Today’s quote of the Day comes forth from 94-year-old economist Paul Samuelson on Alan Greenspan:
>
“But the trouble is that he had been an Ayn Rander. You can take the boy out of the cult but you can’t take the cult out of the boy. “
>
via Kedrosky
While yesterday's US stock market close was poor, Asia and Europe didn't follow today as debt in Greece, Spain, Portugal, etc... rallied, their CDS narrowed and stocks bounced. The Greek finance minister said January tax revenues came in above expectations and that spending was below target for the month and said "that means the deficit reduction for January is well within what we have promised." The euro is rising in turn. Also helping is the story that Trichet is headed to the European Union leaders summit a day early in order to address Greece's problems even as the Greek finance...
read more »
July 6th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Nice! I can’t stand Ayn Randers. When I connected at DFW recently there was a woman behind me on the phone telling someone about how she wanted to “go gault.” I wanted to laugh at her, because without taxes, there wouldn’t be a DFW to land at…or an air traffic control system to get us there…or a highway to carry her to her Texas homestead.
Rugged individualism…my @ss!
July 6th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Franklin: You will never have to worry about individualism…
July 6th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Yep, Alan G. talks long and often in 2007 book AGE OF TURBULENCE about his close relationship with Ayn R. She was his mentor.
To quote from Greenspan’s book AGE OF TURBULENCE:
“Ayn Rand became a stabilizing force in my life. It hadn’t taken long for us to have a meeting of the minds-mostly my mind meeting hers-and in the fifties and early sixties I became a regular at the weekly gatherings at her apartment. Exploring ideas with her was a remarkable course in logic and epistemology. Rand’s Collective became my first social circle outside the university and the economics profession. I engaged in the all-night debates and wrote spirited commentary for her newsletter with the fervor of a young acolyte drawn to a whole new set of ideas.
I still found the broader philosophy (referring to Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism) of unfettered market competition compelling, as I do to this day….
By the time I joined Richard Nixon’s campaign for presidency in 1968, I had long since decided to engage in efforts to advance free-market capitalism as an insider, rather than as a critical pamphleteer.”
So there you have in a nut shell Greenspan’s philosophy directly from his own book, of course the book was published just before the whole edifice that Greenspan helped “design” collapsed.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
@Franklin
…as for the potential future of rugged individualism…
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.
Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
And to think people still suggest the problem was Greenspan sold out on his randianism/individualism/ free market beliefs for the chance to centrally plan our economy. They must be senile.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
to view Ayn Rand you have to look at where she came from and why she held that philosophy. Having said that, Atlas Shrugged presented corporate titans as mythical god-like people that through their actions brough about good for everyone-
what she fails to mention is that they were just as likely to be buffoons, small minded ($80,000 area rugs, $10,000 umbrella stands) greedy, unlawful, self centered people that could care less about society as a whole (Enron, TBTF Banks)- and who
padded their boardrooms with like minded folks who agree to exorbitant pay packages far beyond the Gaults of the world’s worth or value
July 6th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Give me a break. Greenspan was a free market, limited regulation type like Rand? Say what? He worked at the Federal Reserve. How on earth can anyone claim to be a free market type and work for the most anti-free market organization on the face of the earth? Even if they claim and may believe otherwise, all Fed employees are anti-free market. The Fed is a club. Their job is to protect the big banks. Period.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
CV, not sure that the is democracies problem. its more insidious than that. and less too.
while some may vote because of what a politician ‘claims’ they will deliver, and thats nothing new, some vote for what the politicians claims to be (we had lots of them say ‘I am a conservative’ of late. loudly too only because it was in favor at the time). only to find out that maybe they aren’t. or their flavor isn’t exactly what the voters thought it was.
but if you look at almost all presidents since the beginning, they promised some thing they never ever did.
all of that isn’t new. been going on in the US for 200+ years.
and not sure individualism is really helpful either. since in a civilization, there are no individuals, unless you are counting chaos as civilization.
and lots of recent studies point to a much more compelling reason. economics.
