Can be cut in budgets but to some extent

With hindsight, how Barack Obama faced financial crisis compared to Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930s

There are similarities in the method. Barack Obama would like to certainly be compared to Roosevelt. Like him, he had a little empirical approach. So far, this has been rather well perceived by public opinion and financial markets. But it begins to discover today the first tussle with Congress. It must be said that his agenda is very ambitious: reform of the system of health, education, energy... It has an entourage of high quality, as Franklin Roosevelt in his time.

As a former Secretary to the Treasury of Roosevelt, Morgenthau, Paul Volcker will not hesitate to denounce the drift of the deficits. The President of the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, is also a very committed man. Today, one has the impression that any risk of encouraging the deficits. Between 1930 and 1937, there had been a series of disasters. But the crisis was essentially speculative. Today, we found this phenomenon of mad financial speculation, with securitization and CDS for example. But there is also a serious industrial crisis. That is why Barack Obama could meet difficulties within his own party and not only on the front of the health-care reform.

How to manage the out of the crisis at the right time if compared with the great depression

With a 25 unemployment, the situation had known Roosevelt was much more serious than it is today. But he knew to speak to the country in very optimistic terms, even in the absence of immediate results. Barack Obama is much more conservative, more conservative might say. It is less Keynesian than Roosevelt. Investments in infrastructure have been relegated to second place in the priorities given to the health and education. There is no large public infrastructures renovation project. For my part, I would tend to be more daring and more Keynesian.

Barack Obama also like to remind that Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of the US, more than Bill Clinton. Has this surprised you

Step so. It is true that Ronald Reagan gave a new impetus to the country, even if its economic policy has had a disastrous impact. It is indisputable that Reagan had an enormous influence on the history of the United States. This is the man who changed the direction of American foreign policy. He went to Moscow to meet with Gorbachev. It is not very surprising that Barack Obama sometimes refers to Reagan. It is a remarkably intelligent man and his belief is that he must seek non-partisan solutions. However, since the 1960s, there is a growing problem to address the issues through a bipartisan approach. When the city of New York was on the verge of bankruptcy in the 1970s, we have managed to overcome the situation through an agreement between Democrats and Republicans. But the dialogue has become very difficult for many years.

What is your prognosis on the out of the crisis Do you think that the creation of 3.5 million jobs in the administration Obama plan is realistic

We will go through very difficult times. I believe that unemployment will continue to increase significantly. It will have to decide how far it can jump-start the economy while avoiding to fuel inflation. The plan of creation of 3.5 million jobs of Barack Obama seems to me an achievable objective but it is not sure that it is sufficient. The risk is to brake too early lest they create inflation. At one point, he will also have a policy of investment in this country.

Can this crisis actually redraw the financial sector and reduce the weight of the finance industry in the US economy

Force is to recognize that finance has become a sort of public danger. Trying to find formulas to coaching. But, until now, the new financial regulation of the Obama administration plan has disappointed expectations. Many observers consider that it is not enough hard from the manner in which the automotive industry were treated in this country. Probably won't Barack Obama upset the mechanisms of the market economy. In this regard, Franklin Roosevelt had more weight and confidence in the economic field. At its landfill, Barack Obama faces a range of challenges so broad that it may not perhaps all at the same time treat.

As a former banker business, do you think that is focused on the debate on the remuneration of the bankers

Non. I believe that the debate on the bonus is a true debate. He goes to the crucial question of the redistribution of national wealth. It focuses on the nature of capitalism sought to promote. It is a topic that will remain central. But the administration and Congress will try not to go too far. Because, ultimately, I am afraid that we dare not impose too dirigiste solutions in this area. I believe that a form of pragmatism will prevail on this subject. If you take the average remuneration level of business leaders, it has increased considerably since ten years. Capitalism is practised in recent years is now very shortsighted. We will not avoid the taxes for high income increases.

Do you think that the United States can still avoid the "lost decade", has known the Japan in the 1980s

One cannot predict anything. We live in a world where everything is interconnected. International relations are upset. Today, the Russia and China play a much more important and more subtle role in some respects they played ten years ago. This has very significant effects. When the Vice President of China suggests that it creates a new reserve currency, it must take it seriously.

Will the fact that the United States have been at the epicentre of the crisis change the relationship of America with the emerging powers

In my opinion, it will have to create multilateral structures very large scale to meet the new challenges. The international monetary fund should play a central role with the World Bank. But it will need to evolve its governance principles.

Can this crisis deeply modify the behaviour of the American middle class in terms of credit and consumption

There are already changes in current behaviour. There is a moderation in the use of credit. Consumption of gasoline, it will have to very strongly encourage the use of cleaner fuels with an adequate taxation policy. But it will be very difficult. Because the Americans live in their cars. In any case, the Fiat boss Sergio Marchionne, certainly made a very good deal with the takeover of Chrysler.

Can the return of public interventionism in the economy be accepted by the US business community

It is inevitable. Currently, there are probably twenty or thirty American cities faced financial problems, much will risking bankruptcy. Take, for example, Philadelphia, Detroit, Boston, Indianapolis or Chicago... What had happened in New York in the 1970s now breeds in some cities. Can be cut in budgets, but to some extent. Cannot dispense with a return to public interventionism. It is clear that the Federal Government has already acquired banks, two automakers, and refinanced part of real estate assets: it is already a revolution in American economic history. It has already achieved the unthinkable with the nationalization of General Motors. It probably scares many people. But it should be. These reforms that Barack Obama wants to also enjoy wide popular support.

What chances has Obama to push through reform of the Health Bill Clinton in 1993 Is this the test key to fall for the new administration

In 1993, there had been an extraordinarily negative reaction of the pharmaceutical industry and the insurance sector who did everything to block reform. But today, the public feels very concerned by the rise of unemployment and the loss of their social security cover. There is no doubt that the reform of the social security system will certainly be a major test for the Obama administration. But this will not be the only one. The international field, the future of the Iran and the issue of the North Korea will also be key issues. These are two records at high risk if one considers that these two countries want to develop nuclear weapons.

Find articles in the summer on series