Hi impristine, <<we going higher>> :0) of course we are, because we always do, for it is a permanent condition, especially if one meanders from the CFZ.
dailyreckoning.com
"A bare-bones indictment of the Greenspan stewardship would number six counts. For the first three, we are indebted to Andrew Smithers and Stephen Wright, British economists (though not yet knights)...The six are: 1) He refused to intervene to prick a bubble that he knew, or should have known, would cost the United States dearly. 2) He believed that the stock market is efficient (if not perfectly efficient in the academic sense, then efficient enough to be bubble-proof). 3) Though he refused to intervene to cap the rise in stock prices, he repeatedly intervened to stop declines. 4) By suffering a bubble to be blown, he was party to the distortion of the structure of the U.S. economy, a distortion that has persisted to this day. Its symptoms include excessive productive capacity, excessive indebtedness, inadequate savings and immense current-account deficits. 5) In an attempt to revive the economy, revitalize the financial markets and/or to curry favor with the incumbent political party, the Fed must create more credit than it otherwise would have to do, in this way risking a new inflationary cycle. 6) Amid the crisis of confidence he did so much to bring about, the chairman, on July 16, passed a marble-mouthed remark about "infectious greed." "Our historical guardians of financial information were overwhelmed," he added, omitting reference to "our historical guardians of margin regulation" or "our historical guardians of credit growth," i.e., himself." |