Rome collapsed in part because of a major drought that it couldn’t over come (didn’t have that level of technology)
Britain collapsed in part because it grew to big and because of that, when it tried to go back the gold standard, it crashed its economy.
about the only thing we can say for us, is that we actually get some thing for taxes paid. as opposed to a lot of countries. actually almost every other one
July 6th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
@the bohemian
Re: “what she fails to mention is that they were just as likely to be buffoons, small minded ($80,000 area rugs, $10,000 umbrella stands) greedy, unlawful, self centered people that could care less about society as a whole (Enron, TBTF Banks)- ”
I, for one, would like to toss in THE FACILITATORS of the next generation of those you describe onto the same categorical scrapheap…Especially the ones who do it at the taxpayers expense IN THE NAME of helping out society…
July 6th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
@willid3
Re: “Rome collapsed in part because of a major drought that it couldn’t over come (didn’t have that level of technology)
Britain collapsed in part because it grew to big and because of that, when it tried to go back the gold standard, it crashed its economy.”
Nice try but TOO COMPLICATED…
They both collapsed because they were broke…
…and wait to see how many things we get for OUR TAXES PAID going forward…Less & Less (you can count on it)…
July 6th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
It is gratuitously ironic that the men who viewed themselves as Gault were the very people who Gault had to save in Rand’s book.
History will judge Greenspan a complete and utter failure. His Ph.D. thesis was on housing prices in the US – of course he KNEW this would be the result!
He was simply in place as a pawn to get the banksters more commissions.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
they were broke.
but one failed because a drought killed its economy.
the other made a stupid choice that made it broke because nobody else could afford to grade with it,
but neither were because politicians promised to much from the treasury to satisfy the ‘public’.
even though i have not doubt they did (as they always have)
July 6th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
willid3 and cvienne – I would agree that there is more than one main reason both Empires failed and would further argue that comparing either one to our current state is of minimal value.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
@willid
Let’s put it this way…
if Rome hadn’t been BROKE, a drought wouldn’t have killed their economy…
if Britain weren’t BROKE, they wouldn’t have been in a position to make stupid choices…
Certain companies have a balance sheet that can weather Black Swans, others don’t…Governments NEVER do…(especially those whose officials are elected by a populace that understands it can support the candidate that will support the free lunch)…
July 6th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
willid-
biggest issue is that we do not know what we are about anymore. What is the goal of the United States? What are we trying to acheive as a people? Are we going to dream the big dream and strive or are we going to muddle along until other’s settle our fate for us? Do we want our far flung forces to remain around the world or do we want to regroup and determine a new path?
Our dilemma is we have run out of ideas, we have become a nation that cherishes consumption as an end in itself, ability to consume as reason alone to signify our greatness.
Where is the inspiration in that?
July 6th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
…and please…I don’t want to hear from any “Clintonians” out there that Clinton left office with a balanced budget (based on windfall revenue sucked out of tax receipts from dot.com vaporware…
That would be like saying that Bush left office with 5% unemployment (because of jobs that came because of the robust housing market which we all know was a similar house of cards based on low interest rates and speculation)…
This country has been broke since 1962 (probably 1958)…
July 6th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
While one can poke holes in many of Samuelson’s theories I think he is right when using the term cult to describe Greenspan’s philosophy. The problem is that nothing is ever absolute or sacred. Nothing wrong with individualism, or free markets except when they become unfettered.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
cvienne Says-
“and wait to see how many things we get for OUR TAXES PAID going forward…Less & Less (you can count on it)…”
agreed
July 6th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
It’s about time some folks start calling out Alan Greenspan.
He’s first on my list in my Bankster Nuremberg dream.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
PPT right on time….
July 6th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Getting some of that SRS Mannwich??
July 6th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
@the bohemian
“Our dilemma is we have run out of ideas, we have become a nation that cherishes consumption as an end in itself, ability to consume as reason alone to signify our greatness.
Where is the inspiration in that?”
I AGREE WITH THAT 100%…WE NEED TO BE INSPIRED…
Wanna know something?
