@sniped101 -Actually Greenspan was wrong and he admitted it to congress in the fall of 2008. Wesley Born fought him to regulate OTC Derivatives and because money was being made, until it wasn't , no one listened. She spoke of a financial crisis that could result if there was no regulation. Nearly 10 yrs to the day her predictions came true. Greenspan admitted that conserve ideology was flawed, bankers couldn't be trusted to regulate themselves and such practices caused the financial meltdown.
@urparanoia and guess who i blame for that? I will give u a hint.. not greenspan...
He wanted banks to regulate themselves and they failed.. and guess what? They should have failed but they didnt.... why? because they knew the government would have bailed them out. I don't blame them.. i blame the government for bailing them out... do you?
@sniped101 -We're talking about 2 different things.Greenspan was thought to be a rock star when Born spoke to congress.No one with the exception of Born could believe the gravy train would ever stop or could imagine failure when the money was rolling in.Even Clinton felt that Greenspan was correct.You may not be in favor of the bailout but during the great depression this happened to a lesser degree.My comment was in regard to Greenspan being wrong about conservative ideology being correct
So the government should have let the world economy go under entirely?! That is your purposed solution?! The libertarian ideology that was pushed by greenspan in the first place which set up the conditions for the crisis was also responsible for major cutbacks in government power. They assumed government would bail them out because of the massive disaster that would happen if government didn't.
@Mufaso1000 Bullshit! Ayn Rand is a hack and a cult leader. Greenspan was the architect behind deregulation that was placed to prevented fraud for all these years including the commodities futures modernization act of 2000 which was largely supported by Greenspan.
Now that all the protections removed, Wall St. is the new Wild West, corporate interests hijacked government, we still have people promoting deregulation.
@Mufaso1000 read about commodities futures modernization act. i wouldn't say greenspan is the only guy, but he was in charged of a regulatory agency and backed deregulation of the markets. that makes him prime target.
I think he's missing the point here. Greenspan didn't think that bankers would directly look out for the wellbeing of their investors, but that they would do what's best for themselves, and that would also be what's best for their clients. E.g. if i make my client's more money then I get more, so I act in their best interests because it's also in my own.
The issue is not that the bankers didn't care, but that the incentives they faced weren't aligned with what was best for the economy as a whole
The Americans DO NOT have the best healthcare system in the world. DO NOT. Bill Clinton has said it as well as most of the world. It is not free market it's like a sort of hybrid which doesn't match the European style which is much better which covers everybody, nor is it purely free market as you guys spend 19% of revenue on healthcare, more then the UK which spends 9%, pick one, either is better then what you have now
I don't know about that. Every time I see Greenspan's ugly mug talking to the camera the word 'Ass-Flaps' immiediately jumpt to the front of my mind and stays there.
But hey, the important thing is that their both terrible people
"Well, first of all the Federal Reserve is an independent agency, and that means basically that there is no other agency of government which can overrule actions that we take" - Alan Greenspan
We have exterminated the property owners in Russia.We are going to do the same thing in Europe and America
The Jew,December 1925,Zinobit
The world revolution which we will experience will be exclusively our affair and will rest in our hands.This revolution will tighten the Jewish domination over all other people
Le Peuple Juif,February 8,1919
Please read this book to see what God has prepare for those Ashkenazi criminals,they will be exterminate
It's nice to run around and say let them fail. I think ideally that is what you do. But when you let them grow so big and powerful that they will take the whole economy down with them based on their own short term "needs" you ask everyone to suffer for their faults. That is asking to much.
If you want to let them fail regulate them to keep them smaller.
This is not capitalism. Its a world wide banking cartel buying up all industry with money they create out of thin air while posing as every government on earth, (minus the 7 nations left on the Rouge/Terrorist Nations list, who haven't bowed to the new world order by handing over their monetary systems yet).
The comfort of the rich depends on an abundance of the poor. -Voltaire
The economic collapse we are witnessing was designed at least 100 years ago.
Neither Greenspan or Bernanke set monetary policy for the foreign and privately owned non governmental Federal Reserve Banking System Corporation. They are fall guys for our impostor government, just like our Puppet in Chiefs.
Of course TVT fails to understand that Bernanke and Obama are every bit as bad or worse than Greenspan and Bush. They see everything through the left/right liberal/conservative prism. bad guys/good guys...hey dummys, no one in Washington has your best interests in mind, get a clue.
banks failed without regulation because of crony capitalism with a special adherance to corporatism. Regulation is garbage, was garbage, will always be garbage. Look at goldman sachs, super regulated, and yet they still managed to scam everyone.
FUCK THE BIG BANKS, AND FUCK THE FEDERAL RESERVE. What happens when banks are caught scamming their customers by regulatory agencies? Find out for yourself and see if they do their jobs!
I don't believe it was a failure on Greenspan's part. These are not stupid people. They deliberately manipulated the system to get exactly what they wanted. Our f*****g money. Which is precisely what they have got. They knew exactly the consequences if the malpractices and excessive risks were to continued to be taken by the banksters. There is now no such thing as free market capitalism. They rolled the dice and came up trumps. While we lost everything, and are being thrown out of the back door
I don't think it was limited to Greenspan's fault. It was the fault of so called, "Fiscal conservative, neoliberalism, libertarianism" and they just don't want to admit it.
This means all the US presidents since Truman, Ron Paul, Milton Friedman, Chicago school of economy, Austrian school of economy, you name it.
Forget about his ideas which he abandoned as soon as he became the chairman of a CENTRAL BANK which engages in price fixing. Instead look at his actions i.e. easy money and low interest rates which avoided the Tech bubble and created the Housing bubble. The malinvestment as a result of false price signals can be seen clearly by the ghost developments.
Capitalism is the wage slavery of immense humanity in a politically corrupt,manipulated MARKET SYSTEM OF ARTIFICIAL SCARCITY ,a tyrannical,destructive system to perpetuate poverty and exploitation in the interest of the ruling class. Capitalism from its mercantile plundering and enslavement of African natives to its Millitaristic rise of European Powers to World wars and Financial serfdom of the world has been a DISASTEROUS imposition .
@Ddvex LoL yeah! Let the american banks go bankrupt and all the companies that depends on them go down with the fall. Let all investors move over to euro and chinese yuan, and propell chinas echonomy up to the worlds strongest in a few years while american taxpayers thies to pay off their humungus debt with worthless dollars. Go ahead!!
The banks have us all by the balls, we go down with them. That's capitalism, baby!
Congress & FED with bailouts and QE (money printing) have decided that the poor and the middle class WILL pay the piper. They will do that through hyperinflation. They will be economically wiped out.
Had the banks been allowed to go bankrupt, all the rich (shareholdres, bond holders, bank depositors: american or chinese) would have paid the piper; they would have been wiped out. The middle class and the poor would have been hurt but not wiped out.
@Ddvex Do you understand that hyperinfation hurts the rich (because their money becomes wortless) and benefits the ones in debt (because their debt becomes wortless and easy to pay off)?
Neither massive bankrupts OR hyperinflation will happen as long as rich people have political power.
The middle class is highly indebted with their home loans, car loans, school loans, etc; they have little savings with what to buy gold silver or commodities.
The few who do have savings are misled by the establishment economists and the Mainstream Media permanently talking about deflation.
By the time HYPInflation hits they will all run to the Supermarket and empty its shelfs; they will spend ALL their cash buying a weeks capacity of food. Same as Germany, Argentina, Peru, Zimbabwe
@Ddvex "The middle class is highly indebted with their home loans, car loans, school loans, etc; they have little savings with what to buy gold silver or commodities."
Exactly my point! The ones in debt are the big winners in a hyperinflation. Just think about it. If you can sell your bicycle for a trillion dollar, your loans will be pretty easy to pay off. That is why the bankers will avoid it at all costs. Since Fed is owned by bankers, and not the state, it will not happen.
Bankers couldn't avoid house prices from falling even though it almost bankrupted them had it not been for the bailouts.
Bailouts, QE, Gov deficits and debt, have created the perfect scenario: bankers want inflation, they'll get MEGA hyperinflation.
If you think the middle class will benefit from HYPinflation, just because a few of them will get a free ride with their mortgages... well that wont be of much help with skyroketing CPI and 80% unemployment; check ZIMBABWE out!!!
@Ddvex In case you didn't notice... In countries where the market is let free, corruption and corporate welfare runs rampant. This is also what happened in the US. It is simply the result of wealth concentration, which happens everywhere where the government doesn't redistribute.
Don't know any country on Earth today with free market capitalism (Singapour may be close!).
