Should Greenspan just STFU?

Should Greenspan just STFU and get on with his retirement?

  • Yes

    Votes: 52 55.9%

  • No

    Votes: 41 44.1%
  • Total voters
    93
IMHO the data is almost always known except shocks like 9/11 World Trade Center, London Subway Bombing, etc. It is the difference in interpretation. A.G. is great. This is the Fed's m.o. now let A.G. talk the markets where they want them to go in addition to pulling the monetary strings.

What is he saying. RECESSION!!! But is anybody listening? He is also saying small recession. That doesn't mean it is necessarily correct but it appears the fed wants a light well-controlled pullback so that a new cycle can begin without so much underbrush. A good wildfire is necessary sometimes to allow the strong plants to get stronger and get rid of the weeds so the young favorable plants can sprout, grow, and feed the economies worldwide.


So either make an attempt to understand and participate or get angry and get burned in the wildfire.


Just some thoughts...
 
Here is yet another spin on Greenspan's speach today in Boca.

TS
===============
Greenspan: Subprime Spillover Unlikely
Thursday March 15, 4:33 pm ET
By Brian Skoloff, Associated Press Writer
Greenspan Sees Little Threat to Economy From Risky Mortgage Troubles, Unless Home Prices Drop


Greenspan Admits Impotence
...
He was even hesitant to address one question from an audience member about how it makes him feel that his words make world markets "quiver."

"I'm the last person to answer that question," he quipped. "I know my wife doesn't quiver."

The audience erupted in laughter, and Greenspan quickly moved onto the next question...

:D
 
Quote from duard:

IMHO the data is almost always known except shocks like 9/11 World Trade Center, London Subway Bombing, etc. It is the difference in interpretation. A.G. is great. This is the Fed's m.o. now let A.G. talk the markets where they want them to go in addition to pulling the monetary strings.

What is he saying. RECESSION!!! But is anybody listening? He is also saying small recession. That doesn't mean it is necessarily correct but it appears the fed wants a light well-controlled pullback so that a new cycle can begin without so much underbrush. A good wildfire is necessary sometimes to allow the strong plants to get stronger and get rid of the weeds so the young favorable plants can sprout, grow, and feed the economies worldwide.


So either make an attempt to understand and participate or get angry and get burned in the wildfire.


Just some thoughts...
More...

But that is what we call market manipulation not oversight. It is not the FEDs job to make important testimony to congress about the current state of economic affairs and then a few days later use ex FED member Greenspan as an intermediary stooge to bankrupt or economically hamstring millions of investors in a good cop bad cop routine. What side is this guy on? If his intent is to prevent a large economic loss from a posture of legitimate economic concern it is wholly self-defeating to decapitate those that he thinks he is trying to warn. Good God Greenspan has no common sense. He could have elected to privately convey legitimate concerns to members of congress or to the FED members rather than risk the financial contagion he pushed on the entire planet.

According to the Board of Governors, the main tasks of the Federal Reserve System are:

1) Conducting the nation’s monetary policy by influencing the monetary and credit conditions in the economy in pursuit of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates

2) Supervising and regulating banking institutions to ensure the safety and soundness of the nation’s banking and financial system and to protect the credit rights of consumers

3) Maintaining the stability of the economy and containing systemic risk that may arise in financial markets

4) Providing financial services to depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign official institutions, including playing a major role in operating the nation’s payments system

None of the above imply an authority for covert or overt manipulation of the stock market or even the real estate market to deflate imagined bubbles to the ruin of one class of citizen investors to the arbitrary benefit of another. That defines two classes of citizens. That is not equal protection under the law and should be a behavior that tantamount to high treason. Greenspan needs to be put in prison for financial terrorism.

TS
 
TS,

You make a good point. I suppose I'm pragmatic to a fault and therefore try to problem solve the "reality of the situation."

Perhaps in an egalitarian society your words would carry more weight....

But having said that the majority of the mission statement of the FED which you just posted have and/or are being met or attempting to be met.
 
Quote from TrendSailor:


None of the above imply an authority for covert or overt manipulation of the stock market or even the real estate market to deflate imagined bubbles to the ruin of one class of citizen investors to the arbitrary benefit of another. That defines two classes of citizens. That is not equal protection under the law and should be a behavior that tantamount to high treason. Greenspan needs to be put in prison for financial terrorism.

TS
More...
Well spoken sailor, regards.

