|
I just love it when CFR comrades can't get along.(Cheney/Greenspan)AG has described himself as a GOP Libertarian, which would place him in the headlights of any neocon adventure. Unlike Collin Powell, he stayed until he most likely wanted to vomit! Only a neocon could slightly lower taxes while he pursues "spending like a drunken sailor!"(McCain neocon confession),ignore open borders,promote NAFTA ON STEROIDS, increase medicare, and still stand in front of a mirror telling himself that he's a conservative!.........Sure you are Dubya. |
|
A very informed (like, Chicago grad., econ mavin, and right in the middle of the gov't bond pits) friend of mine believes that Greenspan made one of the three largest blunders in the history of the Fed by not properly accounting for the huge amount of money that had already been pulled out of the tech bubble before it burst.
And therefore, this continuously under-accounted-for money has been subterraneously creating inflationary pressure, which Greenspan did not see, and did not address.
Now we have a housing bubble, oil at historic levels, and gold at historic levels. Makes you wonder where the market thinks all this cash came from. But apparently no one, including those at the Fed, can still can see the effects of too much cash in the market, as evidenced by the lowered interest rates to calm the ½ of the market that bought mortgage-backed securities and hasn’t revealed the extent of their wounds yet.
Arrogance is a dangerous thing in anyone, but in the Fed Chair it is potentially disastrous to us all.
|
|
|
it's just nice to see that cheney has time for book reviews. |
|
I don't know about the time machine, but at some point in the near future, some of the GOP hopefuls might be so desperate for votes that they'll subsidize a pony for you.
"Greenspan advises the President and then lambasts him."
Hence my wish that just once a politician would have the courage of his convictions while serving in office rather than finding them years after the fact.
And they wonder why approval ratings are down in the 10-35% range for our government branches? |
|
|
Mind you, I'd love to have the advertising dollars and hit count old Markos is raking in... ;-) |
|
. . . it's too bad the VP didn't take _this_ friend hunting...
Greenspan advises the President and then lambasts him. He criticizes government spending and ignores the historical context.
Out country deserves worse; but we need MUCH better leadership than we've had for the last 19.5 years... |
|
The White House (Perino) said on the 18th,
"He did not veto a bill in the first, I guess, six years of his presidency. Part of that was because we were able to help try to hold down the line on spending. There's two reasons that you veto a bill, basically. One is because you're concerned about the spending priorities or overspending, of which we've seen a lot of that in the Democratically-controlled Congress; and secondly, because some people try to change policy within those appropriation bills."
Their line is that they held down spending for 6 years. There was really no need to use the veto. Conservatives don't buy this, but the so called republicans buy it hook, line and sinker.
|
|
I fail to see where AG is "out of the club", as you suggest.
He was interviewed on 60 Minutes this previous Sunday eve. He was specifically asked a few political questions; about Hillary he said he thought of her as capable, etc. He was asked some questions about Boooooosh, however, I won't be complicit in your wetting yourself by providing his responses. HERE IS THE KEY to your being fairly off track about your "clubby" claim.
Mr. Greenspan said he would still vote republican because the ideologies remain closer to his.
So, you are plainly incorrect in your "clubby" comment. Sorry about that, however, you must be used to that sensation. |
|
Is out of the club too? The list of lockstep GOPers grows ever thin.
"Of course, it would be really nice if, for once, one of these lauded politicians actually said something while they're still IN office and have the power to influence official policy, instead of waiting to say it in their memoirs."
Well, I'd also like the GOP to be the party of limited government, efficient federal offices, responsible spending, and respect for the Constitution.
I'd also like a time machine and a pony, but I won't be getting any of those soon either, will I?
http://www.themechanicaleye.com
DU |
|
How anyone can disagree on the guy's criticism's of Bush's economic policies.
Yes, I'm for tax cuts. I think 0% income tax would be great.
But not if you're going to spend more than you're taking in, add in a costly new entitlement program, and get bogged down in overseas nation building.
That way lies a plummeting dollar and future inflation.
Of course, it would be really nice if, for once, one of these lauded politicians actually said something while they're still IN office and have the power to influence official policy, instead of waiting to say it in their memoirs.
|
|
that you will ever pay attention to the amnesty bills moving through Congress? This is supposed to be a conservative blog, isn't it?
How about asking the various candidates what they think of the DREAM Act? I haven't seen Rudy do any Clintonion parsing in at least three days.
|
|
|
If love is wrong, I don't want to be right. |
|
moments contemplating that Alan Greenspan may be right and President Bush's economic policies are flawed.
No new taxes is a great policy. I agree with the President on that.
But if you appoint a feckless Treasury Secretary in your first term, allow run away spending, expand entitlements for a short term and questionable political benefit (frankly I do not think Bush got any additional support for the prescription drug expansion to Medicare), and fail to use your veto leverage to rein in your own party at the hog trough. . .
what do you expect a gold star from Greenspan?
In a way Clinton was lucky to be restrained by Congress on spending and taxes. That combined with a pretty decent Treasury Secretary proved to be a winning combination for him. |
|
You know, it was nice to have him, nice to see him leave. I mean, if he did not leave, we would not see him flashin' those pearly whites. Now that he's a "regular" guy, he does not have that appearance of sittin' on a flag pole--at half mast (hald the pole being hidden).
Seriously, answer me this one. For a guy who claims to be consumed by the minutia---i.e. the "differentials of Kansas wheat futures and Nebrasks wheat futures" (outta his mouth), why was he NOT interested in the "sub-prime" lending phenomena over the last couple years of his tenure?
He admitted that others in the Fed had circulated memos suggesting this be "explored" and "analyzed", however, he saw no need to. He may have had his eyes on the "tech bubble" of the late 1990's, but this guy completely struck out on the housing bubble. STRUCK OUT!!!
Nice to see him remain smug on all things LOFTY in the finance and economics arena. |
|
|
|