You are confusing free market capitalism with "crony capitalism".
That is what happened in the US and many other countries.
The real problem was not the concentration of wealth... that was the result.
The real problem is Concentration of POWER allowing Big Government Central Planing distorting free market with aid from Central Bank making fortunes for their CRONYS.
@Ddvex Not really, they're different theoretical concepts, but in practice, they both end up as "crony capitalism". I mean, i could be a utopian too and say we don't need a market at all and then EVERYTHING would be solved. It's wonderful in theory, but crap in practice. So far, deregulating has led to one thing and regulating has led to another. Check the numbers, do the math. Sorry to break it to ya, but "free market" is an entirely theoretical concept, which has no bearing in the real world.
@Ddvex I don't believe that. I know that from experience and statistics. Check some statistics on well-being and corruption, for example. It is also obvious that chaos is detrimental, while order at least CAN be something positive for society. The first time the market was no longer free, it was because children could no longer work. On a free market, they can, and i simply can't accept that.
@Ddvex Right. And now we have a better world to live in, where children can go to school for free instead :). That productivity was a result of science and not capitalism. As a matter of fact, countries with better regulation have less corruption and produce more patents per person per year :).
And yeah, if a government can't take their mandated responsibility, that's gonna be the result! Of course it is. So... When they can't take their democratic responsibility, they resort to the free market
Science came from Government? No. It came from individuals pursuing their self interest.
Science by itself doesn't generate wealth; neither do patents. Evidence of this is that science is available for every poor country on Earth, still they can't generate wealth.
You need CAPITAL to obtain the benefits of science.
With all due respect:
Do you know what CAPITAL is? How it is created? Why it is needed?
@Ddvex Seriously, how daft are you? Inventions come from individuals. Individuals exist in every society.
Science generates wealth, if indirectly. Science provides the means for increases in productivity. Patents per person is a good measure of progress. It's interesting how most poor countries are very capitalist in their nature.
You need competence, labor hours and raw materials, not capital.
The whole idea that capital is a raw material or natural element is hilarious :P.
@Ddvex That's just a dumb question, asked by an ideologue.
Capital is, in classical economics, a so called "factor of production" that is -worthless- in itself, but used to purchase other things (raw materials and labor hours). Even without capital there will be raw materials and labor hours. Even without capital, there will be wealth. Capital is a means to make trade easier and that's all it is.
CAPITAL = Capacity to produce goods or services below the market price which enables you to generate a PROFIT. This Capacity can be a potential one, that is why it is said that CAPITAL comes from SAVINGS, or earnings (net income); almost the same thing.
Even if you have all the science available, if you don't have the capacity to produce goods or services with it, you can't prosper; you don't have CAPITALISM.
Do you understand why BG can't create CAPITAL, wealth??
@Ddvex You simply have no idea of how an economy works. Currency capital has no intrinsic value. Profit is an indirect tax on work, as there is no way of justifying a wage that represents the value a worker creates. If one tried, profit wouldn't exist. Currency is simply purchasing power and the power of each unit of currency can be anything the gov't wants.
Again, currency capital has no intrinsic value. Instead, goods and services do. That's the real economy.
@Ddvex It's possible to at any moment nationalise a profit-producing industry and choose between two options 1. let wages rise or 2. reduce the price of said service/good. I'm not saying it should be done, just that the production in and of itself has nothing to do with capital in the real world, the one most people live in. You should come see us sometime :).
BG can easily create wealth. It's a way of organising the economy, not changing the nature of it.
The only way BG can produce, at least for a while, anything below the market price is by stealing (nationalizing) from a private citizen.
Why cant BG invest in the industry without stealing? Because they could NEVER invest and generate a profit. BG cant compete for the benefit of consumers. That would be as rare as barking cats.
@Ddvex If a government is democratically elected, i'm not sure i'd classify expropriation as theft.
But that's exactly the point. The government isn't SUPPOSED to make a profit (if it did, it's be acting like a corporation). It's supposed to provide services for it's citizens in a manner the market can't and as there's no need for profit, prices can be lower. It's simple. PriceCorp = L+M+P, PriceGov't = L+M. A gov't doesn't compete, because it's not a corp.
@Ddvex Wrong. 1. Public companies and private corporations compete on the same labour and material markets and so pay the same prices.
2. Private corps need administration too and a centralised administration will always be theoreticall more effective.
3. Corruption is inherent in capitalism (in any large-scale system that handles goods), but it's funny how Scandinavia, with their huge public sectors, are the least corrupted countries in the world.
5. Inflation is inherent to any and all currency systems.
6. Violence is upkeeping private property rights.
7. Private coercion is way more troubling than public coercion and small gov't countries tend to have more of it.
Thus, the public sector can, at any given moment, produce the same goods cheaper for the consumer, as there is no leakage to profit. That's the main difference.
@Ddvex No need for profit, no need for savings, investment and production made in coordination with needs = surplus = lower prices on basic wares (electricity, food, etc.) = Social Wellbeing
@Ddvex The government can easily coordinate production of basic supplies with needs and should definitely do so. That's need. Wants are different and can easily be left to the market, whether socialist or capitalist. No ones capital is at risk, but rather the inefficient allocation of labor is a waste of labor time for society as a whole. That, however, is done in a capitalist market economy more than anywhere else. Hence we have crises every now and then.
@Ddvex In a capitalist system, it doesn't matter who risks the capital. If it's well placed, the real economy wins, and if it's malplaced, the real economy loses. Heck, in a capitalist system, even the most capital-efficient investment can be a loss to the economy through overproduction of a certain type of commodity. Overproduction in a sector leads to layoffs, which leads to less aggregate demand, which leads to further layoffs in other sectors. Happens all the time.
@Ddvex 1. There are sure bets, you know. Employment is one. Infrastructure is another. It's not either or, they're supposed to live in synergy. The government can run amok, sure. Wars happen too. We have to aim for something, though, and i like democracy more than greed, so i prefer the gov't to take care of some things. The gov't doesn't risk other people's money, it manages the economy. There is no financial contraint per se, as it is the monopoly-issuer of currency.
@Ddvex Also, if you're dumb enough to think the gov't can't generate capital, you're seriously disabled :D. Of course it can! In many cases better than the private sector can. The gov't can never steal. Also, taxes aren't theft. Seriously dude, the neoliberal era is ending. Laissez-Faire caused this. The common weal is what should be focused upon when forming an economy.
@Ddvex 1. You have no idea what the concepts of socialism and communism are. 2. I don't really believe in central planning, but a sensible mixed economy. Cuba has been devoid of trade since the USSR fell. Were you ever there before that? Also, none of the examples you mention are communist, as communism is a stateless form of society. China follows a system that could be called market socialism. There is no capitalism there yet. The US is nowhere close to socialist yet.
@Ddvex The US is just a good example of market mess-ups and the need for gov't intervention in markets. I believe in freedom, friend, and that's why i advocate mixed economy. True freedom can never be enjoyed in a society where greed rules :).
@Ddvex But you contradict yourself, friend. Capitalism as in the UK and the USA is the Anglo-Saxon disease. "The common good is what makes the cities great''. There is no such thing as a "free market". It is a system forever condemned to be burdened by humans and not desirable.
There has never been any free market Capitalism in the USA or the UK; specially since the creation of the central bank or Social Security or Medicare or Madicaid, or any entitlement program.
The common good will never be obtained via Crony Capitalism or Socialism!!!
@Ddvex There will never be free market capitalism and every effort to make it is wasted and goes to the big corps. And that's what always happened and has happened. Sorry to say it, but we're not machines. We're human. If people are to have a good life, we need common rules to abide to and a government regulation machine to make the ground even. Of course i dislike it when the gov't gives benefit to one company and not to another, that's unfair, so i guess we agree on that.
@Ddvex Well that explains it then! If you're religious, it's okay... If one is prepared to believe in the man in the sky, then one is certainly prepared to believe in the invisible hand and anarchism. Personally, i think better outcomes come from social cohesion and collective will, but yeah.
Anyway, i shall argue with you no longer, as it is clear we have different thresholds of belief! Have a good life! :)
@Ddvex ...But if a government wanted to compete, it would always win. The government has a monopoly on violence and currency and that's pretty much all you need to do what you want.
No one can compete with government on violence and currency counterfeiting.
The problem is that whenever government starts competing in that way, only scarcity, and serfdom are the fruits.
On the other hand, Government can't compete on anything that produces goods and services for the benefit of consumers; that is, for the benefit of society.
Prosperity doesn't come with government violence, coercion and counterfeiting; slavery does!!!
