Stockman v Greenspan – Just Absurd
- Greenspan says bubbles can’t be stopped without ‘crunch’
- Stockman: C’mon Alan! Bubbles Are Caused By Central Bankers, Not “Human Nature
David Stockman is clearly still a politician who blames central bankers to the point he is just way out of touch. Stockman fails to even understand the global capital flows and harps on 1987 when in fact Stockman did nothing to prevent the formation of the G5 (now G20) that is run by the politicians – not the central bankers. Stockman seems hopelessly lost in assuming central banks are even in control of anything. The national debt stands at $17 trillion of which 70% is accumulative interest expenditures NOT because of central banks, but because of politicians as he was!!!!!! They assume Congress can spend whatever it desires and it is the job of the central bankers to mitigate the failure of Congress.
To the contrary, Alan Greenspan has apologized for trusting big banks too much. That is an important statement that is now being reflected in the bankers being hunted for manipulating everything. Greenspan is correct and Stockman is way off base. Bubbles are NOT created solely by interest rates nor by changes in money supply. The driving force is always international capital flows and if Stockman ever had a real job dealing with capital on a global basis he would see that any country can be overwhelmed by external forces.
Stockman merely repeats the errors of those that have dominated this debate for decades. They argued that lowering the interest rates in 1927 created the bubble in 1929. That is just seriously wrong as if the events around the world mean absolutely nothing. The Fed did not create gold out of thin-air. The gold fled Europe and poured into the USA regardless of the interest rates. The rate cut in 1927 was taken overseas as a confirmation that there was a real debt crisis that eventually exploded in 1931.
Stockman blames central bankers preventing any real analysis of the global economy because everything they see is only within the domestic context. If the argument of Stockman were correct, then as soon as the Fed began to raise rates after 1927, the market should have declined. It rallied instead. Then the Fed cut rates yet the market continued to fall.
We will see rates rise and the stock market WILL RISE and everyone will be confused because of this myopic domestic viewpoint that keeps repeating the same mantra for decades without any investigation or understanding.
Sorry Stockman – Greenspan is correct. This is the business cycle and you cannot manipulate it like Karl Marx. It is the people and not the central bankers because itALWAYS requires CONFIDENCE. Just look at Japan, Rates declined for 23 years but nobody wanted to borrow because they saw ZERO opportunity of making a profit. Deflation engulfed Japan and the stock market was dead. Unless peopleBELIEVE they will make a profit, they will never borrow regardless of the level of interest rates.
When you do real analysis you quickly discover that the stock market has NEVERpeaked with the same level of interest rates in history. It has always been the difference between expectation (CONFIDENCE) and the actual empirical level of interest. So in other words, if you THINK the you can make 50% in just six months, you will pay 20% interest. But if you cannot see even 1% possible profit, you will not pay 1% interest. There has to be a margin of expected profitability.Wikipedia – A Propaganda Tool?
Quite frankly, the problem with Wikipedia has been its very design. The idea of Wikipedia that its open forum promotes content assumes honesty and quite frankly such a forum dies not exist. Wikipedia should be closed to politics and living persons for therein lies turning this forum into just a propaganda tool.
Wikipedia has become a political manipulation tool for false information and the fault is the ability for anyone to write about anything. This problem first made headlines over the Sarah Palin good where she did not know her history concerning Paul Revere. To prevent her from looking like and idiot, her supports kept rewriting history to match her comments.
In my own case, I believe Tancred Schiavoni and friends not only kept changing my page on Wikipedia, I believe they kept changing the legal definition of contempt to try to cover up what he and his cohorts did to me. I believe Tancred Schiavoni and friends were desperate to alter the definition of contempt to support the position that the receiver Alan Cohen was hired by Goldman Sachs, the very firm we collected evidence against and became a board member yet refused to resign running Princeton Economics. This was a conflict of interest to hand your company to be run by your adversary – totally illegal. When people questioned the editor’s bias, he claimed to not know me. Then in another conversation say I write the way I speak in court, The war became absurd and the only way to resolve the issue would be to take Wikipedia to court for it then protects its own abuse refusing to admit it is an open forum for propaganda. Wikipedia has become a propaganda tool in the hands of people with a desire to slander others or to change the truth in politics.
The latest problem has surfaced again with Wikipedia being used for propaganda. Its administrators have imposed a ban on page edits from computers at the US House of Representatives, following “persistent disruptive editing”. Wikipedia in this area of self-interest is a joke. Anyone can alter the page of a living person amount to criminal liability for slander yet Wikipedia supports them. The ban against Congress IPs will not change anything, The problem lies in the design of propaganda and their refusal to take steps to ensure it is not abused and transformed into just the communist version of Pravda..