Condoleezza Rice is more qualified than Lisa Cook.
Young Black economists are watching this hatchet job unfold.
-
I called it line stepping in a conversation yesterday. It’s like they took the least qualified person and advanced them primarily to devalue the role of expertise in the fed
This. There are at least two black women that would get less blow back if they were groomed for this role for a couple of years like LC has been. Washington is one of them. But why anoint LC? Ask yourself that. The answer to the question means you have reached the next level in decoding the hierarchy of the progressive mind and the economics profession.
Curious why they wouldn’t pick Ebonya Washington. Also a lib, but you wouldn’t get anywhere near this level of sheer competence
Calling lc an amazing blk economist is an insult to blk economists
Congratulations, you cracked the code!
-
Lisa Cook is an accomplished economist and creative thinker.
Having read many of her papers and had numerous opportunities to interact with her, I am certain she will be an outstanding member of the Federal Reserve Board, assuming bad faith attacks do not prevail.
A small number of economists have bizarrely argued she is not qualified.
I find the complaints as silly as suggesting that Earl Warren was unqualified to be Chief Justice as he had no scholarly record on constitutional law.
LC was appointed for advice/judgment/evaluation/guidance, not to write monetary theory papers.
Her totality of scholarship, policy work and advocacy define her, not the number of papers she has published that one calls "macro."
It is true, IMO, that LC will take seriously the distributional effects of monetary policy in ways that are foreign to the mindsets of old guard macroeconomists and conservatives of any vintage.
For me, that is an argument for the nomination!
-
Lisa Cook is an accomplished economist and creative thinker.
Having read many of her papers and had numerous opportunities to interact with her, I am certain she will be an outstanding member of the Federal Reserve Board, assuming bad faith attacks do not prevail.
A small number of economists have bizarrely argued she is not qualified.
I find the complaints as silly as suggesting that Earl Warren was unqualified to be Chief Justice as he had no scholarly record on constitutional law.
LC was appointed for advice/judgment/evaluation/guidance, not to write monetary theory papers.
Her totality of scholarship, policy work and advocacy define her, not the number of papers she has published that one calls "macro."
It is true, IMO, that LC will take seriously the distributional effects of monetary policy in ways that are foreign to the mindsets of old guard macroeconomists and conservatives of any vintage.
For me, that is an argument for the nomination!You do not seem to be among the not-dum.
-
"They are also watching the relative silence of the profession about it."
Sure, I'm watching the relative silence of the profession as a sociologist is elevated to the FED Board. How much do you think she knows about the intricacies of the term structure, the mechanics of QE, and the neo-Fisherian view of inflation---all topics at the heart of current FED policy? Has she read, say, Friedman&Schwartz? Based on her research, I doubt it. Does Logan et al not realize that Peter Diamond was turned down for the FED for lack of monetary policy expertise?
-
Curious why they wouldn’t pick Ebonya Washington. Also a lib, but you wouldn’t get anywhere near this level of sheer competence
Calling lc an amazing blk economist is an insult to blk economists
This is my question! She must have said no
No. They would not ask her because the public does not know who she is. The point of LC for the administration is to throw a bone to the radical left. LC has carried on a strong campaign of self-promotion that now has the papers calling her one of the country's most eminent economists. Nominating LC is paying off the left. Nominating EW would just put a competent economist in the position, which is not the point.
-
I have voted D for 20 years in every election. The admin seems to think openly making all high appointments about race and gender, but in particular nominating obviously unqualified B females, will help them in the polls. But which voters does this policy motivate to vote D? I see this policy as racist and irresponsible and I am more upset by it than any other D policy in recent memory. I will gladly support anyone else in the 2024 primaries. I would not even be upset if B/H lost in 2024 This madness must end.
-
I know several Black economists who would be much better picks than her. She is beyond criticism because she is a black "liberal" women?
The funny part, if she was a black conservative female appoint under Trmp, Econtwitter would be tearing her down.They tore down Herman Cain and later danced on his grave.
Herman Cain was an !d!0+ and deserved it. LC is not quite an !d!0+ and also deserves it.
EconTwitter never considered that his r/ace (systemic r/acism by healthcare workers) may have been a factor in his dea/th.
EconTwitter is, of course, notoriously r/acist.