@Ddvex It's simply a matter of regulating purchasing power between different industries. If we find a certain industry is 1. mature or 2. of key importance to society, we can easily nationalise it. Also, capital isn't wealth. Wealth is goods and services and they can be produced without currency. Currency is a means to an end, which is to make the market run smoother. Taxes are the other side of the coin and are absolutely necessary for the currency to maintain it's value.
@Ddvex It is unbelievable that deregulation comment gets this many thumbs up on this channel.
1. If you think fraud in Wall St. would magically disappear once the FED is gone, you're naive.
2. Why wait for the house to burn down to teach them don't play with fire? This whole argument about interest in self preservation alone would prevent fraud is ludicrous. Go tell it to a degenerate gambler not to take risks, because Wall St. is a casino and bankers are degenerate gamblers.
The only way a DEGENERATE GAMBLER stops taking risks is for him to go lose all his money. I'm sure that would teach him a very good lesson, and even if it didn't, he would still stop taking risks because he's out of money.
You would need to be stupid to give a DEGENERATE GAMBLER your money and expect that a REGULATOR check over him in order that he doesn't lose it. He will find a way to gamble it all; regulator or no regulator.
@Ddvex That's the problem with your solution. Why wait for it to break and let the "invisible" forces fix it? This is not some social experiment where we can afford to let it play out. Prevention is more practical. Unlike the gambler, who's only losing his money, banks are using your money to gamble. BTW how is deregulation going to protect smaller businesses from monopolies? I'm sorry, I don't think your theory will demonstrate as you wished in practice. Humans have flaws.
This is the danger of having some guy fiddling around with interest rates and printing money. He does not know any more than anyone else what interest rates should be. The market should decide interest rates not some guy sitting in an office.
Keynesian economics is going to be revealed as little more than a money printing racket within the next 5 years.
It's amazing that Alan Greenspan with all his credentials and intelligence didn't understand the most basic tendencies in human nature. Greed and selfishness. Alan was living in an isolated dream world of his own making and it finally collapsed around him. His professionalism and ideology was a complete failure and he will forever be remembered as one of the most colossal fools this world has seen . Unfortunately our leaders lead us into destruction and we pay the price.
Greespan ... is living in mumu land ... he doesn't care either about the american people ... all those rich FUCKS care IF they really care only about themselves ... and they last thing they worry about is YOU ... if they do bad buisness who cares the middle class will pickup the tap as usual ...
Let's sue all the bastards. Watch "The Warning" by Frontline about Brooksley Born warning congress and Alan Greenspan KNOWING ABOUT THE FRAUD happening. All of them, The FDIC, the OTS, the Federal Reserve, the CEO's of the failed banks, have walked away with billions of our money. They are worse than Bernie Madoff.
Let's sue all the bastards. Watch "The Warning" by Frontline about Brooksley Born warning congress and Alan Greenspan KNOWING ABOUT THE FRAUD happening. All of them, The FDIC, the OTS, the Federal Reserve, the CEO's of the failed banks, have walked away with billions of our money. They are worse than Bernie Madoff.
Let's sue all the bastards. Watch "The Warning" by Frontline about Brooksley Born warning congress and Alan Greenspan KNOWING ABOUT THE FRAUD happening. All of them, The FDIC, the OTS, the Federal Reserve, the CEO's of the failed banks, have walked away with billions of our money. They are worse than Bernie Madoff.
I recommend EVERYONE to read "Greenspan's Fraud" by Dr. Ravi Batra, pHd of Economics from SMU. It is a brilliant and undeniable charge and PROOF that this sack of shit Greenspan is public enemy number ONE when it comes to how the U.S. has crumbled economically and in the state that it is. Outstanding book!!!
Maddof should be let go free! After all Greenspans creed is that there is no such thing as fraud. Whats the difference between Madoff and Greenspan ? Greenspan owns congress .
If this is what they are learning in school, i;m dropping the F out. Greed, selfishness, and inhumane pricks. Free marketm means giving your money away and sending all the jobs abroad. We don't need jobs in America, there's enough wild plants and animals for us to live on. Health care, well we have bandaids and gauzes. Let the states regulate the money, who cares if they spend it on their girlfriends in South America.
Yes after we lost the steel mills in the 80s under reaganism,it took 30 years,Oh clinton was no liberal,he was a republican lite.Clinton just delayed the crash 8 years.thats why I did not vote hillary,it looks like obama is a clone of bill.
That whole adminstration just served up America to the powerful monied interests who had been glowering ever since the New Deal. And somehow they made the average person think there was something in it for them. They are still managing to sell that lie to people further and further down the economic ladder.
Yeah - funny how you can steal a bag of chips and get the book thrown at you, but you can head a ring of large-scale crooks that bilk a whole country out of its future, and you just get to shrug it off.
Bingo! It is an insiders club where friends help friends manipulate the system to their mutual benefit. By the time they do their dirty deeds, it is often not illegal anymore.
If I understand this right, you are suggesting that Rand who was half a tick away from being a total anarchist would have supported TARP, Greenspan's bailouts and interventions, and in general using a centralized government granted monopoly to control interest rates?
That's like saying Jesus liked buttsechs and crystal meth because Ted Haggard, a self proclaimed "Jesus Groupy" liked getting analy rammed while tweeked out on junk.
Step away from the internet and go back to eating crayons downie.
Well said. Greenspan truly ignored Rand as evidenced simply by being willing to take the job. This depth-less Turk brings us a meaningless diatribe. We are to believe, in general, that unspecified differing/further regulation of the derivatives would have solved the problem that evolved. Yeah, right.
do not put the blame completely on alan greenspan,,,,it was under his stewardship america saw the greatest economic miracle ,,under the three people 1]alan greenspan 2] robert rubin 3] lawrence summers,,,these big three reported to bill clinton [whose economic bent of mind is legendary ],,,,,,,,,,come george bush he ruined the economy by over spending and wars ,,,,,,,bush inherited a suplus budget from clinton and turned it in to a deficiet budget ,,,,,blame for this must fall on bush too
America's economic growth during the Clinton years is purely illusory. With Greenspans fiscal paradigm generated between $4.50 and $5.50 of debt for every dollar of profit, check out Ravi Batra's book, Greenspans Fraud, well explained and easy to follow. Bush's foreign policy was disastrously expensive but his tax breaks for the wealthy were incepted by Greenspan along with maintaining artificially low interest rates for so long after he pumped so much cheap money into the economy.
USD is in some ways the reverse of the old Soviet ruble, which was actually two-tiered--an internal chit system and an external "hard currency" based on commodities (including gold) valued in USD.
USD is virtually two-tiered--one virtual currency for the Big Banks and Financials (the skim) and another currency for the rest, who are %99.
The Federal Government is the "fiat", not for the owners, but for the serfs.
you do not view the beginning of this horrible packaging of loans though. Henry Cisneros, ACORN, etc. made the loans riskier than they appeared and in many cases banks were mandated to have a certain number of risky loans. When you have the fed creating unreasonably low interest rates on these big balls of risk that the free-market would not set them at then people beging to buy into it.
Certainly Fannie and Freddie have moral hazard. They're GSE's, what do they have to lose? They're the owns who packaged these loans and sent them into the market. Referring to me as a white racist again tears down the legitimacy of your positioning. Furthermore, you imply that I am some hardcore conservative and think Bush did a great job. I do not approve of the bailouts under the Bush and Obama administration. I subscribe more to the libertarian economic philosophy developed by FA Hayek.
And in the last few days before the collapse new ones were proliferating like trilobites--ALL unregulated, ALL private, ALL designed to expand lending, ALL pseudo-statiscal BULLSHIT.
greenspan was right but the issue was we didnt let the banks fail..
of course they are going to care about themselves because WE set it up that way.
sniped101 2 months ago
@sniped101 -Actually Greenspan was wrong and he admitted it to congress in the fall of 2008. Wesley Born fought him to regulate OTC Derivatives and because money was being made, until it wasn't , no one listened. She spoke of a financial crisis that could result if there was no regulation. Nearly 10 yrs to the day her predictions came true. Greenspan admitted that conserve ideology was flawed, bankers couldn't be trusted to regulate themselves and such practices caused the financial meltdown.
urparanoia 2 months ago
@urparanoia and guess who i blame for that? I will give u a hint.. not greenspan...
