This news story has 15 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »
•  
  

  • Neil459: 
  • Comments (1082)
  •  • Instablog (1)

  • •
  • perceptivemind.com
  Typical government bureaucrat, highlight the politically correct numbers and ask everyone to ignore the ones that don't fit. Its all about spin.

  Oct 04 06:29 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Graham and ...: 
  • Comments (1828)
  •  • Instablog (648)
  •  • StockTalk (1336)

  • •
  • R.W. Wentworth & Co.
  Only a Greenspan recovery; soft landing followed by a soft recovery. Most other recoveries (like the previous landings) were "harder."

  Oct 04 06:34 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • D. McHattie: 
  • Comments (418)
  •  • Instablog (1)
  •  • StockTalk (1)
  Yup, this is what a recovery looks like, Alan. A false recovery, that is.

  Oct 04 06:49 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Baeck: 
  • Comments (39)
  •  • StockTalk (5)
  Why is it that anyone still cares what Alan Greenspan thinks? He unwittingly set the stage for this whole disaster and now he magically knows how we're going to get out of it? Doubtful.

  Oct 04 06:52 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • jpiretti: 
  • Comments (193)
  Just a reminder. When Reagan took office in Jan. 81' the unemployment rate was 7.6%. 2 years later in Jan. 03' it was 9.6% and that was considered an economic revitalization and I don't think anyone who comments on this site would consider those 2 years to be a false recovery. The private sector is even slower to hire then it is to shed capacity...it takes time.

  Oct 04 07:07 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • fed_alchemy: 
  • Comments (134)
  Back then America still made something , todays service economy will not rebuild America . (unless we all go to work for the man)
  
  
  On Oct 04 07:07 PM jpiretti wrote:
  
  The private sector is even slower to hire then it is to
  > shed capacity...it takes time.

  Oct 04 07:58 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Niner: 
  • Comments (669)
  Unemployment will/has overshot the bottom just like the Market indexes overshot the bottom. The big question for me at the moment is: Has the Market indexes overshot an intermediate top?

  Oct 04 08:22 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Jolly_Rancher: 
  • Comments (372)
  •  • Instablog (5)
  Greenspan is correct. This is what a recovery looks like. There was no end to the b$tchin and moanin during the 1991 recovery, so much so that Bush was not re-elected. Remember "it's the economy stupid." Back then, the Bush administration tried to tell people that the recovery was real, that this is what they look like, but no one listened. Then Clinton took full credit later when it became obvious. Unfortunately, too many investors won't believe this is a real recovery and will panic sending the indexes down 10 to 15 percent. Let's get it over with.

  Oct 04 09:11 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Gino Verza: 
  • Comments (17)
  •  • Instablog (3)
  Someone should tell Alan to relax, walk his dog, have a coffee.
  
  Whatever following he had in his earlier years lost steam after the financial meltdown. His explanations and excuses were too transparent to be credible.
  
  Relax Alan, let it go, walk your dog. No need for public view.

  Oct 04 09:16 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • EX-AD-MAN: 
  • Comments (66)
  The ruckus over Alan Greenspan's mutterings reminds me of how the wise men in ancient China would collect their 3 year old emperor's tiny poops in a bowl, and then pick it over with a magnifying glass, looking for "signs."
  
  History repeats, like a trucker with gas.
  
  Jolly-Rancher: What does a USA recovery look like when the last of the borrowed money is spent, and no foreigners are willing -- for GOOD REASON -- to lend anymore? Wake up and take a look around. If it isn't made in China, it's borrowed in China.

  Oct 04 09:43 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Jolly_Rancher: 
  • Comments (372)
  •  • Instablog (5)
  You mean like the huge deficit and the tapped out consumer during the 1991 recession that disappeared by the end of the decade -- so much so that the government started buying back notes and GASP! bond dealers worried about the supply? Of course, history never repeats, but this looks pretty similar to me.
  
