Christine Lagarde, the head of International Monetary Fund (IMF), offered a bit of advice to U.S. politicians deadlocked on the country’s budget: don't ignore the fiscal cliff.
“If I were to give a piece of very humble and modest advice,” the Frenchwoman began during an interview with Andrea Mitchell, “It would be, ‘Focus on the very dear of consequences that could result from the fiscal cliff.’ [It would] actually result in 4% deficit reduction, so part good news, but very bad news—contraction of about 2% of the U.S. GDP, which brings the U.S. growth to zero. This is something that is very, very serious.”
The "fiscal cliff" is used to describe the set of automatic tax increases and spending cuts that will occur if Congress and the White House fail to reach an agreement on the federal budget before the end of this year.
Lagarde made similar remarks urging the United States to action while speaking in Washington Monday at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.
She also called on global leaders, including in Europe and the United States, to learn to better compromise in order to avoid “more crisis to come.”
“I would hope decision-makers can actually come to terms to show a spirit of compromise in order to avoid yet another crisis,” Lagarde told Mitchell. “I think we all have had enough of the crises in the last few years. Everybody is looking for something that is better for households, better for enterprises, and better for people.”
Lagarde is the first woman to lead the IMF and she is doing so during a period of not-so-inconsequential nor easy economic times. She stepped into the IMF’s top position last year after the previous chief, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, departed amid allegations of sexual misconduct.
Seemingly reluctant to be identified as a pioneer, though, Lagarde, said: “I have to do my job like everyone else. Let’s face it. If I can bring a different dimension to the table the better because I think differences actually take us further.”
She did weigh in on an ongoing conversation among professional women, particularly in political circles, as to whether women truly can “have it all,” i.e., both professional and personal success. It was sparked by an article in The Atlantic, “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All,” by Anne-Marie Slaughter, a former U.S. State Department official.
“I think you cannot have it all at the same time. I think you can have it all in a way as long as you can afford to be patient and not have it all at the same time,” said Lagarde, also a divorced mother of two grown sons. “You also have to accept that there will be failures, delay along the way, and be reasonable with it. This concept that you could have it all at the same time—have your kids, be a super professional, be a perfect mother, a perfect spouse, be beautiful and socially accepted—this just doesn’t work. It’s a matter of managing time. Managing your own expectations, managing expectations that others have about you and for you.”
Leave a Comment:
Christine Lagarde is a woman that is fully brilliant, focused, driven, strong and precise. She has all of the positive attributes that we attach to the greatest of persons, on our globe. She is but another example of why humanity needs more like her (and I would add some of the great women of MSNBC) in top level leadership positions, in media, politics, business, education, religion, etc., etc.
Good grief; are you a Mr LaGarde in another existence? I used to feel simiarly though until she made her callous 1% comments on Greece earlier this year, criticising the country for its lousy tax system, or lack of. (This from a woman who pays no tax on her near-half-million salary)
These comments by Mitt earlier in the week betray a similar nastiness in tone and content; both, I suppose, have a point, but both are coccooned and highly partisan.
LOL, Sharpeiboy, appreciate the opportunity to get in a good smile. On the issue of my point, I am a tad more fanatical in my assertion that women are the superior gender, when it comes to actually getting things done. As a general rule, they are smarter, better at compromise, conversation, and making the effort to make an idea become a true reality. An exceptional woman, like the one mentioned above, is going to provide leadership and direction that will stay focused on the end-goal, and, far less interested in drifting into tangents.
Ms Lagarde is focused on the economic survival and revival of the Eurozone. She is correct to feel that the Greek population is approaching, benefits and responsibility, in a grossly irresponsible manner. Her focus is not on Greece, it is on the Eurozone and the rest of the financial world.
Will remember your name & try to do similar elsewhere. I agree she is exceptional but from the point of view of the IMF & other multinational mega-bureaucracies. And elsewhere, obviously.
One of the problems regarding the above is that they set up by men & - until recently - have been run by men, so my opinion is necessarily skewed. I suppose women have to prove themselves using the criteria formulated by men(twice as efficient & good etc), but, from my amateur & wet-liberal viewpoint, can criticise her for her callous-sounding words and actions.
I suppose it will take a couple of centuries to see whether these super-women (sorry - cliche) - amongst whom I'd include H Clinton & Merkel - can make a better fist of things than the male sex, but I don't reckon I'll be around then.
I am incline to agree with this out look . As for what i see ,there are very astute women in the field of politics, finances, medicine and a host of other important fields. And MSNBC continue to amaze me with the women they have who are bring the news and what`s happening news wise to the forfront of the world.
Well I can only speak on this particular comment. In the grand scheme of things Iwould guess there would be quite afew disagreements on a huge level. Maybe at a later date i could delve into and look at some issues more closely.
It seems to me Zero growth really isn't getting anybody anywhere, but deeper in debt. The Republicians just don't seem to get the fact they are not in touch with reality, nor responsible thinkers. What happens when their bubbles burst, they'll blame anyone but themselves for their blunders?