Alan Greenspan interviewed on Democracy Now 1

[sullenboy1o3o]

Actually preventive war is illegal according to international law. What greenspan descibes is legal thoe. If a fighter jet is coming your way with clear intent to attack, then obviously any country has to right to shoot that jet down and declare war.

But iraqi jets were not headed to the us. If they were iraq would have been destroyed in a 1/2 hour.

Wat is illegal is an imagined threat and attacking on that basis. This is all in intentional law.

[offenwrong]

How in the He!! is the Fed supposed to make everyone happy....tough job in my opinion.......I think whats happening should have happened a long time ago.....globalize this planet and have REAL equality, after that there is nothing left to fight about

[ludeluver]

States thought Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction because America was holding the retail copy of the receipt.

[Lieu3C4]

1:31 Is it so much the size that matters or the quality of the technique employed when it comes to smaller government, especially given rival interests whose size may well exceed? If I trust the government little, those who pretend to egregeous privilege built on a Democratic foundation, of generations of generation of a Nation, I trust less. 8:00 I think look at Iraq as the central issue is wrong: looking at Saudi Arabia is more to the point &why the US has a stable military presence in the ME.

[kazearaki]

Alan Greenspan is a Libertarian Republican? He must be joking, wasn't he?

[woodlandcammo27]

Fuck democracy! I want the republic back! 

[szatmar666]

@woodlandcammo27 LOL! One doesn't exist without the other, only southern racists and traitors think they do.

[bonfirejovi]

Klein is an economic illiterate.

[madashelldude]

@bonfirejovi Because she pointed out that $12 billion Iraqi helicopter money has gone missing from the FED vaults and the head of that bank was unaware?! I think it's time you cons pull your heads out of your collective asses.

[MomSaysImCool]

@madashelldude I don't think she's economically illiterate, but I would say that her serious ideological blindfolds make her suspect that their are conspiracies just beyond her peripheral.

[Stealthsuit07]

@bonfirejovi Economic illiterate huh? The economic language is a power tool, designed to dismiss the common mans observations like you just did. It's just like when the vatican controlled the people during the middle ages by having the exclusive right to read and interpret the latin Bible.

[allwecaretopay]

haha she is like lisa simpson

[madashelldude]

you got it Jr. that's what economics is: cartoon science.

[stephengnelson]

i'd like to meet naomi klein - just so i could call her 'toots'

[vivahst]

Fishmongerfunk, do you have a link to that bizzaro world interview you watched. Sounds interesting.

[ejg2290]

She bears a strong resemblance to Glen Buxton (lead guitartist of the original Alice Cooper group).

[CaptainoIndustry]

I think this Naomi Klein needs to relax. I would mentioned a certain prescription of what I believe she needs but this is generally a family space. What does she care whether the US is "stealing" Iraqi oil or not? Doesn't she realize that American imperialism contributes to her way of life?She's kind of cute,doesn't she have anything better to do with her time than to try to think about subjects at which she knows absolutely nothing about? Hey Naomi, take it easy, everythings going to be OK :)

[madashelldude]

Keeping a 100 year old oil industry on artificial taxpayer sponsored lifesupport and willing to kill innocent people for it has nothing to do with capitalism, or our way of life: it's corporate welfare and a way to keep alternative energy off the market by skewing the marketplace in favor of the Texas boys.

[direwolf661]

@CaptainoIndustry condescending moron.

[etsneroj]

Greenspan's acknowledgment that the rationale for war was to secure access to oil is so important. And I am amazed that mainstream media does not talk about the war in those terms. I was against the war because it seemed an untimely, crude, and risky method of regime change. But clearly we must ensure the free flow of oil out of the Gulf. People who don't understand that fact will never understand U.S., Russian and European policy towards the region.

[BeholdZeus]

And does such a policy justify the death of 1 million Iraqis? [statistic from the John Hopkins Health Foundation, and subsequently peer-reviewed by congress). Strategic interests are not the interests of the people; they are the interests of the elite. Ergo, there is nothing democratic about them.

