To: Bill Holtzman who wrote (6526 ) 2/21/2000 1:16:00 AM From: red jinn Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24042
bill: you must have misunderstood me. i don't think alan g. "owns" the economy and i dont' think i said so. i also don't think greenspan himself is arrogant, quite the contrary from everything i've read, so i agree w/ you there. frankly, i'd much rather have him as chair of the fomc than almost anyone else i could name, other than a libertarian, but you wouldn't see that b/c a true libertarian would resign rather than take the job. i guess my point is that if we let the market decide most things, why don't we let it decide what the price of money should be. i think, in part, it's something that most would be afraid to try b/c they don't know what wd happen. and i don't think, for at least a couple of reasons, it's quite fair as you suggest to say that unless you've headed the federal reserve, your opinions don't count. first, you can't tell if greenspan is the architect of the economy or just a beneficiary of it unless you examine the arguments, not just performance, b/c you can't tell about the latter unless you have a theory to explain it. oh, you can say it's magic and let it go at that, but i'd rather not. second, although we don't have it b/c, relatively speaking, a conservative is at the helm of the fed and liberal economists haven't taken the dare, when england had a socialist (relatively speaking) as prime minister, a group of u.s. economists created the "shadow finance ministry" (can't quite remember what they called it) to track the performance of those in power and what they recommended. the shadow committee included alan meltzer of carnegie mellon and the late karl brunner, who held a chair at the the univ of rochester and a chair of a european university. it was a crude but useful measure to see how the predictions of the shadow committee came out compared to the predictions of those wielding the policy levers. as it turned out, the shadow got more answers right, at least in predicting the performance of the economy. (i may have it wrong; perhaps they actually measured the performance of the u.s. economy, but the point doesn't change.) your statement that you're not an economist is fine; i'm not really either, although i studied the subject in school a fair amount. and i'll be the first to say it's tough doing a job as, say, an air traffic controller, raising a family, or whatever your interests are, etc. there's just not enuf time in the world for us all to study/learn enuf about what is true and what is not. which is why i admire socrates for admitting he didn't know but tried to find out from those who were supposedly "wiser" than he. but what i don't buy is that reality is up to each of us, as you seem to suggest in your statement that you "view things through [your] own frame, which has more to do with human nature and is unique to [you]." that way lies anarchy and the ability to justify any behavior. it's the argument a dictator uses when he doesn't agree w/ you. (note: i'm not accusing you of being one; i'm just following your argument to its logical conclusion (i think).) we owe it to ourselves to step back and think about what those who have so much influence/power over us are doing. enuf already. have enjoyed the exchange. best, red jinn