| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Has Greenspan lost his mind? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 24 2008, 08:46 AM (481 Views) | |
| Dwayne | Oct 24 2008, 08:46 AM Post #1 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
I came across an article in the Financial Post titled Greenspan concedes his ideology was flawed. And just what ideology is that? According to the article...
In my opinoin, the above article is just a blatant ideological attack on free market capitalism. Part of the reason I believe this is that the article spins an impression that a free market ideology is flawed and blames Greenspan for "lax oversight of the housing boom", but never mentions the democrats' own role that lax oversight. All the while, the article totally ignores Greenspans words from 2005...
Why can't Greenspan stand up and throw his own words from 2005 back in the faces of democrats and the media? Maybe it has something to do with his wife, NBC journalist Andrea Mitchell. To me, this looks more and more like a scheme to destroy capitalism and free markets, and the media and the left are blatantly spinning all this as the excess of free market capitalism. This is done, because that's what the Left has to do in order to garner the support necessary to make all of changes it desires, but not so much because capitalism and free markets some how take attention from the Left's solutions, but because capitalism and free markets are antithetical to their solutions. For the left, free market capitalism -- as we know -- it must be destroyed. The only way to accomplish that in America is to convince the American public that the changes are necessary to insure their own economic survival, and it seems that in order to bring that about part of the plan is to destroy our faith in the man who guided the financial health of the nation for so many years. Edited by Dwayne, Oct 24 2008, 09:10 AM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ImpulseEngine | Oct 24 2008, 11:14 AM Post #2 |
|
Admiral
|
![]() You gotta love it. Greenspan admits his ideology was flawed - let me repeat that - HIS ideology was flawed and HE admitted it - but somehow you, Dwayne, see that too as somehow "the Left"'s doing. Tell me, just how did "the Left" coerce Greenspan into admitting a flaw that doesn't exist and into doing so publicly?And good for Greenspan for being man enough to be able to admit a mistake and NOT blame everything on "the Left" or others simply because it's convenient. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Oct 24 2008, 11:32 AM Post #3 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
He's lost his mind, because he EXPLICITELY WARNED about the danger in 2005... just as the article I cited from CNN shows, and he never defended himself based on his own words from 2005. The reason Greenspan just might be saying these things is that he believes democrats are going to take control and that democrats will find a sacrificial cow to blame for all this which doesn't point fingers back at democrats themselves, and so Greenspan is protecting himself from being totally blamed by democrats to beinging man enough to be able to admit a mistake and put the blame on free market capitalism... After all, he'll be dead in a few years and won't have to suffer living under socialism, and his reputation secured with his admission, he won't have to worry about all the blame being left on his shoulders. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| RTW | Oct 24 2008, 11:40 AM Post #4 |
![]()
Vice Admiral
|
2005 - "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are taking advantage of their implicit government subsidy to pad their profits with investments that are too risky," 2008 - "My fault" It looks to me that Greenspan is trying to curry favor with his potential new boss. It was a wise career move for him to conveniently forget the hearings about this in 2004. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs& |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Oct 24 2008, 11:44 AM Post #5 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
Another thing that IE totally ignores is that my post is more a point about the media than it is about Greenspan. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Oct 24 2008, 04:15 PM Post #6 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
Here's an editorial that really drives home the point I'm making here...