He wanted banks to regulate themselves and they failed.. and guess what? They should have failed but they didnt.... why? because they knew the government would have bailed them out. I don't blame them.. i blame the government for bailing them out... do you?
sniped101 2 months ago
@sniped101 -We're talking about 2 different things.Greenspan was thought to be a rock star when Born spoke to congress.No one with the exception of Born could believe the gravy train would ever stop or could imagine failure when the money was rolling in.Even Clinton felt that Greenspan was correct.You may not be in favor of the bailout but during the great depression this happened to a lesser degree.My comment was in regard to Greenspan being wrong about conservative ideology being correct
urparanoia 2 months ago
@sniped101 -Dubya and Paulsen spent 700 billion and O spent more so who do you blame since both conserves and dems did the same ?
urparanoia 2 months ago
@sniped101
So the government should have let the world economy go under entirely?! That is your purposed solution?! The libertarian ideology that was pushed by greenspan in the first place which set up the conditions for the crisis was also responsible for major cutbacks in government power. They assumed government would bail them out because of the massive disaster that would happen if government didn't.
Captain0Newman 1 month ago
Problem is that the professional derivative traders are protected by ~ free gov't insurance, which of course, throws out Greenspan's entire thesis!
PADRAEG 6 months ago
@PADRAEG exactly!!
sniped101 2 months ago
Greenspan is a dirty rat.
helpdonate1 7 months ago
He's a traitor to Ayn Rand's philosophy. He is not a capitalist at all.
Mufaso1000 7 months ago
@Mufaso1000 Bullshit! Ayn Rand is a hack and a cult leader. Greenspan was the architect behind deregulation that was placed to prevented fraud for all these years including the commodities futures modernization act of 2000 which was largely supported by Greenspan.
Now that all the protections removed, Wall St. is the new Wild West, corporate interests hijacked government, we still have people promoting deregulation.
LloydMadoff 6 months ago
@LloydMadoff : How was he the architect behind deregulation? What were the protections you spoke of?
Mufaso1000 6 months ago
@Mufaso1000 read about commodities futures modernization act. i wouldn't say greenspan is the only guy, but he was in charged of a regulatory agency and backed deregulation of the markets. that makes him prime target.
LloydMadoff 6 months ago
The issue is not with the morality of Wall Street, but with the fundamental structure of the industry.
perezthegood 7 months ago
I think he's missing the point here. Greenspan didn't think that bankers would directly look out for the wellbeing of their investors, but that they would do what's best for themselves, and that would also be what's best for their clients. E.g. if i make my client's more money then I get more, so I act in their best interests because it's also in my own.
The issue is not that the bankers didn't care, but that the incentives they faced weren't aligned with what was best for the economy as a whole
perezthegood 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Americans DO NOT have the best healthcare system in the world. DO NOT. Bill Clinton has said it as well as most of the world. It is not free market it's like a sort of hybrid which doesn't match the European style which is much better which covers everybody, nor is it purely free market as you guys spend 19% of revenue on healthcare, more then the UK which spends 9%, pick one, either is better then what you have now
toberses11 8 months ago
no one knows what to say to this guy, half the time nobody understands what hes even saying
ovechkin100 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Best comment coming from Ddvex: "Right on: the CRIMINAL is the CENTRAL BANKER (i.e. Greenspan)
Wrong: The crime is NOT the lack of REGULATION.
The CRIME is: CRONY CAPITALISM with Monetary Inflation, Manipulation of interest rates, guaranties and Bailouts!!!
LET THEM FAIL. LET THEM GO BANKRUPT. That is the only REGULATION!!!"
jbvillarante 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is the best comment in this video: "Right on: the CRIMINAL is the CENTRAL BANKER (i.e. Greenspan)
Wrong: The crime is NOT the lack of REGULATION.
The CRIME is: CRONY CAPITALISM with Monetary Inflation, Manipulation of interest rates, guaranties and Bailouts!!!
LET THEM FAIL. LET THEM GO BANKRUPT. That is the only REGULATION!!!"
jbvillarante 9 months ago
you are exactly right Brooksley Born, they crucified her for daring to tell them how they were f**king up
cjendret 10 months ago
Yes, the market will work itself out just like it did in 1930.........oh wait
bmwm3cs 11 months ago
I don't know about that. Every time I see Greenspan's ugly mug talking to the camera the word 'Ass-Flaps' immiediately jumpt to the front of my mind and stays there.
But hey, the important thing is that their both terrible people
TheMchap123 11 months ago
I never liked Greenspan, not only for his policy; He looks to much like Rupert Murdoch
vladdrac88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Well, first of all the Federal Reserve is an independent agency, and that means basically that there is no other agency of government which can overrule actions that we take" - Alan Greenspan
J1NX1337 1 year ago
did GSpan not see it or did he put "a blind eye"?
lvildos 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We have exterminated the property owners in Russia.We are going to do the same thing in Europe and America
The Jew,December 1925,Zinobit
The world revolution which we will experience will be exclusively our affair and will rest in our hands.This revolution will tighten the Jewish domination over all other people
Le Peuple Juif,February 8,1919
Please read this book to see what God has prepare for those Ashkenazi criminals,they will be exterminate
Who Is Esau-Edom.The book is free on internet.
MsMihailescu 1 year ago
DUHH>....WE COULDNT BUY THOSE DERIVITIVES IF WE HAD ALL THE MONEY in our solar system
TryDeletingMe 1 year ago
It's nice to run around and say let them fail. I think ideally that is what you do. But when you let them grow so big and powerful that they will take the whole economy down with them based on their own short term "needs" you ask everyone to suffer for their faults. That is asking to much.
If you want to let them fail regulate them to keep them smaller.
rugbyguy59 1 year ago
theres the man that caused your housing mess
joewoo127 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
FUCK GREENSPAN Hang his ass!
Kenny123456ish 1 year ago
This is not capitalism. Its a world wide banking cartel buying up all industry with money they create out of thin air while posing as every government on earth, (minus the 7 nations left on the Rouge/Terrorist Nations list, who haven't bowed to the new world order by handing over their monetary systems yet).
The comfort of the rich depends on an abundance of the poor. -Voltaire
The economic collapse we are witnessing was designed at least 100 years ago.
Stand for it, or stand against it.
verbalmilitia 1 year ago
Comment removed
verbalmilitia 1 year ago
Neither Greenspan or Bernanke set monetary policy for the foreign and privately owned non governmental Federal Reserve Banking System Corporation. They are fall guys for our impostor government, just like our Puppet in Chiefs.
USTREAM. TV/CHANNEL/VERBALMILITIA. TV
Our Words are Weapons,
Our Ammo, the Truth.
VERBALMILITIA
marc27
verbalmilitia 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Travel around the world with and Naughty women mworld5.info
VeleriaWendi 1 year ago
كووووووووووووووووووووس خــــــــــــــــــــــوات الشـــــــــــــــــــــــــــيعة ابناء المتعة
dodehamdan 1 year ago
I just wonder why this really old people want more money... are they in denial of their own mortality?
I think there are some really dangerously stupid people in this world, and so dam greedy.
Ramiromasters 1 year ago
Bankers and brokers are nothing more than educated con men.
CommonSensePeter 1 year ago
Of course TVT fails to understand that Bernanke and Obama are every bit as bad or worse than Greenspan and Bush. They see everything through the left/right liberal/conservative prism. bad guys/good guys...hey dummys, no one in Washington has your best interests in mind, get a clue.
pretorious700 1 year ago
banks failed without regulation because of crony capitalism with a special adherance to corporatism. Regulation is garbage, was garbage, will always be garbage. Look at goldman sachs, super regulated, and yet they still managed to scam everyone.
FUCK THE BIG BANKS, AND FUCK THE FEDERAL RESERVE. What happens when banks are caught scamming their customers by regulatory agencies? Find out for yourself and see if they do their jobs!
Lookup Major Regulatory Agencies!
baihbalm 1 year ago
I don't believe it was a failure on Greenspan's part. These are not stupid people. They deliberately manipulated the system to get exactly what they wanted. Our f*****g money. Which is precisely what they have got. They knew exactly the consequences if the malpractices and excessive risks were to continued to be taken by the banksters. There is now no such thing as free market capitalism. They rolled the dice and came up trumps. While we lost everything, and are being thrown out of the back door
shanepaulcoward 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shadowgeyser
"Austrian school hasn't gone into effect .."
What they would do if they took the control of the economy, such as taxation and regulation?
Please explain.
allgoo19 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shadowgeyser
"How so? Austrian school hasn't .."
Key regulation placed by FDR was deregulated in 2000 then caused the 2008 crash.
Here's my question for you.
What new regulation have been added to prevent the banking industry collapse since 1945?
allgoo19 1 year ago
I don't think it was limited to Greenspan's fault. It was the fault of so called, "Fiscal conservative, neoliberalism, libertarianism" and they just don't want to admit it.