I ‘feel’ inspired when I make efforts to take care of my standard of living…(debt free, renewable energy, growing food, etc.)…Yet when I try to INSPIRE others to do the same instead of looking to the Government to do things for them, they look at me like I was from Mars (and call me the “Unabomber” in the process)…
So I ask the general audience…How “inspired” do you believe the average American is at present…Inspired, TO ME, means “what are you willing to do” to go forward?
July 6th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Who the f*ck is Ayn Rand?
What a show…
July 6th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Christopher-
I see anything that happend today as noise- as I opined last week- we do not have much in the way of data or earnings to set a course-
in the end though- overall trend should be down
July 6th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Here’s the link to the full interview.
http://correspondents.theatlantic.com/conor_clarke/2009/06/an_interview_with_paul_samuelson_part_one.php
He doesn’t pull any punches.
July 6th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
cvienne-
inspired- as a country- to set long range goals- to say we are going to put a man on the moon and then do it-
do you think that we would have the same sense of awe now? if we were even able to generate any interest at all- in space exploration- let’s say to Mars- on a manned mission? The country is apathetic to long range goals-
energy independence for instance. It’s a non-starter because people want their gas cheap NOW- who cares about 20 years from now- but I say- let’s set a long range plan- develop other energy sources here- drill here- let’s be grown ups and make adult decsions that will only help us in the future
July 6th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
The rally came along more or less as expected, led by junk and garbage, banks and REITs. I would not be surprised to see the SPX ramble northwards to 910-915-925 from here, and I am not going to step in until it gets there. Sometimes the BEST trade is to trade in your screen for a bag of golf clubs or a fishing rod for a couple of weeks.
“How “inspired” do you believe the average American is at present”..?
They are INSPIRED by American Idol, Survivor, The Bachelor and Sarah Palin, and by the patriotic bailout of our nation’s great banks. Suggesting otherwise is un-AMERICAN.
July 6th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
All the Greenspan bashing is actually causing me to feel a little sorry for the old man….”there was flaw” in his model of how the world worked…. How would you like to be one of those geocentric scientists back in medievel times….and you had a world view that you completely believed in that was supported by “facts,” only to find out that everything you ever believed in was totally WRONG. That can’t feel great. Though, the millions in book deals and Pim(p)co’s $$ probably cushions the sideaffects of a shattered belief system.
Well….we got a little bounce today.
Seems like it wants to move sideways/higher next 24-48 hours. I see 909 – 915 as a resistance zone for short term traders/bears. Obviously 886-889 is now growing in importance for bulls….That level has been tested twice now and held….Short term bulls would not want to see it tested again….
July 6th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
left. sorry to repeat your post a bit…didn’t see you had posted something….Agreed. I’m golfing tomorrow…must begin kicking the rust off the game…
July 6th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
leftback Says-
“patriotic bailout of our nation’s great banks”
swells me up with pride as well
July 6th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Perfect. Love it.
July 6th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Here are a few questions:
1. Is capital sentient?
2. Is it organic?
3. Does it act independent of human agency?
Bonus question: Will I win the MegaMillions lotto drawing on Tues?
July 6th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
S&P just lowered ratings on a lot of mortgage bactked securities: http://www.cnbc.com/id/31766221
Any opinions on whether they lowered them enough?
July 6th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
What is the purpose of the United States? Originally, its collective purpose was to protect and promote the natural rights every man is born with…life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness….all that good stuff in that seminal document whose signing we just celebrated…even if it took another 150 years before freedom flowed to all men, no matter the color of their skin.
Then its purpose morphed, after WWII, into an empire, filling the void left by Great Britain, and existed as a counter-balance to the other empire, the Soviet Union.
Then the Soviet Union failed and it had no purpose. So it cast about looking for one. It did minor wars (Iraq 1, Bosnia, Somalia) but found a new purpose with 911 of fighting terrorism, even if it bastardized the response just so Bush II could prove he was a bigger man than daddy.
Then came the economic and financial system collapse. Now its purpose is to enrich Goldman Sachs.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
I think a lot of Ayn Rand’s conclusions about the behavior of government are correct simply because they were based on observation, but this leads her to a philosophy that individual behavior should be motivated purely by self-interest. This is where she goes wrong IMO – advocating a fundamentally immoral and sociopathic philosophy.
