NYT Paul Krugman calls Greenspan, "just another repub hack"

[whistle]

<snip>

February 18, 2005
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Three-Card Maestro
By PAUL KRUGMAN

Alan Greenspan just did it again.

Four years ago, the Fed chairman lent crucial political support to the Bush tax cuts. He didn't specifically endorse the administration's plan, and if you read his testimony carefully, it contained caveats and cautions. But that didn't matter; the headlines trumpeted Mr. Greenspan's support, and legislation whose prospects had previously seemed dubious sailed through Congress.

On Wednesday Mr. Greenspan endorsed Social Security privatization. But there's a difference between 2001 and 2005. In 2001, Mr. Greenspan offered a convoluted, implausible justification for supporting everything the Bush administration wanted. This time, he offered no justification at all.

<snip>

But Mr. Greenspan is no longer entitled to such deference. By repeatedly shilling for whatever the Bush administration wants, he has betrayed the trust placed in Fed chairmen, and deserves to be treated as just another partisan hack.

<so much more>

<link> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/18/opinion/18krugman.html?th

[patrice]

1. Really, you never hear any debate about Greenspan's decisions . . .

= royalty.

We are War Slaves!

[Stevendsmith]

2. Yeeeeees!!!! Go, Paul!

[Skink]

4. When Greenspans name is mentioned it should start with Partisan Hack...

Partisan Hack Greenspan said today.....

[Hobarticus]

3. Dang! The gloves come off!

Usually the pundits leave old Al alone!

[PROGRESSIVE1]

5. Bush Partisan Greenspan

[redqueen]

6. Will Democratic Senators catch on?

Or will they keep acting like the chumps they have up to now?

[Paranoid_Portlander]

7. I found this Greenspam cartoon...

... at www.internetweekly.org/2004/07/cartoon_greenspam.html Lots of really interesting links follow the cartoon.

[Technowitch]

8. What? He's FINALLY figured this out? Yeesh!

Greenspan's been a Repuke for as long as he's held the office.

Clinton NEVER should have renominated him.

[depakid]

17. True, but you have to undrestand that Clinton was basically

a moderate Republican who pushed all sorts of right wing policies at the federal agencies. He may have done more to destroy progressivism thatn anyone else in the past 3 decades.

[JohnnyRingo]

9. As I recall....He made disapproving sounds about the second cut

The White House began talking about replacing him.

Suddenly he threw his support behind the idiotic theory that another tax cut just may "kickstart" the economy.

Then it was buisness as usual.

[mistertrickster]

10. Thank god, the voice of reason.

What would we do without this guy, practically the only pundit who will say the obvious--BUSH SUCKS and so does the horse he rode in on.

[The Backlash Cometh]

11. Krugman's articles always deserve a kick of approval.

[damntexdem]

12. Hanging around Dubya, even a plaster saint ...

can develop feet of clay.

[indepat]

13. Greenspan: a name that will live in infamy as I have long proffered on DU

[whistle]

14. Exactly how can U.S. economy achieve this Greenspan goal...

...of an increase in net national savings (priority #1), not raise taxes (priority #2), grow the economy with real growth of higher GDP than inflation (priority #3), not enlarge the national debt (priority #4) and fully fund social security so all of those now 55+ won't loose what they have put into the fund while those under 55 can save for their retirement (priority #5)?

Do we rearrange the priorities? Do we eliminate one or more of these priorities from the top group?

How will the democrats address this?

[chaz4jazz]

15. Wonder what photos they have of Greenspan?

Seems this Administration lords over so many - you know they have "stuff" on all these guys. What pictures do they have of Alan? Alan - what were you doing that you weren't supposed to be doing?

[Blower]

16. INDEED--

more

www.libertywhistle.us

[tibbir]

18. Alan Greenspan is an asshole.

IMHO he started the recession in 2000 by raising the prime rate too many times. Then he lent his support to the tax cut - a perfect hack job for him. Now he's behind SS privatization. He knows who he's working for, no doubt.

[teryang]

19. He is also a fraud

He tries to justify privatization as a way to increase the savings rate. The reason we don't have a savings rate is because savers are penalized by negative interest rates for savings, while money is literally given away to corporate borrowers to create income producing capital. Who is responsible for negative interest rates? He is.

Who suffers from this? The savers, who are the banks creditors. Savings accounts are liabilities to banks and assets to consumers. Thusly, overpriced homes, virtually the only capital asset most Americans have, are billed as savings even though they are saddled with debt.

This ponzi scheme is like a game of musical chairs in which you want to get out before the last chair is pulled.

How stupid is the public if it could be sold a phony social security crisis which would allegedly be resolved with investments in private security accounts? We have witnessed so much securities fraud in the last several years wiping out hundreds of billions of dollars of so called "savings?" The mainstream media is once again suffering from Alzheimers disease.