This means all the US presidents since Truman, Ron Paul, Milton Friedman, Chicago school of economy, Austrian school of economy, you name it.
They all failed.
allgoo19 1 year ago
@allgoo19 i know
isawanangel2 1 year ago
Forget about his ideas which he abandoned as soon as he became the chairman of a CENTRAL BANK which engages in price fixing. Instead look at his actions i.e. easy money and low interest rates which avoided the Tech bubble and created the Housing bubble. The malinvestment as a result of false price signals can be seen clearly by the ghost developments.
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
Capitalism is the wage slavery of immense humanity in a politically corrupt,manipulated MARKET SYSTEM OF ARTIFICIAL SCARCITY ,a tyrannical,destructive system to perpetuate poverty and exploitation in the interest of the ruling class. Capitalism from its mercantile plundering and enslavement of African natives to its Millitaristic rise of European Powers to World wars and Financial serfdom of the world has been a DISASTEROUS imposition .
arzoyan 1 year ago
Right on: the CRIMINAL is the CENTRAL BANKER (i.e. Greenspan)
Wrong: The crime is NOT the lack of REGULATION.
The CRIME is: CRONY CAPITALISM with Monetary Inflation, Manipulation of interest rates, guaranties and Bailouts!!!
LET THEM FAIL. LET THEM GO BANKRUPT. That is the only REGULATION!!!
Ddvex 1 year ago 20
@Ddvex LoL yeah! Let the american banks go bankrupt and all the companies that depends on them go down with the fall. Let all investors move over to euro and chinese yuan, and propell chinas echonomy up to the worlds strongest in a few years while american taxpayers thies to pay off their humungus debt with worthless dollars. Go ahead!!
The banks have us all by the balls, we go down with them. That's capitalism, baby!
AngeCord 1 year ago
@AngeCord
Someone WILL pay the piper!!!
Congress & FED with bailouts and QE (money printing) have decided that the poor and the middle class WILL pay the piper. They will do that through hyperinflation. They will be economically wiped out.
Had the banks been allowed to go bankrupt, all the rich (shareholdres, bond holders, bank depositors: american or chinese) would have paid the piper; they would have been wiped out. The middle class and the poor would have been hurt but not wiped out.
Ddvex 1 year ago
@Ddvex Do you understand that hyperinfation hurts the rich (because their money becomes wortless) and benefits the ones in debt (because their debt becomes wortless and easy to pay off)?
Neither massive bankrupts OR hyperinflation will happen as long as rich people have political power.
AngeCord 1 year ago
@AngeCord
I think you are wrong.
Hyperinflation hurts everyone; but wipes out the middle class. They become extremely poor. Look at Zimbabwe.
The rich are the most educated and can move very fast their assets to protect from hyperinflation (Gold, Silver, Commodities).
Even if the middle see it coming can't do much about it.
Irresponsible Americans that took mortgages that couldn't pay should loose their homes. Irresponsible bankers should loose their banks.
Hyperinflation will distort that.
Ddvex 1 year ago
@Ddvex What would prevent the middle class from buyng gold, silver and commodities?
AngeCord 1 year ago
@AngeCord
The middle class is highly indebted with their home loans, car loans, school loans, etc; they have little savings with what to buy gold silver or commodities.
The few who do have savings are misled by the establishment economists and the Mainstream Media permanently talking about deflation.
By the time HYPInflation hits they will all run to the Supermarket and empty its shelfs; they will spend ALL their cash buying a weeks capacity of food. Same as Germany, Argentina, Peru, Zimbabwe
Ddvex 1 year ago
@Ddvex "The middle class is highly indebted with their home loans, car loans, school loans, etc; they have little savings with what to buy gold silver or commodities."
Exactly my point! The ones in debt are the big winners in a hyperinflation. Just think about it. If you can sell your bicycle for a trillion dollar, your loans will be pretty easy to pay off. That is why the bankers will avoid it at all costs. Since Fed is owned by bankers, and not the state, it will not happen.
AngeCord 1 year ago
@AngeCord
Bankers couldn't avoid house prices from falling even though it almost bankrupted them had it not been for the bailouts.
Bailouts, QE, Gov deficits and debt, have created the perfect scenario: bankers want inflation, they'll get MEGA hyperinflation.
If you think the middle class will benefit from HYPinflation, just because a few of them will get a free ride with their mortgages... well that wont be of much help with skyroketing CPI and 80% unemployment; check ZIMBABWE out!!!
Ddvex 1 year ago
@Ddvex - iagree if we are going to give banks the opportunity to grow and expand by default we should also let them fail!!
marcoantonio078 1 year ago
@Ddvex In case you didn't notice... In countries where the market is let free, corruption and corporate welfare runs rampant. This is also what happened in the US. It is simply the result of wealth concentration, which happens everywhere where the government doesn't redistribute.
freedomthrough 10 months ago
@freedomthrough
Don't know any country on Earth today with free market capitalism (Singapour may be close!).
You are confusing free market capitalism with "crony capitalism".
That is what happened in the US and many other countries.
The real problem was not the concentration of wealth... that was the result.
The real problem is Concentration of POWER allowing Big Government Central Planing distorting free market with aid from Central Bank making fortunes for their CRONYS.
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex Not really, they're different theoretical concepts, but in practice, they both end up as "crony capitalism". I mean, i could be a utopian too and say we don't need a market at all and then EVERYTHING would be solved. It's wonderful in theory, but crap in practice. So far, deregulating has led to one thing and regulating has led to another. Check the numbers, do the math. Sorry to break it to ya, but "free market" is an entirely theoretical concept, which has no bearing in the real world.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
We don't disagree on our evaluation of reality: there is NO free market capitalism!
WHY? BIG GOVERNMENT Power Concentration.
It seems to me that we disagree on what helps the economy.
I believe that free market capitalism (as utopian as it may seem) helps the economy, freedom and liberty.
You believe that intellectual bureaucrats from Big Government can regulate the economy and generate prosperity.
Indulge me please and read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt.
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex I don't believe that. I know that from experience and statistics. Check some statistics on well-being and corruption, for example. It is also obvious that chaos is detrimental, while order at least CAN be something positive for society. The first time the market was no longer free, it was because children could no longer work. On a free market, they can, and i simply can't accept that.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
Throughout history children worked.
Either worked or didn't eat and died.
How did that stop in some developed countries in the 19 century? Due to BG regulation? No!
Children stopped working thanks to the productivity arising from Capitalism.
Machines increased the purchasing power of the common man, which allowed that their children could stop working.
BG regulation in poor countries tried to stop child work... they generated children begging and child prostitution.
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex Right. And now we have a better world to live in, where children can go to school for free instead :). That productivity was a result of science and not capitalism. As a matter of fact, countries with better regulation have less corruption and produce more patents per person per year :).
And yeah, if a government can't take their mandated responsibility, that's gonna be the result! Of course it is. So... When they can't take their democratic responsibility, they resort to the free market
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
Science came from Government? No. It came from individuals pursuing their self interest.
Science by itself doesn't generate wealth; neither do patents. Evidence of this is that science is available for every poor country on Earth, still they can't generate wealth.
You need CAPITAL to obtain the benefits of science.
With all due respect:
Do you know what CAPITAL is? How it is created? Why it is needed?
Do you know why government cant create CAPITAL?
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex Seriously, how daft are you? Inventions come from individuals. Individuals exist in every society.
Science generates wealth, if indirectly. Science provides the means for increases in productivity. Patents per person is a good measure of progress. It's interesting how most poor countries are very capitalist in their nature.
You need competence, labor hours and raw materials, not capital.
The whole idea that capital is a raw material or natural element is hilarious :P.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
Please answer: What is capital???
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex That's just a dumb question, asked by an ideologue.
Capital is, in classical economics, a so called "factor of production" that is -worthless- in itself, but used to purchase other things (raw materials and labor hours). Even without capital there will be raw materials and labor hours. Even without capital, there will be wealth. Capital is a means to make trade easier and that's all it is.
Your obsession with capital is funny :D.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
Simply put:
CAPITAL = Capacity to produce goods or services below the market price which enables you to generate a PROFIT. This Capacity can be a potential one, that is why it is said that CAPITAL comes from SAVINGS, or earnings (net income); almost the same thing.
Even if you have all the science available, if you don't have the capacity to produce goods or services with it, you can't prosper; you don't have CAPITALISM.
Do you understand why BG can't create CAPITAL, wealth??