If you want to label Greenspan a failure of a self-serving Objectivist ideology, that I can see.
But a proponent of free markets he was clearly not.
A free marketeer would not have intervened in 1998 with the “Greenspan Put” to stop a badly needed market correction.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
B in T- an excerpt from the MBS downgrade-
“Standard & Poor’s Monday boosted its expectations for losses on risky loans backing U.S. mortgage securities to as much as 40 percent, suggesting a darkened outlook for the troubled housing market . . .
The more dire assessment will likely “significantly impact” bonds originally carrying AAA ratings, S&P said in a report. ”
wasn’t it leftback who said today on these very threads that he increased his postion in SRS- the guy’s a genius
July 6th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
The Romans and the US are matching up perfectly. Its human nature. Abuse having the senior currency by relentlessly debasing it. Tax the crap out of your citizens and give them diminishing services in return. Constant foreign adventures that further drain the treasury. And favor foreigners by eventually giving them rights of citizens. It couldn’t be more mapped out for us. And it wasn’t just Rome: many ancient civilizations did the same thing. Once in a perpetual weakened state, the society was completely unable to deal with any outliers like drought or plague.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
@thetanman:
If we have another hurricane season like 2005, watch out. Florida would follow California into bankruptcy court. It could be an outlier that would do us in.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
I’m having a hard time swallowing a lot of these comments. The very existence of the Fed is contrary to the idea of free markets. You can call Greenspan whatever you want, but a free marketer he was not, regardless of what he or you or anyone else says.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
@Christopher: Didn’t reload any SRS (or FAZ) yet, but may do so tomorrow. Want to watch a bit tomorrow first.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
more words of wisdom from a senile nutcase
July 6th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Mike M – you nailed it. Why don’t people call him on it? I would ask “Commandate Greenspan, you and a small group of people at the central planning agency set the price of the goods sold at one of the largest markets in the world. What do you mean you are a believer in free markets?
July 6th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
No takers on the questions, fine here are the answers
Here are a few questions:
1. Is capital sentient? Probably
2. Is it organic? Yes
3. Does it act independent of human agency? Indubitably
Bonus question: Will I win the MegaMillions lotto drawing on Tues? God I hope so cuz I already spent the money on a bronze statue of Alan Greenspan modeled the Colossus of Rhodes. It’s very cool but hard to move.
July 6th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
I agree the “Free-marketeers” are a cult. They believe in the sacred truthness and invincibility of something, without experienced facts or logic to support it. When you point out that to much freedom coused this mess they say ohh but we haven’t experienced “true” freedom. When you then ask them how they know it will work if it has never been tried, they go blank.
Any idiot who have experienced humans could predict that if given freedom, then people will exploit and destroy other people, as long as it enrich them personally. So off course you have to have rules, incentives and punishment to control individualism and keep it more productive than it is destructive. Even the free marketeers are convinced that we have to do that with poor people to keep their criminal behaviour under control, why would rich people be better. I mean they obviously crave money a lot more.
July 6th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
I would argue that Greenie, like most so-called “libertarians” who are among the elite and wield the power, only believes in true, unfettered free markets when it benefits he and his friends. When it doesn’t, he most definitely believes in bailing out he and his friends. I think it’s really that simple. Real libertarians don’t exist once they walk among the powerful and the elite. They only use some of its precepts to manipulate the real libertarians into thinking they’ve got an ally when in reality they’ll do anything and everything (including betray any/all libertarian principles) to ensure that they and their friends never lose. Real libertarians should wake the f*ck up and get a clue. We’ll never have real libertarianism in this or any country because the elite will always do anything and everything to ensure they never lose. Money and power are more important to them (and any other elite ruling group) than adhering to any strict ideology. Money and power ARE their ideology.
July 6th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
virginian
What do MBS have to do with SRS? – other than in the loosely related way that everything in the markets are related
I ask that because I see often people talking about the residential housing market and relating that to trading in SRS/IYR which are commercial REIT trading/investment securities. It worries me that a lot of people are out there playing in the markets without really doing their due diligence; especially regarding leveraged ETFs. Many have been burned and more will be, I’m sure.