  
  On Oct 04 09:43 PM EX-AD-MAN wrote:
  
  > The ruckus over Alan Greenspan's mutterings reminds me of how the
  > wise men in ancient China would collect their 3 year old emperor's
  > tiny poops in a bowl, and then pick it over with a magnifying glass,
  > looking for "signs."
  >
  > History repeats, like a trucker with gas.
  >
  > Jolly-Rancher: What does a USA recovery look like when the last of
  > the borrowed money is spent, and no foreigners are willing -- for
  > GOOD REASON -- to lend anymore? Wake up and take a look around. If
  > it isn't made in China, it's borrowed in China.

  Oct 04 09:59 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • spald_fr: 
  • Comments (381)
  GREENSPAN: Oh, no new stimulus for two reasons. One, only 40 percent of the first stimulus has been in place. And there is a considerable debate going on in the economics profession about how effective this stimulus package is. And so mainly because of the fact that as broad as it is and as effective as it will turn out to be, it still has got 60 percent left to go. So in my judgment it's far better to wait and see how this momentum that has already begun to develop in the economy carries forward.

  Oct 04 11:20 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • jpiretti: 
  • Comments (193)
  People who doubt Jolly Rancher need to google US Debt/GDP 1933-2008. You will see a parabolic rise in 1981 to 1992 and again in 2001 with a slight decrease during the Clinton years. What it tells me is the investment we made in our economy by cutting marginal rates and investment distribution rates gave us a negative real return and that was reflected in the Federal balance sheet. I believe in low taxes, but I also believe that they must be targeted towards R&D, capital and infrastructure spending which create a robust multiplier effect as opposed to cutting rates for trust fund kids.
  
  On Oct 04 09:59 PM Jolly_Rancher wrote:
  
  > You mean like the huge deficit and the tapped out consumer during
  > the 1991 recession that disappeared by the end of the decade -- so
  > much so that the government started buying back notes and GASP! bond
  > dealers worried about the supply? Of course, history never repeats,
  > but this looks pretty similar to me.

  Oct 05 09:41 AM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Jolly_Rancher: 
  • Comments (372)
  •  • Instablog (5)
  The graph shows that the fiscal shape we're in is a combined team "effort" of the current and previous presidents, though I wonder why the vertical black line that would separate Obama and Bush terms is MIA. I think that line would make the picture a little clearer.
  
  But to your point, I agree completely; it is not too late to enact policies that encourage investment, and repeal those laws that encourage blatant useless consumerism. For example, the home interest deduction should be phased out, while the business deduction for investment in the 50 states should be 1.5x.
  
  
  On Oct 05 09:41 AM jpiretti wrote:
  
  > People who doubt Jolly Rancher need to google US Debt/GDP 1933-2008.
  > You will see a parabolic rise in 1981 to 1992 and again in 2001 with
  > a slight decrease during the Clinton years. What it tells me is the
  > investment we made in our economy by cutting marginal rates and investment
  > distribution rates gave us a negative real return and that was reflected
  > in the Federal balance sheet. I believe in low taxes, but I also
  > believe that they must be targeted towards R&D, capital and infrastructure
  > spending which create a robust multiplier effect as opposed to cutting
  > rates for trust fund kids.
  >
  > On Oct 04 09:59 PM Jolly_Rancher wrote:

  Oct 05 02:19 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • jpiretti: 
  • Comments (193)
  America made something? Really? My memory is that you could have replaced "Made in Japan" in the 80's for "Made in China" today. Don't you remember?...Japan was going to eat our lunch and own all of our industries. I don't remember the 80's for much besides the beginning of financial de-regulation followed by the S&L crisis and insider trading scandals. Let me ask a question for our Libertarian crowd out there. How many financial crisis did the US have during a pretty strong regulatory framework from WW2 to 1981?...Can anyone think of one?
  
  On Oct 04 07:58 PM fed_alchemy wrote:
  
  > Back then America still made something , todays service economy will
  > not rebuild America . (unless we all go to work for the man)
  >
  > The private sector is even slower to hire then it is to

  Oct 05 03:32 PM | Link | Reply