Asserting that those who are determined by their peers to be experts in a field of study don't know requires more than an assertion, at least in my book. Are we all uneasy about this? I would say so. Do the vast majority of economists thing that what we did was the best that the economic and political situation allowed? That's my reading of people like Stiglitz, et al. If anything, the economists fault the bailout for not targeting consumers more directly, as a way of stimulating the economy (although that was done, right at the beginning, through a tax cut that was doled out in a way that led to the money being spent, which was what the economy needed at that time).

I have read economists share a concern that more should have been done in certain areas. I haven't read anything that says they have no clue as to whether what was done will work: to the contrary, they are saying that what has been done is helping, and may or may not have been enough, which is quite different from not knowing, wouldn't you say?

Hank

><snip> 2) the government's intervention saved the tax payers a lot of money, when all is considered; and 3)
>
>It may have saved a few jobs in this epoch, but it has slung a millstone around future generations necks.
>
>Economists don't really know whether the current measures will work, they are just doing the opposite to what they did in the run up to the great depression.
>
>They are becoming increasing uneasy with what is happening at present, time will tell.