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex You simply have no idea of how an economy works. Currency capital has no intrinsic value. Profit is an indirect tax on work, as there is no way of justifying a wage that represents the value a worker creates. If one tried, profit wouldn't exist. Currency is simply purchasing power and the power of each unit of currency can be anything the gov't wants.
Again, currency capital has no intrinsic value. Instead, goods and services do. That's the real economy.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@Ddvex It's possible to at any moment nationalise a profit-producing industry and choose between two options 1. let wages rise or 2. reduce the price of said service/good. I'm not saying it should be done, just that the production in and of itself has nothing to do with capital in the real world, the one most people live in. You should come see us sometime :).
BG can easily create wealth. It's a way of organising the economy, not changing the nature of it.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
I rest my case.
Even you agree.
The only way BG can produce, at least for a while, anything below the market price is by stealing (nationalizing) from a private citizen.
Why cant BG invest in the industry without stealing? Because they could NEVER invest and generate a profit. BG cant compete for the benefit of consumers. That would be as rare as barking cats.
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex If a government is democratically elected, i'm not sure i'd classify expropriation as theft.
But that's exactly the point. The government isn't SUPPOSED to make a profit (if it did, it's be acting like a corporation). It's supposed to provide services for it's citizens in a manner the market can't and as there's no need for profit, prices can be lower. It's simple. PriceCorp = L+M+P, PriceGov't = L+M. A gov't doesn't compete, because it's not a corp.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
People normally understand the difference between democracy and MOB RULE.
Thats why USA is a REPUBLIC.
The law of the land is the RULE OF LAW.
It's not mob rule, it defends the LAW.
The Rule of Law benefits what is right (correct).
It's supposed to be blind; never caring if it benefits majorities or minorities.
Ddvex 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
Please Understand:
PriceCorp (including Profits) is ALWAYS LESS than REAL PriceGov't
REAL PriceGov't = L+M+Beaurocracy+Corruption+Indirect taxes+inflation+violence+coercion
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex Wrong. 1. Public companies and private corporations compete on the same labour and material markets and so pay the same prices.
2. Private corps need administration too and a centralised administration will always be theoreticall more effective.
3. Corruption is inherent in capitalism (in any large-scale system that handles goods), but it's funny how Scandinavia, with their huge public sectors, are the least corrupted countries in the world.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@Ddvex 4. Profit is an indirect tax on work.
5. Inflation is inherent to any and all currency systems.
6. Violence is upkeeping private property rights.
7. Private coercion is way more troubling than public coercion and small gov't countries tend to have more of it.
Thus, the public sector can, at any given moment, produce the same goods cheaper for the consumer, as there is no leakage to profit. That's the main difference.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
No Profit = No Savings = No investment = No more goods and services = Scarcity = Higher Prices = Social Unrest
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex No need for profit, no need for savings, investment and production made in coordination with needs = surplus = lower prices on basic wares (electricity, food, etc.) = Social Wellbeing
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
"Investment and production made in coordination with needs"?
Who coordinates that?
Who is so wise to know what is needed, when is needed, and how to produce it at the lowest cost?
Whose capital would be at risk for the wrong "coordination"?
Sure... Super Intelligent Big Government Beaurocrats!!!
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex The government can easily coordinate production of basic supplies with needs and should definitely do so. That's need. Wants are different and can easily be left to the market, whether socialist or capitalist. No ones capital is at risk, but rather the inefficient allocation of labor is a waste of labor time for society as a whole. That, however, is done in a capitalist market economy more than anywhere else. Hence we have crises every now and then.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@Ddvex In a capitalist system, it doesn't matter who risks the capital. If it's well placed, the real economy wins, and if it's malplaced, the real economy loses. Heck, in a capitalist system, even the most capital-efficient investment can be a loss to the economy through overproduction of a certain type of commodity. Overproduction in a sector leads to layoffs, which leads to less aggregate demand, which leads to further layoffs in other sectors. Happens all the time.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
Thats exactly the point: "if it is well placed".
Who will allocate better capital, Government or private sector?
Friedman: No one spends other people's money as carefully as they spend their own.
The private sector risks its own money when they allocate capital.
BG risks other people's money.
And, by the way, did I already tell you that government cant generate CAPITAL?
Oh yes, and you told me that BG can steal through violence an coercion.
Ddvex 8 months ago
@Ddvex 1. There are sure bets, you know. Employment is one. Infrastructure is another. It's not either or, they're supposed to live in synergy. The government can run amok, sure. Wars happen too. We have to aim for something, though, and i like democracy more than greed, so i prefer the gov't to take care of some things. The gov't doesn't risk other people's money, it manages the economy. There is no financial contraint per se, as it is the monopoly-issuer of currency.
freedomthrough 8 months ago
@Ddvex Also, if you're dumb enough to think the gov't can't generate capital, you're seriously disabled :D. Of course it can! In many cases better than the private sector can. The gov't can never steal. Also, taxes aren't theft. Seriously dude, the neoliberal era is ending. Laissez-Faire caused this. The common weal is what should be focused upon when forming an economy.
freedomthrough 8 months ago
@freedomthrough
It appears to me you believe in Government "Central Planning" of the economy, Socialism, and Communism.
Have you tried visiting Cuba? How much Capital do they have?
Do you have any idea why the Berlin Wall fell? Or why did communist Russia fell?
Do you know why communist China turned into capitalistic China?
Do you know that USA is turning Socialist? Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, GM, AIG, Citibank, BoA,
By the way do you even believe in freedom, liberty?
Ddvex 8 months ago
@Ddvex 1. You have no idea what the concepts of socialism and communism are. 2. I don't really believe in central planning, but a sensible mixed economy. Cuba has been devoid of trade since the USSR fell. Were you ever there before that? Also, none of the examples you mention are communist, as communism is a stateless form of society. China follows a system that could be called market socialism. There is no capitalism there yet. The US is nowhere close to socialist yet.
freedomthrough 8 months ago
@Ddvex The US is just a good example of market mess-ups and the need for gov't intervention in markets. I believe in freedom, friend, and that's why i advocate mixed economy. True freedom can never be enjoyed in a society where greed rules :).
freedomthrough 8 months ago
@freedomthrough
The US is a good example of SOCIALISM and its rotten consequences!!!
Crony Capitalism is NOT "free market" failure.
Crony Capitalism is NOT "free market".
Crony Capitalism is SOCIALISM. The "Socialist Elite" gets the profits and the common man gets the losses.
WAKE UP!!!
Ddvex 8 months ago
@Ddvex But you contradict yourself, friend. Capitalism as in the UK and the USA is the Anglo-Saxon disease. "The common good is what makes the cities great''. There is no such thing as a "free market". It is a system forever condemned to be burdened by humans and not desirable.
freedomthrough 8 months ago
@freedomthrough
There has never been any free market Capitalism in the USA or the UK; specially since the creation of the central bank or Social Security or Medicare or Madicaid, or any entitlement program.
The common good will never be obtained via Crony Capitalism or Socialism!!!
Ddvex 8 months ago
@Ddvex There will never be free market capitalism and every effort to make it is wasted and goes to the big corps. And that's what always happened and has happened. Sorry to say it, but we're not machines. We're human. If people are to have a good life, we need common rules to abide to and a government regulation machine to make the ground even. Of course i dislike it when the gov't gives benefit to one company and not to another, that's unfair, so i guess we agree on that.
freedomthrough 8 months ago
@freedomthrough
That is why I do not put my faith in any human government.
I believe that only the Kingdom of God, the Government of God, will bring true happyness, justicie peace and prosperity for mankind.
"Let thy Kingdom come. Let thy Will be done on Earth"
Ddvex 8 months ago
@Ddvex Well that explains it then! If you're religious, it's okay... If one is prepared to believe in the man in the sky, then one is certainly prepared to believe in the invisible hand and anarchism. Personally, i think better outcomes come from social cohesion and collective will, but yeah.
Anyway, i shall argue with you no longer, as it is clear we have different thresholds of belief! Have a good life! :)
freedomthrough 8 months ago
@Ddvex ...But if a government wanted to compete, it would always win. The government has a monopoly on violence and currency and that's pretty much all you need to do what you want.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
I agree 100%.
No one can compete with government on violence and currency counterfeiting.
The problem is that whenever government starts competing in that way, only scarcity, and serfdom are the fruits.
On the other hand, Government can't compete on anything that produces goods and services for the benefit of consumers; that is, for the benefit of society.
Prosperity doesn't come with government violence, coercion and counterfeiting; slavery does!!!