What would happen if a former general or worse, a diplomat, would speak of the nifty tricks they pulled on the Iraquees or the Serbs to win a battle or war. It would cause political explosions that could undo any achieved goal. And if a political agenda was suspected behind these 'leaks' it would be even worse.

Is there no rule against high government officials interfering or elaborating on their old jobs?

Ursa..
 
Quote from MajorUrsa:

Well spoken sailor, regards.

What would happen if a former general or worse, a diplomat, would speak of the nifty tricks they pulled on the Iraquees or the Serbs to win a battle or war. It would cause political explosions that could undo any achieved goal. And if a political agenda was suspected behind these 'leaks' it would be even worse.

Is there no rule against high government officials interfering or elaborating on their old jobs?

Ursa..
More...

Thanks.

There is no law or enforceable rule unless there is classified information or secret executive orders barring the disclosure of information. Normally in the US we rely on integrity and the honor of our retired upper echelon leaders to not do anything irresponsible or in "poor form" in these kinds of matters. This has worked pretty well in the past (except for Jimmy Carter running about like a tin hat lunatic after he left). Also the reality of getting oneself alienated and professionally shunned from both sides of the political isle for violating "the code" (unwritten) is usually sufficient to keep everyone on reasonably good behavior after they leave office. This is especially true if they want to consult or maintain their privileged access to continued insider information with their old contacts still in office. No-one, not even the opposing political party respects a "rat" since that makes everyone feel uncomfortable about sharing privileged or sensitive information.

But in the area of the FED its a different animal since its not suppose to be political affiliated. But it's clear now that somone needs to draft some guidelines or laws to muzzle the likes of Greenspan. In the past, the prior ex-FED Chairmen have pretty much been on good behavior after they left office. Case in point Paul Volcker was highly respected, responsible and professional and I don't recall any issues with him after he left. But the FED members, especially the Chairmen are extremely powerful people and they must exercise restraint and care when they make public statements both while in office and when out of office. At least there needs to be a cooling off period of a year or so before they are permitted to publicly contradict the sitting Chairman unless we want to ruin the financial markets.

If Greenspan continues to be irresponsible and careless in his statements or if the market continues to take him seriously it will be time to legislate some new laws.

As I have stated I am of the opinion that Greenspan's last actions were not far from being those of an economic terrorist. At least he was criminally negligent with tossing a contradictory economic hand-grenade around the globe at a time the US is struggling to recover from his own ruinous FED tenure.

TS
 
Quote from TrendSailor:

No its just Greenspan speaking out of both sides of his mouth to different groups of investors at different times of the day. At his brunch meeting he puts as much negative spin as he can to his bear audience that is paying him to reassure them that their shorts are a good investment. Then at dinner time, he tells his bull audience who are paying even more that this is a great time to short squeeze the bears. Then the BBC or other news organization pays him an exclusive speaker fee to explain the apparent contradiction. Then he waxes neutral and says that people misunderstood what he originally stated and offers to sell his Rosetta stone to decode his cryptic FED speak babble.

The man needs to be put away on an island somewhere or people need to wisen up and learn that he he is as clueless as everyone else is about the economy and let the chips fall where they will.

TS
More...

Yeah, means he is doing a great job. Problem is, you and many others have no real what his real job is. Neither do most of the sheep. Not sure just how much Greenspand knows or whether he just sold out. But he does know that you have to be vague when making speeches and making a stance. And at that, he is a master.

He is just figurehead, nothing more. One of the two government appointed officials of the Fed. It's the other ones which are selected privately that really pull strings, on behalf of the corporations which own the Fed.

Don't blame AL, blame the stupidity and ignorance of the masses, blame the overcomplicated nonsense/propaganda bought into by the "professionals". For christ sake, you are trading derivative strategies . Nothing but bullsh*t painted and mushed around to look like something special. A by product of elaborate paper pushing. So you gotta expect nonsense like this.

In the end, is he really saying anything breakthrough? Sub-prime market problems? Who would have thought? What a revelation!
 
What's he supposed to talk about at these conferences? His grandkids? His prostate?

After all, his policies created what we are seeing now. I think he has a DUTY and OBLIGATION to speak about what's happening.

Jack Welch used to say (about GE) that his success at the company should not just be judged on what happened while he was running the show, but moreso but what happened AFTER he left. Same thing with Papa G.

Bubbles Greenspan knows what he's doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top