Five Questions for Alan Greenspan
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
As Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan prepared to make his final appearance on Capitol Hill today and tomorrow, an article over at CNN/Money attempted to assist our elected leaders by suggesting the following five questions to ask of the chairman:
- Is bubble popping one of the Fed's jobs?
- What qualities should your successor have?
- What inning are we really in (interest rates)?
- Should the next chairman keep his opinions to himself?
- What do you want your legacy to be?
1. Are you on crack?
While the Enron employees Q&A session with Ken Lay from 2001 was something that naturally arose while pondering five more interesting questions to ask of Mr. Greenspan, after a short chuckle, it was dismissed as being inappropriate. But, after thinking about it a bit more, there are some interesting similarities between Ken Lay in 2001 and Alan Greenspan in 2005:
- Unwavering confidence and trust, built up by both men over many years has recently been questioned
- It is not clear that either man understands that which he oversees
- Both men rely on wizardry (accounting/statistical) to explain the soundness of that which he oversees
2. Do you believe everything you say about the health of the economy?
For example, from last month's testimony before the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress, you made the following statements:
Despite the uneven character of the expansion over the past year, the U.S. economy has done well, on net, by most measures. Real GDP has grown by 3.7 percent over that period, the unemployment rate has fallen to 5.1 percent, and core personal consumption expenditure prices have risen a historically modest 1.6 percent.Surely, you know the details of how all of these statistics are calculated - that they are all manipulated and misleading. Don't you?
It is perhaps understandable that you have to say that things are going well, then cite these statistics, because otherwise financial markets may have an adverse reaction. But, do you actually believe this?
3. How does it feel to have created more money in the last 18 years than was created in the previous 200 years?
While it is clear that you have no choice in creating the money needed to help out with government borrowing, the personal and business credit creation juggernaut of the last 18 years is all yours. How does it feel to have created so much money?
4. Could you elaborate on your comments about how Fed policy replicates the gold standard?
In the context of your answer to question #3, please expand on these statements you made in July 2004:
Once you decide that a commodity standard such as the gold standard is, for whatever reasons, not acceptable in a society and you go to a fiat currency, then the question is automatically, unless you have Government endeavoring to determine the supply of the currency, it is very difficult to create what effectively the gold standard did.5. When do you think our next financial crisis will be?
I think you will find, as I have indicated to you before, that most effective central banks in this fiat money period tend to be successful largely because we tend to replicate which would probably have occurred under a commodity standard in general.
Last year, former Fed Chief Paul Volcker made the prediction that "there is a 75 percent chance of a financial crisis in the next 5 years". What's your prediction?
8 comments:
Take it easy on the guy, he's 79 years old!
79 years old and in control of the worlds biggest economy!!! If that is NOT scary i dont know what is. He has no clue what he's doing, I fear 79 year olds driving cars, but in charge of our economy, holy crap! This crash in housing he has created will put the US into a very deep recession, not sure alot of people will be lining up to be his successor just to get blamed for the mess he made.
Thanks for question one, I needed a laugh
Your comments on Ken Lay make me ask: Is being thought of as a wizard a contrary indicator? (i.e. indicates the truth is being hidden, ignore the man behind the curtain, etc.). I think from now on I'll just assume if everyone thinks someone is perfect, that their reputation is built on lies.
AG is secretly sweating bullets- he hoping for the best, but also saying in carefully worded language that there is a chance (and IMHO a big chance) that when this thing falls it could cause a depression.
In central/northern Coonecticut here by the way- where median price for a SFH is around 255K- prices this year (Jan-July are up 15%) Cheap compared to you guys in California.
My 1100 square foot townhouse here is selling for around 165K- wow that must seem cheap to guys as well. But prices are RISING rapidly here- as we are part of the northeastern bubble. Cheers.
Peter
anonymi: In my browser, below the comment window is a menu where when you choose "Other" and put something in the "Name" field, it will be displayed on top of the comment. Just a suggestion.
"How does it feel to have created more money in the last 18 years than was created in the previous 200 years?
While it is clear that you have no choice in creating the money needed to help out with government borrowing, the personal and business credit creation juggernaut of the last 18 years is all yours. How does it feel to have created so much money? "
This is a flay out lie. The amount of money in circulation is
determined by the expansion of GDP. If that were not true, the
mistaken belief that your are spreading would mean that we would be experiencing massive inflation. Perhaps you might admit that we are not. Therefore perhaps you might admit that Grenspan is hardly flooding the market with dollars. You might also note that the dollar is getting stronger
and stronger, an impossibility if the quantity is growing w/o refernce to underlying fundamentals.
"Despite the uneven character of the expansion over the past year, the U.S. economy has done well, on net, by most measures. Real GDP has grown by 3.7 percent over that period, the unemployment rate has fallen to 5.1 percent, and core personal consumption expenditure prices have risen a historically modest 1.6 percent.
Surely, you know the details of how all of these statistics are calculated - that they are all manipulated and misleading. Don't you?"
Suppose you tell us hwo such statistic, which have been calculated for tha last 50 years, are manipulated. And just exactly
how can one manipulate a specified statistic? And why? Those who calculate the stats are civil servants, not party hacks , as t
those with little knowledge of the Federal govt might believe. Suppose you explain just how and by who, such statistis are manipulated. Running you mouth is very easy. Backing up your claims won't be, Bud.
Speaking of "Are you on crack?", check out what the Capital Spectator has to say about Greenspan's flip-flop on the gold standard:
In essence, he asserted on Wednesday that central banks needn't bow to the gold standard any longer because they already act responsibly as stewards of money supplies. It was a theoretical point, to be sure, since the deployment of the gold standard in the 20th century is about as common as bartering in lower Manhattan. Nonetheless, Alan felt compelled to outline his thinking on the issue if only to dispel any notion that he still holds gold near and dear to his monetary heart.
"Since the late 70s, central bankers generally have behaved as though we were on the gold standard," the maestro explained yesterday in the House with his usual calm but assertive tone. "Central banking I believe has learned the dangers of fiat money. And I think as a consequence of that we have behaved as though there are indeed real reserves underneath the system."
As a swansong to his widely celebrated career as Fed chairman, Greenspan's snubbing of the precious metal officially brings him full circle from 1966, when he warned in an essay: "In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value." The government has an ulterior motive for keeping the gold standard suppressed, he concluded in a year when gold was artificially held to a price of $35 an ounce: "The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves." In sum, "Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard."
http://www.capitalspectator.com/archives/2005/07/dissing_the_gol.html
Admittedly it's not as exciting as the real estate bubble, but it might be interesting to do a more in-depth analysis of this topic.
Post a Comment