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex It's simply a matter of regulating purchasing power between different industries. If we find a certain industry is 1. mature or 2. of key importance to society, we can easily nationalise it. Also, capital isn't wealth. Wealth is goods and services and they can be produced without currency. Currency is a means to an end, which is to make the market run smoother. Taxes are the other side of the coin and are absolutely necessary for the currency to maintain it's value.
freedomthrough 9 months ago
@freedomthrough
Why would you want to nationalize an industry?
Government dont have the capacity to produce anything below the market price!
The private sector competes permanently in the market and aim to produce more at lower prices.
Governments like Cuba and Russia have tried to regulate the economy (central planning) nationalizing industries, they only got scarcity.
Ddvex 9 months ago
@Ddvex It is unbelievable that deregulation comment gets this many thumbs up on this channel.
1. If you think fraud in Wall St. would magically disappear once the FED is gone, you're naive.
2. Why wait for the house to burn down to teach them don't play with fire? This whole argument about interest in self preservation alone would prevent fraud is ludicrous. Go tell it to a degenerate gambler not to take risks, because Wall St. is a casino and bankers are degenerate gamblers.
LloydMadoff 6 months ago
@LloydMadoff
The only way a DEGENERATE GAMBLER stops taking risks is for him to go lose all his money. I'm sure that would teach him a very good lesson, and even if it didn't, he would still stop taking risks because he's out of money.
You would need to be stupid to give a DEGENERATE GAMBLER your money and expect that a REGULATOR check over him in order that he doesn't lose it. He will find a way to gamble it all; regulator or no regulator.
Solution: STOP giving your money to GAMBLERS!!!
Ddvex 6 months ago
Comment removed
LloydMadoff 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Ddvex That's the problem with your solution. Why wait for it to break and let the "invisible" forces fix it? This is not some social experiment where we can afford to let it play out. Prevention is more practical. Unlike the gambler, who's only losing his money, banks are using your money to gamble. BTW how is deregulation going to protect smaller businesses from monopolies? I'm sorry, I don't think your theory will demonstrate as you wished in practice. Humans have flaws.
LloydMadoff 6 months ago
This is the danger of having some guy fiddling around with interest rates and printing money. He does not know any more than anyone else what interest rates should be. The market should decide interest rates not some guy sitting in an office.
Keynesian economics is going to be revealed as little more than a money printing racket within the next 5 years.
orangedac 1 year ago
It's amazing that Alan Greenspan with all his credentials and intelligence didn't understand the most basic tendencies in human nature. Greed and selfishness. Alan was living in an isolated dream world of his own making and it finally collapsed around him. His professionalism and ideology was a complete failure and he will forever be remembered as one of the most colossal fools this world has seen . Unfortunately our leaders lead us into destruction and we pay the price.
rcshouldis 1 year ago
Greespan ... is living in mumu land ... he doesn't care either about the american people ... all those rich FUCKS care IF they really care only about themselves ... and they last thing they worry about is YOU ... if they do bad buisness who cares the middle class will pickup the tap as usual ...
NobbyBear08 1 year ago
Yeah they are profesionals...professional Wall Street corporate whores!
FightTheCorporations 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Let's sue all the bastards. Watch "The Warning" by Frontline about Brooksley Born warning congress and Alan Greenspan KNOWING ABOUT THE FRAUD happening. All of them, The FDIC, the OTS, the Federal Reserve, the CEO's of the failed banks, have walked away with billions of our money. They are worse than Bernie Madoff.
konahawaiitina 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Let's sue all the bastards. Watch "The Warning" by Frontline about Brooksley Born warning congress and Alan Greenspan KNOWING ABOUT THE FRAUD happening. All of them, The FDIC, the OTS, the Federal Reserve, the CEO's of the failed banks, have walked away with billions of our money. They are worse than Bernie Madoff.
konahawaiitina 1 year ago
Let's sue all the bastards. Watch "The Warning" by Frontline about Brooksley Born warning congress and Alan Greenspan KNOWING ABOUT THE FRAUD happening. All of them, The FDIC, the OTS, the Federal Reserve, the CEO's of the failed banks, have walked away with billions of our money. They are worse than Bernie Madoff.
konahawaiitina 1 year ago 11
This has been flagged as spam show
I recommend EVERYONE to read "Greenspan's Fraud" by Dr. Ravi Batra, pHd of Economics from SMU. It is a brilliant and undeniable charge and PROOF that this sack of shit Greenspan is public enemy number ONE when it comes to how the U.S. has crumbled economically and in the state that it is. Outstanding book!!!
torque122 1 year ago
Get Noam Chomski on your Show
malma1 2 years ago
well you sir can just go ahead and insert my hot smelly penis into your mouth and savour the vinegary flavour :)
LcoolJfiveoh 2 years ago
Adam Smith warned about this sort of thing in 'The Wealth Of Nations'
malma1 2 years ago 2
what can we really do about it?
snowpro90 2 years ago
Well . . . He has the nose.
Caspers187 2 years ago
Greenspan is Darth vader of the modern world.
sethar1 2 years ago
No way. Cheney is the Darth Vader of the modern world. Greespan is a bumbling fool.
devourerofbabies 1 year ago
Maddof should be let go free! After all Greenspans creed is that there is no such thing as fraud. Whats the difference between Madoff and Greenspan ? Greenspan owns congress .
sethar1 2 years ago
Lets just deregulate everything. LOL
If this is what they are learning in school, i;m dropping the F out. Greed, selfishness, and inhumane pricks. Free marketm means giving your money away and sending all the jobs abroad. We don't need jobs in America, there's enough wild plants and animals for us to live on. Health care, well we have bandaids and gauzes. Let the states regulate the money, who cares if they spend it on their girlfriends in South America.
chipsandcookies 2 years ago
It all started with ronald reagan.
MrTabby5000 2 years ago
So true, MrTabby. Thirty years of Trickle Down Reaganomics brought us this disaster.
AtlasShruggery 2 years ago
Yes after we lost the steel mills in the 80s under reaganism,it took 30 years,Oh clinton was no liberal,he was a republican lite.Clinton just delayed the crash 8 years.thats why I did not vote hillary,it looks like obama is a clone of bill.
MrTabby5000 2 years ago
That whole adminstration just served up America to the powerful monied interests who had been glowering ever since the New Deal. And somehow they made the average person think there was something in it for them. They are still managing to sell that lie to people further and further down the economic ladder.
hollywoodartchick 2 years ago
hollywoodartchick, well said!
atlantoon 2 years ago
Thanks much, atlantoon.
hollywoodartchick 2 years ago
Greespan needs to bunk with Madoff.
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 2 years ago
Yeah - funny how you can steal a bag of chips and get the book thrown at you, but you can head a ring of large-scale crooks that bilk a whole country out of its future, and you just get to shrug it off.
hollywoodartchick 2 years ago
Its because most large scale crooks are white old good ol boys,and most chip stealers are people of color.
MrTabby5000 2 years ago
Bingo! It is an insiders club where friends help friends manipulate the system to their mutual benefit. By the time they do their dirty deeds, it is often not illegal anymore.
hollywoodartchick 2 years ago
Greenspan dont give a fuck if people are unemployed as long as the bankers are getting wealthy.
I would jump for joy if greenspan and paulson died of a massive heart attack,and I would find their graves and spit on them.
Fuck capitalism.
MrTabby5000 2 years ago
I can't stand him any more
hopes26 2 years ago
Sadly, Ayn Rand groupies like Greenspan and Paulson didn't go Galt before they nearly destroyed the US economy.
AtlasShruggery 2 years ago
If I understand this right, you are suggesting that Rand who was half a tick away from being a total anarchist would have supported TARP, Greenspan's bailouts and interventions, and in general using a centralized government granted monopoly to control interest rates?
That's like saying Jesus liked buttsechs and crystal meth because Ted Haggard, a self proclaimed "Jesus Groupy" liked getting analy rammed while tweeked out on junk.
Step away from the internet and go back to eating crayons downie.
PumpkinJoe999 2 years ago
Well said. Greenspan truly ignored Rand as evidenced simply by being willing to take the job. This depth-less Turk brings us a meaningless diatribe. We are to believe, in general, that unspecified differing/further regulation of the derivatives would have solved the problem that evolved. Yeah, right.
skidancin 2 years ago
Are you sure? To me, Greenspan came pretty close of stopping the motor of the world, didn't he.
aynair 2 years ago
do not put the blame completely on alan greenspan,,,,it was under his stewardship america saw the greatest economic miracle ,,under the three people 1]alan greenspan 2] robert rubin 3] lawrence summers,,,these big three reported to bill clinton [whose economic bent of mind is legendary ],,,,,,,,,,come george bush he ruined the economy by over spending and wars ,,,,,,,bush inherited a suplus budget from clinton and turned it in to a deficiet budget ,,,,,blame for this must fall on bush too
23580578 2 years ago 2
America's economic growth during the Clinton years is purely illusory. With Greenspans fiscal paradigm generated between $4.50 and $5.50 of debt for every dollar of profit, check out Ravi Batra's book, Greenspans Fraud, well explained and easy to follow. Bush's foreign policy was disastrously expensive but his tax breaks for the wealthy were incepted by Greenspan along with maintaining artificially low interest rates for so long after he pumped so much cheap money into the economy.
