At the time, I realized, per Yevgeny Morozov, that most alleged or self-identified neoliberal geeks of this type are actually libertarians in drag.
And now, as if I had much doubt before, I realize Matt Yglesias is part of the crowd with this pro-bankster piece, including this WTF line:
The thing about "too big to fail" is that nobody responsible for bailing out TBTF institutions has ever actually cited size as the key consideration.No, Matt, but plenty of people outside the Beltway "Responsible People" have said exactly that.
The rest of the piece?
Matty Y first says that mid-major banks have a vested interest in us actually creating a "too big to fail" class and breaking them up. That may be true, but the implication that the general public doesn't is bullshit.
He then essentially claims that this is an issue separet from other regulatory issues for banks, then gets into Beltway wonkery.
It's part of a bigger piece wondering Sen. David Vitter (R-Whorehouse) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) are making such strange bedfellows on this issue. But, even there, Matty Y whiffs, mainly on not being nearly skeptical enough of Vitter's motives, which could be many, including:
1. Posturing in preparation for a campaign donation shakedown of the banksters, for himself, a 501(c)4 or whatever;
2. Building up cred with any Louisiana Tea Partiers that are actually anti-bankster;
3. Being the GOP senator officially designated to emasculate whatever Brown has in mind.
Meanwhile, being a Brat Pack libertarian means getting others to work for "exposure" so you can drop 1.2 million large on some exclusive Beltway digs, like Yglesias.