Amen... Greenspan... Amen

Bijou said:
Well, I was going to let you have your silly little thread and leave you be today, while you nursed your sore ass beating from yesterday, but since you insist on purporting this complete turd that I expected perfection from Greenspan and he only made ONE mistake, I'm back to steer you back to reality by reminding you that the whole of Greenspan's Fed was a tragedy of errors. He was wrong more often than he was right. And no, I'm not going to search out and post each documented incidence of the proof of it - that's for you to do, since the burst bubbles, crashed economy, and sluggish recovery aren't evidence enough for you. Happy googling!
Click to expand...

In other words... you have no idea what you are talking about, you are simply spouting off rhetoric and you yet again refuse to back up your claims with any sort of evidence.

Understood... you wish to be known as a partisan hack with nothing to add to any discussion that is of value.
 
Bijou sounds like a bitter bitter person who didn't get his/her way when Bush was elected. I can picture him/her laughing at those pictures of Bush the Chimp or Bush hanged in effigy. Sorry to detract from the thread....SF and Rana please continue your discussion.
 
leaningright said:
Bijou sounds like a bitter bitter person who didn't get his/her way when Bush was elected. I can picture him/her laughing at those pictures of Bush the Chimp or Bush hanged in effigy. Sorry to detract from the thread....SF and Rana please continue your discussion.
Click to expand...

No worries, it is an accurate assessment of Bijou. Her actions are comical. She may be the female version of yurt.
 
Superfreak said:
beat you... :)

question: do you think Greenspan's mistake was intentional?
Click to expand...

I think he supports Wall Street, he thinks that taking huge risks should be a part of our economy. I think that type of thinking creates one disaster after another. He is from the ayn Rand school of thought.

I think we need a new way thinking because the old way has created far too many problems.
 
Howey said:
Unfortunately there's a whole lot of bitter people in America today. Just because a black man was elected President.
Click to expand...

I agree. We have a lot of nuts out there on both sides and for different reasons. I can find a few here and there that won't vote for Obama simply because he's black. I'm not voting for him and his being black has absolutely nothing to do with it. I also suspect that the vast majority of those not voting for him this time could care less whether he is black or not. the goobers on the left can make this election all about race if they want but while race might be a small part of the deal for some it is absolutely not a deal at all for others. I also would suspect that just as many if not more on the left will vote for Obama simply because of race than those on the right.
 
Looks like lil' journalist Taibbi's in good company.

William Greider on Greenspan:

William Greider: The lies of Alan Greenspan

snip
Alan Greenspan has come back from the tomb of history to correct the record. He did not make any mistakes in his 18-year tenure as Federal Reserve chairman. He did not endorse the regressive Bush tax cuts of 2001 that pumped up the federal deficits and aggravated inequalities. He did not cause the housing bubble that is now in collapse. He did not ignore the stock market bubble that subsequently melted away and cost investors $6 trillion. He did not say the Iraq war is "largely about oil."

Check the record. These are all lies.
Click to expand...

Krugman on Greenspan:

The Exceptional Mr. Greenspan

snip

Alan Greenspan continues his efforts to cement his reputation as the worst ex-Fed chairman in history; in today’s FT, he comes out for a repeal of financial regulations designed to prevent a repeat of the crisis for which he, more than any other individual, bears personal responsibility.

To be honest, I didn’t know quite how to respond; I was, very nearly, left speechless by the lack of self-awareness on display. But Henry Farrell shows us the way, pointing out that Greenspan’s piece contains this remarkable passage:

Today’s competitive markets, whether we seek to recognise it or not, are driven by an international version of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” that is unredeemably opaque. With notably rare exceptions (2008, for example), the global “invisible hand” has created relatively stable exchange rates, interest rates, prices, and wage rates.
Click to expand...

Stiglitz on Greenspan:

Greenspan 'Mess' Risks U.S. Recession

snip

``I'm very pessimistic,'' Stiglitz said in an interview in London today. ``Alan Greenspan really made a mess of all this. He pushed out too much liquidity at the wrong time. He supported the tax cut in 2001, which is the beginning of these problems. He encouraged people to take out variable-rate mortgages.''

Stiglitz said there is a 50 percent chance of a recession in the U.S. and that growth will certainly slow to less than half its 3 percent potential. A worldwide jump in credit costs following the collapse of the subprime mortgage market is choking off finance to American consumers.

The comments add to criticism of Greenspan's 18 years in control of the U.S. central bank. He stepped down in January 2006 after steering the economy through a series of crises, pumping out money to help growth rebound from market slumps in 1987 and 2001.

After the 2001 recession, the Fed cut its benchmark rate to a four-decade low of 1 percent. That move, along with a hands- off approach to regulation, have brought Greenspan under fire as the bursting of the housing bubble and the subprime mortgage crisis again threaten to sink the economy.
Click to expand...



Greenspan, 81, said on Nov. 7 he predicts a ``less than 50-50'' probability of a U.S. recession, reiterating previous remarks made in late October. Home prices in the world's largest economy haven't bottomed out, he said.
Click to expand...