JustinR81 2 years ago 2
@23580578 Do you consider who is really Bush family and Clinton also?
The fact is this situation is planed over decades such was financial crash in 1920s
tavernstudios 1 year ago
@23580578 :O look what i found, "notha sel-fish in the ocean"
nghtyvbz 1 year ago
@23580578 it's alan's and others that supported the notion that an economy should be run by selfishness and not by balance.
it's easy and dangerous to blame bush for everything which is wrong, you miss the true chance of understanding and fixing what is wrong.
telewebservices 1 year ago
watch the WHOLE show? sorry, his strident semi-whine is only watchable in small doses
mailman63155 2 years ago
"..strident semi-whine..?
Not exactly Mark Twain with your prose, are you?
oldjoe5 2 years ago
the point is that wall street guys DO know what they are doing, out of self interest they are stealing from others.
That is the fundamental flaw with laissez faire, the free rider problem
Blechoz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Turkish people are retarded and don't get anywhere for a reason....so shut the fuck up.
Cockknocker99 2 years ago
@youngturk,
You're half way their but not quite all they way their.
xms32 2 years ago
Bush was the figurehead of a coalition of Zionist Neo-Cons, Christian Fundamentalists, and Corporate Fascists.
Cheney was the mover and shaker.
The military is now becoming another estate.
It is split.
mopsius 2 years ago
All Republicans (including Paul) are Fascists.
Almost all Democrats are Fascists.
FDR was a Fascist middleman who absorbed the Left and whose role was to ready the US for war.
Stalin had his number.
mopsius 2 years ago
Paul is a well-concealed Fascist--closer to a Social -Darwinist of classic liberal--but still a Fascist.
Paul is no Libertarian at all. He just talks like it.
"Christian Libertarian" is a contradiction in terms, and was phrased to bamboozle the few Libertarians left.
Notice that Falwell did not rename Liberty University when he bought it.
The Fundamental Christians are trying to take over the military by taking over the officer corps.
mopsius 2 years ago
USD is in some ways the reverse of the old Soviet ruble, which was actually two-tiered--an internal chit system and an external "hard currency" based on commodities (including gold) valued in USD.
USD is virtually two-tiered--one virtual currency for the Big Banks and Financials (the skim) and another currency for the rest, who are %99.
The Federal Government is the "fiat", not for the owners, but for the serfs.
mopsius 2 years ago
The US is a form of Fascism, but in reverse, a version of what Lenin and Fuller called "FinCap".
Fincap, which is controlled by one percent, owns ninetey-nine percent of the assets and "capital".
Fincap also owns the sate.
mopsius 2 years ago
The US does does not even reach the level of a sound fiat currency (such critters are possible and have occurred historically).
USD is a debt credit instrument that is used as a currency.
That is why I call it a quasi-currency.
mopsius 2 years ago
One thing to get clear: the US is a predatory Capitalist warfare state.
Even Roberts sees that, though he does not phrase it that way.
mopsius 2 years ago
Bush's bailout with Paulson was criminal, pure and simple theft.
Obama's stimulus is ill-conceived.
But after all Paulson and Greenspan and Geithner and Summers are all part of the same cabal--so it is no surpise.
mopsius 2 years ago
The aim of these people is to put the very system that collapsed back into place, with the same incompetents running it in the same way.
It's fantasia.
mopsius 2 years ago
It's a form of collective delusion.
These people are actively disconnected from reality.
And the American dumbasses let them get away with it because they are for the most part dumber than rocks.
mopsius 2 years ago
Another group of defaulters were the local upper and middle class speculators--solid credit and income, already owning real state, financially savvy.
They were buying real as speculaors--at low initial rate, no money down.
Generally they had their own property protected.
When real estate prices began to fall this group just walked away--told the banks to go fuck themselves and foreclose.
But you will never hear of "Moral Hazards" in regard to that group.
mopsius 2 years ago
you do not view the beginning of this horrible packaging of loans though. Henry Cisneros, ACORN, etc. made the loans riskier than they appeared and in many cases banks were mandated to have a certain number of risky loans. When you have the fed creating unreasonably low interest rates on these big balls of risk that the free-market would not set them at then people beging to buy into it.
Ukelelemasta 2 years ago
Ukelelemasta--you really don't know what you are talkign about. Cisneros and the others were all fuck-ups--that was not a major problem--peanuts.
You know nothing about economics or finace or banking.
You just keep repeating ideological trash.
Both Democrats and Republicans are incompetent, and the financials and bankers are incomeptent beyond your imagination--systematically so.
Singling out Cisneros is silly.
You are either just plain ignorant or an ideological asshole.
mopsius 2 years ago
And now these fucking white racists are trying blame getting rid of redlining, and talkign about Moral Hazards?
What a fucking joke.
Shove it up your petty bourgeois Paulista asses.
The nice thing is that they have been fucked too, HAHAHA.
"Free market"--HAHAHAHA/
mopsius 2 years ago
Certainly Fannie and Freddie have moral hazard. They're GSE's, what do they have to lose? They're the owns who packaged these loans and sent them into the market. Referring to me as a white racist again tears down the legitimacy of your positioning. Furthermore, you imply that I am some hardcore conservative and think Bush did a great job. I do not approve of the bailouts under the Bush and Obama administration. I subscribe more to the libertarian economic philosophy developed by FA Hayek.
Ukelelemasta 2 years ago
Another fuckup was variable rate mortgages--borrow now, sell your children when we raise the rates.
But he, real estate is on a never ending rise, right?
If you wanted a collapse you couldn;t have designed a better, more elegantly interlocked system.
Even students loans pplayed.
The old KGB guys would have turned green with envy--we could never have engineered what these greedy dumbasses did to themselves.
HAHAHAHAHA.
mopsius 2 years ago
Banks and Financial needed expanding credit to keep the real estate market prices steadily increasing.
For that they needed expanding credit.
By 2005 you could get a loan on your fucking shoe-size.
The banks were pushing loans, pressuring, retailing. Credit--some model will fit.
You dumbshits are so naive it is pitiful.
mopsius 2 years ago
The other factor was the Financials moving into Bank assets with bundling and offering big profits, for which the banks were the retailers.
Bad paper, good paper--what the fuck did they care.
Put it in the stew and call in ENHANCED.
Sell it quickly, make a lot of money, and leave town.
mopsius 2 years ago
You dumbasses just bailed these sleazeballs out with trillions.
mopsius 2 years ago
Except for a few of the Big Boys banks are run like supermarkets now--strictly retail.
Some of them are deliberately fee-powered--actually encourage overdrafts for example because they profit from the fees.
They want patrons living form hand to mouth--lots of them.
Given half a chance they will fuck you dumbasses for life.
mopsius 2 years ago
"Credit Models" were never regulated.
And in the last few days before the collapse new ones were proliferating like trilobites--ALL unregulated, ALL private, ALL designed to expand lending, ALL pseudo-statiscal BULLSHIT.
And the banks gobbled them up, why?
The Banks were desperate.
mopsius 2 years ago
The Corporate Fascists fucked up--royally.
It would take too long to count the ways but credit models were part of it.
Also banks had long ago become retail.
You dumbasses don't even know what that means.
Privatization and deregulation were part of it as well. People were not looking because they were being hired and paid not to look.
Madoff is just one example, and one of the least important.
That was only $56 billion.Peanuts compared to what Paulson ripped off.
mopsius 2 years ago
then maybe we should be using the Models of the Austrian School of Economics. They predicted the Great Depression and this financial crisis.
Ukelelemasta 2 years ago
Ukelemasta, that comment shows you don't even know what a credit model is--so why do you keep talking?
mopsius 2 years ago
Ukelelmasta, "Moral Hazard" is bullshit--just a buzzword and always directed by the bankers and financials at everyone but themselves.
I might go into great detail but it would take pages.
Even predatory lending doesn't cover it.
Banking became fantasy--and independently of the Federal government.
As I said, you don't even know what it means when I say banking became retail.
mopsius 2 years ago