ignorance, and their political maneuvering in preparation for 2010. Make it clear that this is a problem of ignorance exacerbated by lack of political will/courage (the dems to let the GOP label them 'socialists', and the wounded identity-crisis struck GOP to continue looking aimless/lacking a reasonable counterpoint.) Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 9:28 pm You_were_fantastic_and next time some MSM talking head starts spewing company approved garbage, just kick their data input socket under the table, we all want to see their head spin around a few times. Skippy… feeling lighter or did gravity just flux a bit. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 9:30 pm 9:22, That’s nice in theory, but this isn’t Charlie Rose. The interviewers on financial TV are usually pretty aggressive and they set the pace and control the questions, and you don’t get them in advance, either. Look at how seasoned guys like Roubini and Taleb have to tussle with newscasters to get their points in. alexblack February 12, 2009 at 9:35 pm Yves Congratulations on getting some high-profile airtime, and from what I gather, (and would have expected) used it to knock the ball out of the park (I’m hearing impaired so can’t listen to the clip – do drop a comment if you know of a transcript somewhere online) This is the first time I’ve seen an actual photo of you, and it has destroyed the assumptions that my fertile imagination had sprouted (hazard of the trade – I’m a novelist). At first I assumed you were a man, brilliant but with a nom de plume, and an alter-ego as a flamboyant fashion designer. Then I figured you were still a man, but one who realized that saying you were a woman would bring more traffic to your blog – guys immersed in economics are a traditionally lonely and dateless bunch. Then as I heard others allude to your gender with certainty, I thought, well, maybe a very passable transvestite – probably French. I’ve had many transvestite friends, living here in San Francisco, and they’re remarkably good at stringing guys along for free dinners at 5-star restaurants…. I gave a brief thought to the idea that you actually ARE a woman, but with your depth of scholasticism and knowledge, were probably somewhat of a genius-hermit, a la Thomas Pynchon, living in some backwoods cabin, absorbing the day’s events and commenting astutely on them. I assumed that your stories of hobnobbing with Austrian financiers were just times spent with the imaginary friends you were creating in your isolation. I pictured you in flannel shirts, chopping wood between blogging spurts. I really had no idea you actually had this Greta Garbo/Jennifer Aniston look going. Girl, you have star potential. Get a good agent. As others have mentioned, you’re an extremely articulate messenger for a viewpoint that really needs to penetrate many more minds. I hope there is much more of this mass exposure in your future, and that you have a blast with the limelight. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 10:07 pm Great seeing you. Thank you Yves. I’m not surprised you handled this so expertly and, as I held my breath, watched you breeze right past the little tart and her “well,neither you nor I am the treasury secretary” as you brilliantly and succinctly made your point -the most important point of year. Insulting or trivializing the interviewee seems to come with the “How to Interview” kit when you work for the MSM. I would agree that you’re hot, but I’m a girl so I’ll just say that you’re FABULOUS. LeeAnne YK February 12, 2009 at 10:10 pm Getting your point across NICELY! Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 10:11 pm Terrfic job. You’re a great salesman for the TRUTH. miguel_swanstein February 12, 2009 at 10:18 pm Good for you! I’m glad to see that your work on this site is getting you a wider platform for your (well-reasoned and prescient) viewpoint. I thought you did well when Poppy the Presenter tried to paint you as a populist for calling for some executive heads. This group of go-go managers are not the people we need to remake the banking system; grey operational types only, please. To keep the dealmakers and salesmen and their cronies in the corner offices likely means any taxpayer funds could go into more speculative positions and double-down trades than not. Also, I think the “h” in TurboTim’s last name is silent. It’s Geit-ner (hard T). And I hope you get more air time to call him out if he stays supine to Wall Street interests. datadave February 12, 2009 at 10:42 pm Awesome, Yves! You’re great on radio too. (as “on-point”) Obama missed a chance for an excellent Treasury Secretary. Precise, articulate, and even good on the eyes. And I bet you even paid all your taxes! (at least the obvious ones.) I am sort of glad I don’t think I have cnn-money on my satellite plan. cnbc is bad enough. Poppy–what’s her name– was biased towards those suits she’s been desiring for her own social security plan. Oh, the poor boys are under such ‘scrutiny’ and she’s so sympathetic for the darlings. You were a dose of real truth and beauty. Keep up the good work. Words of caution are hog the microphone (volume was a little low), and treat that camera like she’s your best friend or your boyfriend, give her or him an eye or two. But Don’t Wink, (sarah!) Otherwise, great face time. I’d give Timmy the same advice but then it’d fall on deaf ears. He’s only listening to his boss, larry. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 10:47 pm Thanks for speaking truth to power Yves. I hope you continue to do so and are given a broader forum for your opinions (and those of us readers). I like how you took charge of the interview effectively. I trust you will continue to skewer their misleading narratives. Thanks again and best to you. Anonymous February 12, 2009 at 11:02 pm Adding to the chorus of Congratulations! You were fantastic, and I sincerely hope you get more TV time. wampum February 12, 2009 at 11:08 pm Sigh . . . if only I was ten years older. (And a genius.) Andy Tabbo February 12, 2009 at 11:13 pm It’s always surprised me that you are not on financial TV more often. I observe CNBC all hours of the day for some entertainment and occasional good information. I don’t remember ever seeing you on that channel? Are they keeping you down? Are you not a “favored” one? Please get on….you’re voice is sensible and clear. – AT Adina February 12, 2009 at 11:25 pm S is for sexism, Alex. Why be surprised that an experienced financial expert is a woman? Setting aside the disappointing fact that it seems to be a novelty to see expert women on tv, the larger problem is that there have been many too few economists and financial experts on tv. How does booking happen? How do individuals and sets of people get on the list of “usual suspects” for media commentary? David Merkel February 13, 2009 at 12:29 am You did very well, Yves. Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 12:40 am I was surprised to see you were allowed to say that much. Usually they burn up all the time asking a question in statement form and then say, “Were almost out of time, tell us how you would fix this in 30 seconds or less.” Glad you said the ‘will’ was missing, put her back in her chair. Nationalization would have to occur over the weekend in one fell swoop because you know there would be a lot of pissed off bond/share holders. The bad bank already exists, call it the Federal Reserve. Then costs, how long will it take to work off the debt? Give’em plan specifics and let them try to shoot holes in it. The why questions are your opportunities. Dave Raithel February 13, 2009 at 12:41 am Poppy Harlow is not worthy. artichoke February 13, 2009 at 12:47 am I’m having a problem with the sound on my ‘puter so I cannot hear it. Sounds like it went very well. Think of this “stress test” as the same thing as FDR’s “bank holiday”. The only difference may be that they don’t close the banks. But with computer tech and reporting systems these days, it’s probably not necessary to close them. It is a surprise inspection. It all depends on how good an inspection they can do and how objective they are. My main fears are on the first point. These banks continuously mark to market. The models for CDOs and cousins are very bad. The models for CDS are fine, it’s a simple model, but the probability of default is hard to estimate — it depends on those CDOs that they cannot value. The banks may have ballpark estimates of their own for these values. The job of the examiners would mainly be to dig out those numbers. They do not have time to invent their own models. The next problem is the subsidized values they will use to recapitalize the banks that need it. It will be very hard to know how much of a gift is being given to the banks. (How much above market value is paid for toxic assets, etc.) But we have to press for this to be public. This can be stated, even if we aren’t told how bad a shape the bank is in. FDR didn’t nationalize the banks. Do we have to do more than FDR did? Maybe so, this crisis does seem to be worse. IF February 13, 2009 at 12:56 am Yves: maybe one more with regards to the camera setup. I understand your interview partner did not look into the camera either and you were either looking at her or at a monitor. If you need to look at the camera in the future, maybe read what Errol Morris (Fog of War) has to say about his interview setups. Maybe watch some of his work.http://www.errolmorris.com/content/eyecontact/interrotron.html Yves Smith February 13, 2009 at 1:05 am Thanks for all the kind and helpful comments! IF, you discerned correctly. The one thing I have learned about TV is you are supposed to maintain an eye lock on the camera, otherwise you look scattered at best and shifty at worst. But they set this up as an interview, and aside from Poppy’s address to the camera at the beginning and end, neither of us looked at the camera (I wasn’t even certain where it was). That is actually much easier, even if less satisfying to the viewer. Starting at the camera while trying to formulate an answer is hard (unless you are practiced and/or delivering a canned message, which I suppose is what many talking heads do). In addition, they put on two tons of makeup, which covers a multitude of sins! Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 1:09 am well said Daniel Ivandjiiski Michael February 13, 2009 at 1:29 am Wonderful job, Yves. Delightful to see and hear you. Hope this is the start of much more well-deserved exposure. It is too bad CNN wouldn’t even post your name or website, though. No doubt they’re too worried about competing with you! hanks February 13, 2009 at 2:03 am Yves, Long Time fan and first time comment. Your blog has been BEYOND informative with extremely insightful commentary to accompany very pertinent information that the MSM seems to be desperately be lacking. Sadly I agree with you and the good Martin Wolf that our zombie banks are completly insolvent and need to be nationalized and then finally re-privatized, I just wish that “elected members of our constituency” would just wake up and realize instead of flushing another $1.5 trillion down the debt service drain to our T-Bill Bond holders. Good showing. Your star status is on the rise and hopefully you will become a MSM pundit mainstay. I agree with all the commentators kudos for exposing her for the journalistic rube she is. Keep up the great work. Mike Smith M.G. February 13, 2009 at 2:03 am BRAVA. Très bien. We do not see many women being interviewed, they are normally on the other side… Do not worry about make up you made it up! I am glad the “good bank” proposal is being shown as “the only solution”. I contend that if we even launch IPO for “good banks” to replace the lemons we find taxpayers and investors willing to bid in the so called private-public partnerships for new good banks. Distinguished academics could work out the details but I believe we have to get rid of lemons, which at present are simply driving out the good and the credit… Observer February 13, 2009 at 2:20 am Actually, contra other views above, I think this was very good overall — almost 5 solid minutes on national TV, a rare thing, and the interviewer really wasn’t that bad. There was actually context and content in the questions. Well, at least a little. The focus on “personalities” is typical of the “entertainment” frame that has engulfed news both on TV and in print during the last generation (although occasionally as with Madoff it really is appropriate). But I thought Yves handled this exactly right, pointing out that exec comp is a symbolic issue (as is the everlasting favorite of newspapers forever, congressional pay). Overall there was more substance to this than a month of normal financial TV. I mean, you have to match this up against the usual madness, up to and including Cramer. Richard Smith February 13, 2009 at 3:20 am Dan, Worth a try: if you stop flaming our very industrious & scrupulous blogger in your comments, I'll be convinced, and stop attributing Anonymous's troll posts to you. Deal? Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 3:33 am Hi, You are great. Naively I was thinking that Yves was a man’s name… (at least in France it is) Good job. phil_hubb February 13, 2009 at 3:36 am For the several months I’ve read this blog, everyone kept referring to Yves as ‘she.’I kept thinking, “How much longer is this Frenchman going to tolerate being referred to by the wrong pronoun?” And it turns out Yves is a woman!And a good looking one.Imagine how stupid I must feel. M.G. February 13, 2009 at 3:45 am On Internet you never know if is a she or he… I can confirm that the name in Europe is a boy’s name and the origin is indeed French. We have cases like Andrea who is also boy’s name but in Brazil you have beautiful girls called Andrea… purple February 13, 2009 at 4:15 am The interviewer was arguing, not interviewing. Despite that, you did a good job. Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 4:35 am @All with the Yves man/woman issue, Just goes to show how much mental gearing is devoted to gender, hear the thought, not the visual image and more can be accomplished. Again, Yves and others here show us the herd mentality, some times spooked, only to run right off the cliff, with out a moment to ponder the alternative routes, out of self serving fear. Skippy…kind to creatures of goodness and eviscerator of the malfeasant. Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 5:30 am Hi Yves, You looked good. Articulate and convincing. Also I felt the sense of urgency in your argument. That was good. But who was that interviewer? She did a very good job of annoying me.she was trying to attack your points. She was not even that intelligent (the way she talked)She should work for Fox News. anyway, great job. Looking forward to seeing more. Hey, a prophet’s job is never easy. Your Japanese reader. P.S. have you thought about putting a donation button here? I don’t mind buying you some coffee. rahuldeodhar February 13, 2009 at 5:34 am Fantastic points – shoddy interviewer – you posted a video with Megan – that is still the highwater mark. I think you should do it more in that format – the anchors are too stupid to get any intelligent discussion going. In such a scenario, this intelligent interview is an achievement. fresno dan February 13, 2009 at 5:35 am Yves for President! M.G. February 13, 2009 at 6:40 am As a follow up to my post here more on good banks . I hope you enjoy it, during the WE… It’s raining here in Belgium… Richard Kline February 13, 2009 at 7:42 am This Is Kewl. The MSM need *ahem* guidance. Lead on, Yves, sez I. MarcoPolo February 13, 2009 at 8:29 am I missed this one, Yves. I don’t own a tv and internet is so slow I can’t stream the video. But I’m happy for you that you are receiving some of the attention you deserve for being among the best informed and critical thinkers of the day. A rare and precious commodity. Don’t abandon the blog though. Media & banks, same suits. Rod February 13, 2009 at 8:48 am Great job Yves…thanks for the voice of reason and intelligence — and honesty. The interview also revealed that part of the problem is the mainstream media, whose job is supposed to be to challenge the powerful, but it ain’t so. When the reporter said something like ‘neither of us are Treasury Secretary, thank goodness,’ I thought, speak for yourself lady. You have one of the best blogs around. Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 9:00 am Well done, Yves, from a devoted English reader. Thank you for your truth-seeking and for sharing it with us. Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 9:31 am WTF’s up with the pissy attitude of that young, vapid whippersnapper? Why, when the economy is in the crapper, are we impelled to watch 20-something valley girl ‘news analysts’ give painfully fallacious arguments and, generally, speak that which they know not of? Good job getting key points across, Yves. Definitely not the medium for substance but you handled it like a pro. Way to go! Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 9:48 am Excellent, Yves. Wish you’d had a competent, serious person on the other side of that conversation. SocialismSucks February 13, 2009 at 9:57 am I agree with the other comments nice job around 3:00 minute mark cutting host Poppy off when she tried to carry water for the Administration. Symbolism is damn right! Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 10:46 am Good interview Yves. (Nice shoutout to CR, too!) mft February 13, 2009 at 11:17 am Great work, Yves! Don’t let up! Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 12:45 pm Well said Yves. Great to put a face to the intelligence. You have my respect, fwiw. Anonymous February 13, 2009 at 3:51 pm That unappetising, shrill girl (what was she wearing!) who interviewed Yves was uncannily like the bimbo who interviewed Naomi Klein on some US news programme a few weeks ago. Shame on her if she has any pretensions to be a journalist. s_baghaii February 13, 2009 at 5:38 pm Yves, I have enjoyed your blog for quite a while and think you did an amazing job in this appearance. artichoke February 13, 2009 at 10:36 pm Now I got the sound working, and I am very impressed. The interview started off fairly nice, but when you started really making your points stick, the interviewer got quite snippy. You didn’t show frustration, didn’t pick up on her attempts to personalize things, just kept making your points in a fully responsible yet firm and elegant way. I don’t think “bad bank” could have been handled better, you didn’t have all day. You made the point for those who were ready to hear it (i.e. those who had an awareness of the “bad bank” plans that have been discussed) and moved on. I really don’t see how it could have been better. A++ , and a good contribution to shining some light through the fog. Marlowe February 14, 2009 at 12:01 am Hmm. As a media guy, I have to say that you are less effective on TV than webcasts, less effective on webcasts than blogging, less effective blogging than writing an op-ed piece for NYT. In particular please stop appearing on CNN or Fox, which enables the enemy. Other than that I agree completely that you’re fabulous. Anonymous February 14, 2009 at 1:31 am Jeez, Marlowe, we’d be lucky if 1% of the stuff on CNN was as good as Yves in that interview. Anonymous August 16, 2009 at 4:07 am ugg bootsugg boots Comments are closed. Tip Jar Please Donate or Subscribe!