2006-12-15 04:51:13 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Economics
For most of his tenure he based monetary policy on the theory that their was a natural rate of unemployment of about 6%. A lot of economist also subscribed to the theory but in retrospect it looks as if his monetary was not good for workers. He abandoned the theory in the end which is to his credit. He was successful at controlling inflation in the goods and labor markets but not the asset markets as was seen in stock market in the late 90's and in housing over the last 5 years. Given the prevailing economic theory and the chronic federal budgets it is not clear that anyone else could have done better. I think his record was mixed.
2006-12-15 08:31:26 · answer #1 · answered by meg 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, let's see... Did the U.S. have high inflation under Greenspan? No. Did the U.S. have deflation under Greenspan? Again, no. So there was no monetary evil that attacked the U.S. economy under Greenspan, so he was, to say the least, adequate for the job...
2006-12-15 04:57:33 · answer #2 · answered by NC 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If the inflation rates, unemployment rates, real wages, and GDP growth of his tenure aren't enough to answer this question......I don't know what is.
2006-12-15 05:04:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
hahahaha, yea what they said...
rly combine the two answers above me and submit that for your assignment....
2006-12-15 06:07:38 · answer #4 · answered by p34nu7bu773rj3lly7im3 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