July 6th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Government regulations have failed, so lets try lack of government regulation. It’s like my parachute failed and it almost killed me, next time I will try jumping without a parachute.
That Rand babe was a genious, was she blond ?
July 6th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Samuelson, like so many here, does not understand Rand’s philosophy.
The Randanistas have completely turned their back on Greenspan. They believe him to be a fraud, who bases his beliefs on political expediency rather than true free market principles. Indeed, Greenspan was the ultimate hypocrite, espousing the virtues of free markets while serving as Puppet Master to all things financially related.
Rand was/is correct with her beliefs about government interference and human nature. The failure of the system was not caused by free markets running amok, as so many want to believe, but rather the failure of all of our government institutions to simply fulfill their roles as watchdogs. A plausible argument supposes that truly free markets would never have allowed the easy credit “games” to succeed because fraudulent credit would never have been readily available. The Federal Reserve and the Government are the source of the problems. Human nature simply exacerbated them.
Anyone who thinks the government will fix this mess is sadly mistaken. The same characters who created these problems, excluding Greenspan, are still in control and determined to make things worse as they expand their power. At some point, of course, the markets will severely punish their tactics. Sadly, we will all suffer the fallout.
July 6th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Reading the anti Ayn Randers lap up Samuelson’s criticism of Greenspan is hilarious. And what has Samuelson by writing about Obama’s spending spree? All sweet things I’m sure.
July 6th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
“Alan is a long-time member of the famed Trilateral Commission, the Rockefeller-dominated pinnacle of the financial-political power elite in this country. And as he assumes his post as head of the Fed, he leaves his honored place on the board of directors of J.R Morgan & Co. and Morgan Guaranty Trust. Yes, the Establishment has good reason to sleep soundly with Greenspan at our monetary helm. And as icing on the cake, they know that Greenspan’s “philosophical” Randianism will undoubtedly fool many free market advocates into thinking that a champion of their cause now perches high in the seats of power. ” from Murray Rothbard in 1987
Rothbard also knew Rand and was on to him in 1987 !!!!
http://mises.org/story/359
July 6th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Make that http://www.saintaardvarkthecarpeted.com/ for the floating head of Ayn Rand.
Okay, now I’m really kidding you not. Before was just a dry run.
July 6th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
One thing I would point out is that it is “Galt,” not “Gault.”
The other thing is that it is rational self-interest, not self-interest, that is at the center of Objectivist ethics.
“When one speaks of man’s right to exist for his own sake, for his own rational self-interest, most people assume automatically that this means his right to sacrifice others. Such an assumption is a confession of their own belief that to injure, enslave, rob, or murder others is in man’s self-interest–which he must selflessly denounce. The idea that man’s self-interest can be served only by a non-sacrificial relationship with others has never occurred to those humanitarian apostles of unselfishness, who proclaim their desire to achieve the brotherhood of men. And it will not occur to them, or to anyone, so long as the concept “rational” is omitted from the context of “values,” “desires,” self-interest,” and ethics.”
– The Objectivist Ethics, The Virtue of Selfishness
July 6th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
@Manny and RKenn –
it’s not about money, it’s about power…
July 6th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
@cridder –
(Ayn, pronounced like Ain) Rand was a woman…
July 6th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
@cridder -
…i guess you meant he was on to Bubbles in 1987…..never mind
July 6th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Seems like everyone skipped out early today Wes
July 6th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Hey Thor –
everything cool with you?
July 6th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Yup, everything’s good indeed. Quiet 4th, Hope all is well with you too!
July 6th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
..yeah it was good
some old friends had a party on the 4th – we had not been to their place in 5 years
Tour de France is underway – I can’t ask for much more than that
July 6th, 2009 at 7:59 pm
@OT (6:28)
I was away for awhile because I was at the gym…
But you DID WELL to make that point…
July 6th, 2009 at 8:01 pm
@DeDude
“That Rand babe was a genious, was she blond ?”