[madashelldude]

"secure" he means steal...'nough said.

[etsneroj]

I'm as cynical as the next guy, but I'm aware of no evidence to suggest that the US has stolen Iraqi oil resources, or that they intend to. Everything I've read indicates that they planned on Iraqi nationalized oil production with the revenues paying for Iraqi reconstruction, etc. No doubt, the US expected favortism in getting refining contracts, etc., but this was certainly not the motivation for war. I truly believe it was to ensure long-term access to oil out of the Gulf.

[madashelldude]

seems to me you don't have access to all the news.

Iraq's stolen billions, the FED and the BAHAMAS:

KJTaWgr-uhE

1Dx0EDD8LO8

[etsneroj]

I saw that piece, and neither Democracy Now, nor the journalists who wrote the Vanity Fair piece ever allege that the missing money is tied to oil, let alone stealing oil. So, I have no idea what you're talking about.

[etsneroj]

The deaths were not justified. As I said, I was against the war. That doesn't mean regime change in Iraw was not in everyone's best interest. Without a steady flow of oil out of the Gulf (which is what he threatened) the world economy would be devestated--including that of your country which has experience so much growth in recent years. That affects everyone, not just elites in big business. Ironically, in addition to lost lives, and new terror threats, the war may have made us less oil-secure.

[madashelldude]

if world economy was a consideration Ronald Reagan would have never gotten in the WH with oil company financing and we would have a decentralized power grid fed by solar panels ;)

[etsneroj]

The US economy is the consideration, and as the US goes, so does much of the world.

For better or for worse, Reagan was elected and reelected by historic margins, so I'm quite sure the support of oil companies was not decisive. You forget how bad things were in the late 70s. Lastly, the potential of solar power is great, but no serious energy expert believes solar can produce enough power to meet our current, let alone our future, demand.

[madashelldude]

only Nobel laureates like dr. richard smalley, father of nano technology, james woolsey, former head of the cia and john doerr the most important venture capitalist in silicon valley. other than that only european and asian countries and about half of the people in the usa including the 50 governors who met and discussed it in january 2008 at the NGA 2008 winter meeting ;)

[talktal]

bush, you idiot. you should have second guessed greenspan holding interest rates too historic low for that long. you cost every american 20% of their wealth. the world has limited resources, why would it be in our interest to cause competition for them?

[stone1home]

Typical view of a POS financier: On Iraq, not a word about the slaughter, death, and destruction. Or the few trillion (as these bloodless vampires reckon it) of paralyzing debt associated with the invasion.

[ludachris475]

Furthermore the Fed supplies banks with liquidity, such as those on the verge of bankruptcy, regardless of if they practice imprudent policy or not. In fact, they have more incentive to be imprudent than ever before and create almost limitless ficititious money, which they then charge interest on, while you yield over your assets ie. your house, your car, things of actual worth, as collateral for this fictitious money.

[sunstorm007]

This is the second time you've repeated yourself. Your attacking the theoretical aspect in which the Fed works, and you're not doing a good job. To attack the Fed for creating inflation you must offer an alternative monetary system that is not inflationary. Just because a system operates under a gold standard does not mean there will be no inflation. You don't know enough to talk about this stuff obviously

[ludachris475]

You seem to be advocating leaving prerogative over the control over interest rates in the hands of this banker cabal forever. The Federal Reserve could be nationalized as could other private bankers, where the issue of interest rates could be voted upon.

[sunstorm007]

Yes, of course the Fed might have incentives to abuse the practice of Open Market Purchases, just as governments have incentives to abuse the power of their monopoly on the legitimate use of force. Unfortunatly, you can offer no empirical evidence that a completley Laissez Faire banking system is better.

[ludachris475]

It is also important to note that the Federal Reserve does not have to exist at all. It is a private bank that capriciously inflates the money supply and allows banks to do the same and to employ fractional banking, that is, not to keep accurate reserves but to create money out of thin air and charge interest on this fictitious money.

