Here's a quick review of some interesting subject matter in the FT and elsewhere (press READ MORE):

Simon Johnson is predictably furious about Geithner's plans for how to deal with the underlying problems of the financial system:

"the complete omissions from this document are breathtaking.  No mention of executive compensation or the structure of compenstion within the financial sector.  Not even a hint that the complete breakdown of corporate governance at major banks contributed to execessive risk taking.  And no notion of regulatory capture-by-crazy-ideas of any kind."

The victims of unemployment in the recession: "Two thirds of job cuts hit the poorest" says the FT.  But what their research actually shows is that "two thirds of the areas where rising unemployment is happening are those previously identified as most deprived."  Areas are not people. It does not mean that unemployment is necessarily hitting, say, the bottom quartile of people in terms of income.  In fact, that would be unlikely.  This link shows how the bottom two quintiles tend to get much of their incomes in a secure way: through the benefits system.  I think it will take a few years before the real distributional effect of the recession is known. 

Buried in a small story on page 8 of the FT is an account of why US debt yields have risen.  It is because investors are risk-hungry again.  This links to the argument about whether rising yields are a good thing - see my post about Niall Ferguson - and:

The inflation debate: Robert Lucas, a conservative economist, doesn't worry about inflation.  Neither does Paul Krugman, obviously.  Some people have wrongly concluded that money growth means inevitable inflation. The answer is No. Google  "MV = PY". (or just press this link).  M goes up, V goes down.  At a lunch event with a prominent conservative economic commentator (PCEC) yesterday, one of the questioners asked how inflation will happen when the US economy is operating so well below capacity (there is an output gap).  The PCEC could not say. 

The IMF, though, has a different view to the CBO on how much of an output gap there is (see end of this story).  Here is the IMF's Article IV consultation.

For those in favour of inflating away the debt: there are limits says Willem Buiter.