Less than 50-50. :rofl2:
 
Superfreak said:
In other words... you have no idea what you are talking about, you are simply spouting off rhetoric and you yet again refuse to back up your claims with any sort of evidence.

Understood... you wish to be known as a partisan hack with nothing to add to any discussion that is of value.
Click to expand...

Keep digging that hole, SF. Your need to lend legitimacy to Greenspan is hopelessly transparent in what it reveals about you.
 
Rana said:
I think he supports Wall Street, he thinks that taking huge risks should be a part of our economy. I think that type of thinking creates one disaster after another. He is from the ayn Rand school of thought.

I think we need a new way thinking because the old way has created far too many problems.
Click to expand...

I do not disagree with the above for the most part. Risk does need to be taken in the sense that it is how innovation occurs. I do not personally believe that Greenspan was promoting the degree of risk that has been taken. I also don't believe he made the mistake(s) on purpose. I think hubris was certainly a part of it as it is for many in power.

That said, I again point out that dismissing everything someone says due to past mistakes is in and of itself... a mistake. I think BAC is wrong on many issues (and the reverse is true as well)... that doesn't mean he doesn't offer up valid points or that his views aren't worth discussing... because they are. While he and I come from almost opposite ends of the spectrum (he socialist/me libertarian) we can still learn from each other.

I have yet to meet the perfect person. I see the flaws in Greenspan and have commented on his part in the economic meltdown before. But that doesn't mean he won't say things that nothing he says is worthy of discussion. Pointing to something (as I did) that he says that I think is correct and wanting to discuss that point shouldn't be dismissed simply because some children want to throw tantrums.

He is correct. Adding more debt to a debt problem is not going to solve the debt problem. It simply means the politicians want to take the easy way out by pushing the problem as far into the future as they can... so that someone else has to make the hard choice. Both of our parties do this... consistently.
 
Bijou said:
Looks like lil' journalist Taibbi's in good company.

William Greider on Greenspan:

William Greider: The lies of Alan Greenspan
Click to expand...

So, another Rolling Stone/The Nation journalist? Ok... at least Greider has a history of writing on economics. So he has more validity than Taibbi. Though the snip you quoted contains several errors in it.

1) Greenspan did say Iraq was about oil, he then went on to clarify what he meant by that. He never stated as Greider says that he 'didn't say it'. so since Greider already made one mistake, by your definition nothing else he says matters. (don't worry, I am not like you, I will continue addressing his actual comments)

2) Greider also states that the Bush tax cuts were regressive. Here too he is wrong. Not a good pattern for Greider here. The bulk of the Bush tax cuts went to lower and middle income families in terms of total dollars. The top 50% pay more now of Federal Income taxes than they did before the cuts. Therefore to call it regressive is nonsense.

3) Greider states that Greenspan ignored the stock market bubble. That is pure nonsense. Greenspan is the one that warned us of irrational exuberance. the market and many others ignored him.

4) Greider implies that Greenspan was the reason for the housing bubble. This is partially correct. Greenspan certainly played a role with his providing too much liquidity in keeping rates low for far too long. A mistake which Greenspan now acknowledges. However, to blame him entirely is a stretch.


Krugman on Greenspan:

The Exceptional Mr. Greenspan

snip
Click to expand...

Too funny... you quote Krugman who has been wrong and made far more mistakes than Greenspan? Ok... lets see what your link says... pretty much nothing other than Krugman is 'shocked/appalled/etc...' that Greenspan is against Dodd Frank. Wow. Riveting. Krugman, a liberal mouthpiece, shocked that someone wouldn't like Dodd/Frank.

Unfortunately Krugman is also wrong in his comments. Dodd/Frank does nothing to prevent another meltdown. There are some good components to it and a lot of bad components. But it will not do anything to stop another meltdown.


Stiglitz on Greenspan:

Greenspan 'Mess' Risks U.S. Recession

snip
Less than 50-50. :rofl2:
Click to expand...

Now this is truly comical. Stiglitz is correct in what he stated about Greenspan, especially regarding liquidity. Though he does add in his liberal 'bush tax cuts evil' comment. But the truly comical part is your laughing at Greenspan who stated in Nov 2007 that the chances of a recession were less than 50/50 while at the same time posting a comment from Stiglitz saying the odds were about 50/50. Hilarious.
 
Superfreak said:
<< SF's desperate attempt to save face and defend Greenspan; unread >>
Click to expand...

You've gone to w-a-a-a-a-y too much trouble to defend Greenspan, SF.

So much, in fact, that I won't bother reading it, for the same reason I don't bother reading anything from Greenspan anymore: no credibility, and no integrity.
 
Greenspan. Here's the video that shows the incompetent idiot he was and is.

http://dailybail.com/home/pbs-frontline-the-warning-how-greenspan-summers-rubin-conspi.html

And here he says his ideology was flawed.

The key word there is "ideology". As Greenspan defines it ideology is a belief. His belief in how the world was supposed to work was flawed. Seriously flawed, as we all found out when the crisis hit. Unregulated capitalism. The invisible insidious hand. His belief, his ideology was seriously flawed and one does not casually change their ideology as we all witness here at JPP.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top