Edited by Dwayne, Oct 24 2008, 04:17 PM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| whitestar | Oct 24 2008, 07:39 PM Post #7 |
|
Captain
|
The Democrats have been in power before, right? Why, if they gain govt, should it signal the end of free market capitalism? Didn't Greenspan mention it was his own fault for overestimating the self interest of survival, believing it would overide irresponsible business practice, meaning further regulation would be unnecessary? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| RTW | Oct 24 2008, 07:55 PM Post #8 |
![]()
Vice Admiral
|
Based on the statements and ideas of those running for office. Chalk that up to brown-nosing the new bosses. His comments from 2005 have already been posted. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs& http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPSDnGMzIdo&NR http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-lXNy64 |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Oct 24 2008, 10:44 PM Post #9 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
I think your other questions have been answered sufficiently, but I want to address this question directly. One thing I need to make clear is that the premise of your question suggests that by the very act of a democrat taking office, some how capitalism will end. I have made no such assertion. What I do assert is that every time democrats have power in numbers sufficient to enact and pass legislation, they've always attempted to place greater and greater parts of the economy under government regulation or control. The last time democrats enjoyed having the White House, House of Representatives and the Senate, they attempted to enact Hillary's healthcare program. No one wanted it then, and doubt few want it now, but I can assure you, even considering the fact that over 65 million Americans will not want socialized medicine in any shape or form, the democrats will try it again. And sadly, with the willing help of America's national media, democrats may get a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, which would be the only thing protecting the 65 million or so Americans who wouldn't want socialized medicine at all. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| whitestar | Oct 25 2008, 01:01 AM Post #10 |
|
Captain
|
The first answer, based on the policies I've so far heard, the worst that could happen... the US would parallel a number of democratic nations of the world... I don't see a wholesale destruction of freedoms, of rights, of free market capitalism in my country, or New Zealand, Canada, the UK or a number of European nations. What are you afraid of? What do you see as the very worst scenerio? Whatever that vision is, do you see that fate for the nations I have listed? The second answer, you seem to read into everything stated by everyone, a slant towards the evil leftists.. a giant conspiracy... everyone that does not come straight out with unequivical support for your view can be dismissed as being influenced by the evil left or an agent of the evil left. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| whitestar | Oct 25 2008, 01:25 AM Post #11 |
|
Captain
|
Let the people speak, let the mayority rule. If the Democrats do realize the power to enact and pass legislation, then it will be by the mandate of the people. Though I do understand what your saying in regards to a overbalance of left sided politics. It happens in any nation that allows a certain political colour to prevail too long, it takes the influence of both sides to keep a nation fair for all and not just one view of politics. From my long witness of political events in my own nation, when one side diviates too far towards it's ultimate ideology then the people speak and once more it's opposite influence is given the reigns, even in good times a govt can push it's electorate beyond the limit of patience and invite there own end of power. That is the magic of Democracy, have faith in the wisdom of THE people and Democracy. If your right and their election proves to be a mistake, the people will right that mistake. You worry way too much about media bias to the left or the right, worry too much about a canditate pulling the wool of the peoples eyes. The population at large are smarter and more sophisticated than you give credit. In the long run Democracy will prevail, not Democrats or Republicans but Democracy. Thats ALL that matters. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| RTW | Oct 25 2008, 02:05 AM Post #12 |
![]()
Vice Admiral
|
Well, Democrats aren't always for more oversight or regulations. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs& |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| RTW | Oct 25 2008, 02:25 AM Post #13 |
![]()
Vice Admiral
|
Is it just my imagination or are you being a bit dismissive in accusing me of being dismissive? How's that for ironic? So now, just because he changed his tune, apparently to be more agreeable to his most probably new bosses, Greenspan is suddenly an evil leftist and part of this conspiracy? We've been warned about these specific "problems" with free-market capitalism for nearly a decade. Bush warned us as far back as 2001. I'm sure there were many others but the you-tube link I posted specifically mentions Bush. We had hearings in 2004. Greenspan himself warned us in 2005. The mortgage company I'm familiar with had huge issues with fraud 3-4 years ago and eventually had to quit "rubber stamping" mortgage applications. They had underwriters "underwriting" 20-30 files a day. For comparison, Countrywide, which is still in business and carries most of their own loans (it's their money they're loaning), expects an underwriter to underwrite 5-8 files a day. Government required lenders to make the loan process "more fair". Those which resisted were sued and harrassed until they fell into line. Brokers and borrowers took full advantage of the situation. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Oct 25 2008, 07:40 AM Post #14 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
Well, see, the United States isn't a democracy... it's a constitutional federal republic that uses democratic means to elect many of the members of government. This isn't a country where if the majority of people want something they can just vote themselves what they want. There must be checks and balances. That said, the democrats scheme for socialized medicine takes away my right to choose how I use my hard earned money, by taking more of my money. It also limits my healthcare choices. And the privacy concerns are even worse in that in the here and now, my federal government rifles through all our financial records in the democrats income redistribution schemes, which according the to Fourth Amendment is unconstitutional, but now they want all my medical records too... That's scary stuff, imho. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| whitestar | Oct 25 2008, 10:27 AM Post #15 |
|
Captain
|
That certainly is food for thought Dwayne, I even looked up your own CIA factbook to see a definition of the US "Constitution-based federal republic; strong democratic tradition" That is scary stuff IMHO if the US does not look upon itself firstly as a democracy. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |



Tell me, just how did "the Left" coerce Greenspan into admitting a flaw that doesn't exist and into doing so publicly?
2:13 PM Jul 11