President Obama hasn t said what he and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke discussed when they met in the Oval Office last week. But if I were president, here s what I d discuss with Mr. Chairman:

* As an expert on the Great Depression, Bernanke s academic training couldn t have been better suited for the crisis he confronted last year. Bernanke believes in strong government intervention to curb financial panics -- as his subsequent decisions and actions made clear, and as he reiterated in his speech last week in Jackson Hole, Wyo. Given the history of the Depression and the chaos that ensued after Lehman collapsed, you d think Bernanke's suitability would be beyond dispute. But a vocal minority, including some members of Congress, is still arguing that markets should be allowed to impose their own discipline, no matter how catastrophic the consequences. This group remains hostile to the rescue of Bear Stearns, the bailout of A.I.G., and above all, the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, legislation. Even if the economy is out of the woods, Bernanke needs to keep making the case that the economic costs of government inaction during times of crisis are simply too high.

* Everyone now understands that some firms are too big to fail. But how big is too big? Or should the standard be one of complexity and a calculation of systemic risk rather than size alone? CIT Group (CIT), one of the largest lenders to small businesses, evidently failed the test. And what are the consequences of a government rescue? Will shareholders be wiped out? Will bondholders? In the wake of last year s events, business executives, investors and taxpayers are understandably confused. Yet these issues get at the essence of moral hazard and risk assessment. While some degree of ambiguity may be inescapable, markets function best when there s clarity and predictability. Once the crisis is safely behind us, the Fed could go a long way toward clarifying these issues.

* The Fed chairman and his colleagues need to keep a close eye on bubbles. The conventional wisdom has been that it s not the role of the Fed to identify and deflate bubbles. But in the wake of at least two huge bubbles in which the consequences were so destabilizing the Internet stock bubble and the real estate bubble perhaps this wisdom needs to be re-examined. Last summer there was clearly an oil and commodity bubble as well. Perhaps the broad inflation data the Fed relies on is too broad, since cost of living measures didn t seem to reflect the sharp rise in asset values. If you lived in a city like New York, Los Angeles, Las Vegas or Phoenix during the real estate bubble, the Fed s soothing pronouncements that inflation was under control seemed contradicted by the soaring cost of housing, which for many people is the single biggest component of their monthly expenses.

* Bernanke has been more accessible and candid than his predecessor Alan Greenspan, and he needs to do even more to explain and educate. A former economics professor, Bernanke is a natural in the classroom. His understated, somewhat dry manner may not lend itself to reality television, but it s perfect for the role of a national professor. He should start with certain members of Congress, whose limited grasp of basic economics was frequently on worrisome display this past year.

In my view, Obama s choice of Bernanke is good news for investors. It s not for the Fed chairman to determine stock prices, but they are a reflection of the degree to which he succeeds in his mandate to control inflation and promote economic growth. With the stock market recently hitting new highs for the year, the evidence is that Bernanke has been succeeding at both.