She WASN’T blond…But damn, she could sure spell!
July 6th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
@cridder (6:52)
…and now Greenie can heap yet another steaming pile onto his personal enrichment legacy using the ample backhoe of the Bill Gross earth digger…
July 6th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
-or her copy-editor could
July 6th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
got’er get me one of dem-dere coby-editors one day
July 6th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
cvienne
Grazias. It bugs me to no end when I see that in blog comments (re: SRS and res RE). It’s just so basic though. ???
July 6th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
@OT
What’s the Simon Property Group dividend these days?
I’m pretty sure they’re the biggest slab of the IYR pie…
July 6th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
How would the world be different id Greenspan had stayed as baritone sax in the Boyd Raeburn band?
July 6th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
onlooker/cvienne-
good point, but because the downgrade is due to-
“Increased assumptions for total losses on subprime and Alt-A residential mortgage-backed securities come amid declines in market value of the debt and a surge in the inventory of bank-owned properties, S&P said.”
i.e- more inventory of resale property to compete with new home builders who are already getting their clocks cleaned with “almost new” resale inventory. Can’t be good news. My guess is that if the builders go down tomorrow, so will IYR and obviously SRS will go north.
But maybe I am not as smart as your two.
July 6th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
cridder. terrific link to the mises.org site. Great stuff.
July 6th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
re: the Quote of the Day – what cult did Samuelson join? Since he wrote the college econ textbook I had to use, I’d venture to say his cult was the one formed by the Central Planners. I do believe central planners have more failures to their ‘credit’ than free market supporters.
Also, those who haven’t read ‘Atlas Shrugged’ may not be aware that the hero was John GALT, not Gault.
Also, they may not be aware that Rand reserved her most venomous attacks on the second-handers who ran great corporations into the ground, who had no understanding of the enterprise they were supposed to be running, who may have inherited their positions, etc.
July 6th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
you go jo…
on your last point…
that is what happens to mature organizations, the spirit, the energy that created a free-wheeling growing company begins to fade with the passing of the baton and eventually devolves into a machine that runs on processes no creativity, no individuality, no who really knows how the business works anymore, just tryin’ to preserve their individual status quo
July 6th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
@the virginian
“My guess is that if the builders go down tomorrow, so will IYR and obviously SRS will go north”
Call me a HACK, but I believe the following…
The IYR/SRS is only indirectly related to the homebuilders…(ie. if homebuilders are weak, that portends poorly for the notion of credit based equity consumption going down, then loosely that precludes retail consumption going down, which ONLY impacts REITS which are surviving on the Rasputin-like levels of “anchor” operators who either manage to contain operating costs, OR, have cherry leases…
It’s a matter of time b4 that game is up, place your bets…
so as 4 tomorrow? Who the hell knows…SRS bounced off a .618 FIBO retrace AT THE CLOSE today…a “bounce” to me would only signify a technical move at this point…
The REAL future is to be determined in the future (whichever happens first)…
- People realize that this economy is Steve Barry f***ed and stop spending again (like last year), & we do an ‘08 repeat…
- OR, Credit Suisse manages to hold onto their IYR position (without becoming this years version of Citi)…
Result coming within 60 – 75 days…
Note…part of my psyche is salivating on the idea that Lispy Lloyd is gearing up to take the OTHER SIDE of the Credit Suisse trade and subsequently make it its BITCH in the future…
Beatdowns welcome…
July 7th, 2009 at 12:26 am
To be honest I thought that Randianism was a passing phase in college that adults grow out of.
That said, Marxists and Ayn Randians are cut from the same cloth. Both claim that their respective philosophies were never tried in real life and they quote chapter and verse of their respective holy tomes like some street corner fundamentalist to prove it.
The problem is, is that neither factored in human beings into their pristine thinking and that both were hypocrites. Rand could have easily fled the U.S. to practice what she preached in some 3rd world backwater where self-interest and self-reliance is the rule. No, it was easier to harangue from the safety of the despised state where everything was provided for from security, clean water and food, to roads and educational facilities for all Americans.