[sunstorm007]

I wish I were getting paid to say this LOL. All you're saying, is that the Fed creates inflation. This is part of its function actually, but only with regards to controlling inflation, since inflation in inevitable even in the absence of central banking. You act as if inflation never existed before the Fed, and i'm telling you that it always has. You seem however to have no answer to what I am telling you about inflation. You have no alternative.

[jpenneyatyahoodotcom]

Well, you wouldn't get paid much.

You can criticize a system without providing and alternative system. A criticism can be valid without providing complete solutions to the problems it points out.

For our edification, have you explained how inflation happens if we don't allow charging interest and we have a currency that isn't debt-based? Or is a debt-based currency necessary condition for inflation to happen?

JP

[jpenneyatyahoodotcom]

I was trying to reply to sunstorm, sorry. I think ludachris is right about the FED causing problems, but I think it's more about the design of the system than the evilness of the institution. I assume the two are separable. I think we'd be ok if we had an interest-less liquidity system that placed a more balanced value on capital AND labor rather than valuing capital so much more highly than labor. The New Deal era, I think, illustrates this well though not perfectly.

[sunstorm007]

Yes, I can explain how inflation happens in two words.

It's called Coin Clipping !!!! look it up!

I have repeated myself continuously about coin clipping. Obviously none of you have looked it up.

[sunstorm007]

Your not really answering the issue of inflation which is how to control it in the absence of bank like the Fed. It is not really private in the way you speak of, as I have just stated that the Government has the legal right to eliminate it anytime they please. The government cannot legaly eliminate the Bank of America for instance simply by passing or repealing a law

[ludachris475]

The Fed lends each dollar it prints to the government at interest. Since the government cannot pay the interest, the Fed inflates the money supply to temporarily cover the outstanding debt, which then creates more debt, which the government is then obligated to pay. Since the government still cannot pay the interest, this obligation passes to the general population via the Federal Income Tax. This debt can never be paid because this perpetual increase of the money supply creates perpetual debt.

[ludachris475]

The Federal Reserve prints vastly more money than the Treasury, and creates perpetual inflation both by inflating the money supply and allowing banks to inflate the money supply further through bank pledges. The truth is the Federal Reserve is a private bank. It is not Federal at all.

Sunstorm is obviously paid to support the idea of privately owned independent Central Banks by debunking the messenger. It's highly hilarious how these people give themselves away.

[sunstorm007]

As for checks and balances, the President can eliminate the federal reserve when congress passes a bill dissolving the institution. So far that hasn't happened. The reason why that has not happpened is because moneterism works. There is a reason why all developed countries have created indepndent central banks much like the Fed. Look to the European nations, contrast with undeveloped ones, you will see the difference is a matter of independent central banking

[szatmar666]

I haven't heard of a european central bank that had shipments of billions belonging to an invaded country just leave its gates unaccounted for and unbeknown to its banker. But I get what you are saying, in a well regulated free market econ monetary policy is important. In mercantile monopoly capitalism however it's the tool of central control, not unlike the communist party in the old soviet union, just more sophisticated. It has the same function: keep power concentrated.

[zakkilhoffer]

I don't like how Greenspan discourages presidential influence in the Federal Reserve. Checks and balances, anybody?

[sunstorm007]

He says it because poltitical influence over banking is destructive to economies around the world. In fact, undue political influence over central banks is the key contributing factor in failure of economies around the world, particularly with regards to Latin America

[ludachris475]

Alan Greenspan is a bastard!  He's lying through his teeth.

And everyone, including Amy Goodman kisses his ass endlessly.

Wake up! The Federal Reserve is the reason for the decline of the economy! And of the dollar.

It creates the inflation!

It is a private banking cartel which has a monopoly over printing US currency. When this housing bubble bursts, there will be untold mass evictions in the US.

