State of the Union

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How about when the guy who headed the FED explicitly admits financial deregulation occurred under his watch, and that it was a mistake? You tell me to attempt enlightenment and then, because you don't like what Greenspan has to say, tell me he's not a reliable source of perspective?

His statements during congressional testimony did indeed deflect blame onto lenders, but he did admit fault, and even gave specific ways he fucked up. That's like hearing the bank robber say, "Yea, the bank got robbed, but it wasn't me. But I was there. And I did have a gun. And I did shoot a bitch." and then thinking "Well we can't trust him, he's a criminal. Find out who shot that bitch."

Based on that reasoning, if anything, his role is worse than he admitted and he was deflecting indictment of the very worst of his culpability. But I don't think that's the case. I think Greenspan has integrity, and I think most of his testimony was correct, and that he does not deserve all the blame. I think you just don't like what he is saying, and you haven't really given compelling or specific reasons precisely why you think everything in his testimony was dishonest. And you'll probably just call me stupid for not automatically knowing why you think Greenspan is a lying fiend.

There's really no way it ends well for you. Either:

-Greenspan, one of Ayn Rand's disciples and diehard free market proponent, fucked up so badly with his policies that he has to lie about it during congressional testimony. And if you say he didn't actually fuck up, then he had no reason to lie.

or

-Greenspan explicitly admits deregulation was an error, while deflecting blame.

A scientific mind does not accept the words of a single person as evidence of pretty much anything. I thought we all learned something from the Salem witch trials?