One last thing, a real anything goes pure capitalistic state would only last as long as some strong man gathered a couple hundred men and hunted down all those “rugged individualists” and looted their mud-hut estates.
July 7th, 2009 at 12:28 am
Franklin,
Your gov. job is showing. WRONGO, without taxes, there WOULD be a DFW to land at… an air traffic control system to get us there…and a highway to carry Miss Anny to her Texas homestead. Only it would be built when and where needed, built cheaper, quicker and better.
July 7th, 2009 at 12:53 am
You kind of have to wonder how many times BR is going to have to have it explained to him that Objectivism and the free-market, and Greenspanian monetary policy, are two completely different things. I mean, is he even familiar with Ayn Rand’s philosophy in any kind of depth, aside from the fact that she advocated less regulation for very specific reasons in a particular context (hint: it did not include a central bank and GSE’s shoving credit down the country’s throat for twenty years)?
what she fails to mention is that they were just as likely to be buffoons, small minded ($80,000 area rugs, $10,000 umbrella stands) greedy, unlawful, self centered people that could care less about society as a whole (Enron, TBTF Banks)- and who
padded their boardrooms with like minded folks who agree to exorbitant pay packages far beyond the Gaults of the world’s worth or value
Some of the worst villains in Atlas Shrugged are businessmen. They’re the guys who cash in on the ideas advocated by the likes of Samuelson in order to get regulations enacted (which stifle their smaller and better competitors) and loot the public till.
July 7th, 2009 at 6:50 am
“And to think people still suggest the problem was Greenspan sold out on his randianism/individualism/ free market beliefs for the chance to centrally plan our economy. They must be senile.”
Reahhhheeaaally?
So Greenspan was following free-market ideology when he was deciding how much of our money to counterfeit, and who should have first claim on it?
How about when deciding what industry or firm should be allowed to fail and which shouldn’t?
It’s crazy how intellectually confused some of you guys are (BR-your inconsistency is somewhat dissapointing) . Jump on the Keynesian bandwagon and see where that takes an economy already drowning in debt.
Don’t worry though. Obama and the good guys (i.e. Goldman) are here to save you. Go ahead and place your trust on your benevolent and omnipotent government.
I mean, that has always worked wonders for you hasn’t it?
July 7th, 2009 at 7:08 am
I have read Atlas Shrugged 3 times in the last 20 years. I don’t agree with all of objectivism, but there are certainly elements of Rand’s philosophy I do agree with. The all or nothing approach to objectivism is too harsh for my way of thinking, but the idea of an individual being true and responsible to his or herself is right on. Certainly what is going on here is against my principles, but I certainly don’t expect everyone in the US to think or act as I do. If the philosophy of rational self-interest is taken without the rabid nature its foes attribute to it, it will serve you over the years. It is just another tool in the box of life…
July 7th, 2009 at 8:08 am
hi whitespiral,
You are agreeing with me. Sarcasm can be subtle, but consider Samuelson is 94 and senility is an old age thing.
July 7th, 2009 at 8:14 am
Thought experiment: If man is inherently a social being, what does it mean to be self-interested?
Here is a hint for the haters: the self-interested behavior of a social being does not equate to “OMG all I care about is me and my monies.”
Is it shocking to learn you may been arguing against a strawman all this time? Either way, better to learn late than never.
July 7th, 2009 at 8:18 am
jr-my apologies. I had no idea who Samuelson was. I so hope BR was sarcastic about this too, but I get a feeling that’s a long shot….
July 7th, 2009 at 8:20 am
…..the virtue of selfishness…is not the same as greed is good, is it?
July 7th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
The key word is rational.
Without proportional negative consequences to irrational self interest behavior it will not add up.
Great in theory but does not work in a Corporacy.
July 9th, 2009 at 9:54 am
[...] Samuelson on Greenspan “But the trouble is that he had been an Ayn Rander. You can take the boy out of the cult but you can’t take the cult out of the boy. “ [...]
July 11th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Greenspan ditched his Ayn Rand beliefs years before becoming Fed chairman. Read Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal – Greenspan makes a brilliant argument for the gold standard. Then he became a banker’s tool.