[madashelldude]

how is she "kissing his ass" exactly?! If you want to see ass kissing I recommend the 60 minutes interview ( Lesley Stahl ). Now that was a genuine brown nosed interview. Amy and Naomi are asking the real questions and Greenspan comes through as the disingenuous corrupt bastard that he really is. That was achieved without namecalling or "hardball" techniques. It's more important to trick your subject to go on record than to alienate him or shout him down.

[sunstorm007]

Boy, I can tell that you know nothing about economics! The housing bubble bursted months ago in the subprime market. Whoever told you that the Fed prints money is a lier. The Fed does not print money, the U.S. Department of the Tresury prints money, and they have printed money for many years before the Fed even existed. Inflation also existed before the Fed as well, ever hear of coin clipping?

I don't expect you to understand how coin clipping creates inflation

[davidmesaaz]

Amen you ludachris is ludacris

[davidmesaaz]

4. $3 million to "secure the acquisition of the McGinnes tract, protecting its critical natural resources and helping consolidate refuge inholdings."

5. $5 million to expand the cancer center at Brazosport Hospital.

6. $200,000 for the Matagorda Episcopal Health Outreach Program to fund a "National Health Service Corp Scholar."

7. $4.5 million to study the effects of the health risks of vanadium.

[sunstorm007]

This is enlightening, I didn't know he supported pork barrel projects. Although I never saw him as a real libertarian because he advocates trade protectionism .

[rogersat]

THANK YOU

[davidmesaaz]

I am going to respond when people declare wrongly that Ron Paul is a libertarian he is not a libertarian he thinks that government projects are ok... as long as they are in his district. 1. $25,000 for the Brazoria County Sheriff to establish a "Children's Identification and Location Database."

2. $8 million for the marketing of wild American shrimp.

3. $2.3 million for shrimp fishing research.

[madashelldude]

it's the silicone spinal cord implants.

[GinsingSullivan]

Ron Paul for President in 2008. Vote in the Primaries!

[madashelldude]

Ron Paul is a laissez faire extremist. He is right about Iraq but he does not acknowledge that government has a role in the economy at all, that's just as bad as saying government is the only player in the economy. Successful real life economies, including post WW2 USA are in the middle.

[davidmesaaz]

He is not laissez faire he believes in government pork. He has consistently voted for congressional funding studies for the sex life of shrimp.

[lasvegas4ronpaul]

> he believes in government pork.

David, David, David, why are you telling lies about Ron Paul ???????? And you posted your lies twice (one week apart)... is the best you can come up with, "sex life of shrimp" ??? and you cut & paste it all over the web, how pathetic !!!!

[davidmesaaz]

Well according to the According to the Houston Chronicle, Paul is leads the Houston-area delegation in the number of earmarks, or special funding requests, that he is seeking for his district. He is trying to nab public money for 65 projects, such as marketing wild shrimp and renovating the old movie theater in Edna that closed in 1977 — neither of which is envisioned in the Constitution as an essential government function.

[davidmesaaz]

Ron Paul not the libertarian he claims to be. He has voted for funding that studies the sex life for shrimp.

[lasvegas4ronpaul]

Paul does "ear-mark" but he then votes against the bill that has his own ear-marks... why? Because he is against pork. He also knows if the rest of Congress allow pork to slide why not help his district and prove a point about pork at the some time! Stop hating on Dr. Paul, or find a real issue to dispute him on.

[davidmesaaz]

This makes as much sense as John Kerry's declaration I voted for the war after i voted against it.

In any case your wrong as many as 65 pork projects he has voted for in the Houston Area. Sex life for shrimp is absurd but that is his voting patterns not mine.

[davidmesaaz]

HER ARGUMENT IS A SHAM That increase that she states is meaningless with out knowing the total number of government contracts given out. Her thesis that the US economy is base on kick backs and bribes but does not prove 60, 70 or 80 percent of the 16 trillion dollar economy is based on kick backs this can't be said for the US economy but can be said about Indonesia Also increase of private contracts = crony capitalism? What ?