Discussion of all things related to Public Domain

[tom poe <tompoe AT amihost.com>]

Isn't it time we stop calling those folks in the White House,
Republicans, and call them what they are, Neoconservatives, i.e.,
they're not republicans, and they're not Democrats.  They're a bunch of
Chicago Theory Neoconservatives left over from the '70's, and they need
to be run out of town, along with their obsolete economic crapppoooolla.
Tom

On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 10:59, DanSLegal AT aol.com wrote:
> [I am told they are talking about resignations related to this major screw 
> up.]
> 
> "Federal Reserve Speaks, But Can't Call the Jobs Home"
> PRESS RELEASE 
> Citizens for Corporate Accountability
> 
> -Serious Problems With 02/11 Federal Reserve Testimony
> 
> (SEATTLE) 02/12/04 - Alan Greenspan says a continuing worry is that the Fed 
> policy could become "improperly calibrated" to economic developments. 
> Indeed--"fedspeak"--what does he mean? 
> 
> It turns out, in the past when the Federal Reserve has failed, it is 
> because 
> their moves to affect the economy have not worked for one reason or another 
> (for example, failing while lowering target interest rates in order to 
> achieve 
> higher employment--sound familiar?) . Such failures tend to end badly. 
> Perhaps 
> even, like the 1970s, a period of "stagflation", or more like the present-- 
> periods of alternating stagflation and deflation, relying heavily on 
> borrowing 
> at both the federal and consumer level.
> 
> Greenspan also mentions that currency-related changes to profits have been t
> emporarily offset by currency hedging activities. He mentions foreign 
> companies--but neglects to mention similar effects related to domestic 
> companies, faced 
> with, among other things, skyrocketing aluminum, copper, and energy prices, 
> all coming at the same time. Forget about new hires--how can companies like 
> GE, 
> Boeing, and Caterpillar operate at all domestically, once 
> currency/inflation 
> hedging runs out? The most recent manufacturing survey ("ISM") shows a 
> prices 
> paid component not seen since right before the 2000 stock market crash. In 
> short, US inflation creation is far outrunning job creation--and 
> apparently, 
> running US jobs offshore in the process. Might this be an example of 
> Greenspan's 
> "improper calibration"?
> 
> What Greenspan doesn't mention is more interesting--the effect low interest 
> rates have had on foreign economies--sending several foreign stock markets 
> into 
> bubbles, which dwarf those of the 2000 bubble. Thailand, Brazil, 
> Turkey...the 
> list is long. A bubble is one type of "improper calibration."
> 
> Finally, it is striking to see a headline claim of "vigorous growth 
> ahead"--if that were truly the case, interest rates would not be at 
> multi-decade lows. 
> After all, it is a long, long way up to a "normal" interest rate 
> environment--the only way from down this low, is up. Something clearly is 
> "improperly 
> calibrated" between what the Fed is saying about the economy, and what 
> interest 
> rates are set to.
> 
> Face it Greenspan, problems go way beyond the federal deficit. Lending and 
> equity growth in US markets is way, way ahead of an economic reality that 
> is not 
> only way overdue, but may never materialize.
> 
> The sooner the US admits it has a stock market and lending market 
> appropriate 
> for an economy with two to eight million more jobs--instead of less--the 
> closer the economy will be to a sustainable recovery. The Fed cannot fix 
> the mess 
> the Bush administration created--a fact both liberals and conservative 
> Republicans increasingly understand.
> 
> www.libertywhistle.us