To: Les H who wrote (37881 ) 1/24/2000 5:19:00 PM From: Kailash Respond to of 99985
Greenspan's reappointment: The Fed chief's new term and the spectre of 1929 by ANDREW SMITHERS Chairman of fund manager For those who look to portents and history, the reappointment of Alan Greenspan as chairman of the Federal Reserve is truly scary. The parallel with 1929 is worryingly close. When Herbert Hoover became President in March that year, he reappointed the 76-year-old Andrew Mellon, who was dubbed 'the greatest Secretary of the Treasury since Alexander Hamilton'. America was celebrating a remarkable decade of prosperity and as Mellon had been in office throughout the 1920s, he was thought to be the architect of this success. His confirmation in office was taken as a sure sign of continuing prosperity. In another interesting parallel with today, he ran budget surpluses and reduced the national debt by a third. Until Greenspan, no other financial public servant in US history has received such adulation. History has proved less kind to Mellon than the contemporary Press. Six months after his reappointment, the stock market crashed and this was followed by the slump. After a couple of years Mellon threw in the towel, retired from the Treasury and became Ambassador to the Court of St James. If Greenspan comes here, we must hope that it will be in happier circumstances than those that greeted Mellon, but his predecessor has shown that septuagenarians are welcome. Greenspan is not universally admired. Professor Tim Congdon is among those who think he has messed things up. The next two or three years will show who is right. The Fed chairman's tenure will, in retrospect, fall into one of three categories. The miraculous, the disastrous or the 'skin of our teeth'. Two features of his term of office seem certain. First, that he has presided over a period of prolonged prosperity and second, one of stock market frenzy. His place in history will depend on the outcome of the second feature. If, as the vast majority hold, this frenzy has been soundly based, even if occasionally exuberant, then the praise that he is currently receiving will not be reversed by carping revisionists. If, as pessimists like myself fear, the bubble over which he has presided bursts like that of 1929 and is followed by a major recession, then the poor man will probably and, to some extent unfairly, be treated to vilification in place of the current paeans of praise. If we survive by the skin of our teeth, either the market's fall will be moderate, or the economy will survive a crash. Whatever happens, we should, over the next three years or so, greatly improve our understanding of economics. Although many have sought to justify today's share prices, none of the theories so far propounded are economically coherent. If current prices prove sustainable new theories, which are yet to see the light of day, will have to emerge. If the stock markets of the world do crash, we must hope that lessons will be learned and that the next generation will not permit another stock market bubble to develop. At best we may learn to cope, with more success than before, with the aftermath of bubbles. ¸ Associated Newspapers Ltd., 24 January 2000 Terms and Conditions This Is Londonthisislondon.co.uk