Well, I think most of them have given advice in what should be done to improve the situation (well at least to improve the situation relative to the reactionary measures that are currently been taken) and that's inherent in their position, namely do as little as possible and let the recession work its way out.
I think these analysts see a recession as a natural outcome of years of excess and potentially a healthy part of the cycle whereby people and businesses can reduce debt levels and make structural changes to their operations that will hopefully make them more robust in future years (much like Asian banks improved their capital reserves following the Asian crisis). They recognise that this will come with some measure of pain including unemployment (as companies scale back) and company failures, but consider that trying to alleviate these issues will just prolong structural reforms that need to be made. This is where they differ from Government (who have a different agenda).
I'm personally somewhere inbetween, although I think trying to encourage people to spend in such times will prove fruitless and Stephen Kirvhner is correct in his analysis on this point.
