English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

-Greenspan indicates that Bush has damaged the economy over the last 3 years by lowering taxes for only the wealthy.
-he notes the overspending in Iraq MUST stop
-he acknowledges that the US needs a "need" based health care system. quote (from interview on Democracy now aired on 9/18): "people like me, who have the means, will need to pay effectively a 100% co-pay for health insurance, whereas those less fortunate require more assistance".
-he says that the mortgage companies that had predatory lending/adjustable interest rates were committing "fraud" and should be criminally liable.

2007-09-19 05:02:39 · 12 answers · asked by Free Radical 5 in Politics & Government Politics

oh, and last but not least he confirmed what he said "everyone has known all along"....that America did in fact go to war in Iraq for PRIMARILY oil interests.

he stated that he believed that had the US not taken drastic action, oil would now be over 130$ a barrel

2007-09-19 05:04:55 · update #1

ummm....ken, do you have anything to add of substance or are you just trying to be a @ss? To be honest I’ve not yet FINISHED the book but I have started it. And I’ve gotten this information from an interview with Greenspan where HE discussed HIS OWN book. I think it’s safe to say the info he gave on his own book is correct.

2007-09-19 05:17:40 · update #2

oh I get it since you neocons obviously wouldn't dare to act like you know more than or disagree with Greenspan, you instead switch tactics and say that I’m taking what he said out of context since you disagree with it.....well johnny 2 times your baseless accusations do not make you less ignorant or your opinion any more factual.

2007-09-19 05:20:44 · update #3

no, johnny, you are simply WRONG. he said point blank "the tax cuts for those making in excess of 250,000 a year have harmed the economy"

how is it that you think i am misunderstanding this, and how is it that you are unable to understand this?

2007-09-19 05:23:28 · update #4

good for you pfo, i will be glad to accept your apology once you read it are forced to agree that i have given a truthful analysis of what Greenspan has said on these issues.

2007-09-19 05:26:00 · update #5

12 answers

Once again a major figure leaves the political arena and THEN decides he'll relieve his conscience by telling the truth.

This is an old story. Robert MacNamarra in his memoires shared that BOTH he and Lyndon Johnson knew the demonstrators were right and the war a huge miscalculation.

You may be sure there are people around Bush who know things that they won't admit til they leave office.

There is a special ring of hell for hypocrites.

The people that blindly support their favorite politicos, whatever side, should really pay close attention to what gets said by these kinds of folks, way after it's too late for the words to do any good.

Every general Bush has 'retired' in the last two years has proclaimed his policy seriously flawed.

2007-09-19 05:15:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6 0

Taking things out of context does not make your arguments look more supported or rational.

- He said that Bush's deficit spending has harmed the economy, not his tax cuts. Why can't people understand that spending is just as big a contributor to a deficit as taxes. Tax revenues have been increasing at rates not seen since the early 1980's.

- True. overspending must stop period, not just in Iraq.

- Providing assistance to the needy is already taking place. See Medicaid, Medicare, and SCHIP. His support of helping those in need is NOT support of a system that erodes personal choice by forcing people to buy insurance.

- If fraud was committed, then it should indeed be prosecuted. However, it is not fradulent activity to provide someone with a loan who doesn't bother to acknowledge the fact that rates could go up. What you people don't seem to realize is that much of this sub-prime mess is a result of people assuming that the price of their home would continue to rise, and they could therefore refinance or sell and make a profit. IT IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S ROLE TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM MAKING BAD BUSINESS DECISIONS. Both parties have already been punished by the market. Both lenders and borrowers have lost their a$$es, so there is no need for government intervention.

- I wouldn't put him too high on your anti-war pedestal. He argued IN FAVOR of going into Iraq because he thought that Saddam was trying to gain control of the Strait of Hormuz. And his opinion simply supports your and much of the left's claims. However, it doesn't lend any more proof to this claim than you have by shouting it from the roof tops for the past three years. The truth is there were many reasons to go in. Oil, for sure, the fact that the world thought he had WMDs, the fact that he was trying to acquire WMD's, the fact that he ignored every UN sanction and treaty aggreement that ended the 1st Iraq war, etc.

2007-09-19 12:11:15 · answer #2 · answered by Time to Shrug, Atlas 6 · 3 3

This doesn't appear to be a question, but a rant.

I've always liked Greenspans bi-partisan's nature.
I've read Maestro by Bob Woodward, though I must admit some of the economic lingual had me a bit confused. I still look forward to reading Greenspan's new book, certainly hope it is well written and maybe now I'll have a better understanding on the economics of it all.

2007-09-19 12:18:55 · answer #3 · answered by labken1817 6 · 0 3

I was just wondering about his book. Thanks for sharing that. People should listen to what this man says especially about the oil. Being a financial wizard means he would have known all the finer details of the oil crisis we are facing. Smart man. I think Greenspan wants to open up dialogue on something that needs to be addressed very soon.
http://www.energybulletin.net

2007-09-19 12:11:17 · answer #4 · answered by Enigma 6 · 6 1

Just the latest in a long line of people...when are people going to realize that one person may be lying, but if a whole group of people say something, there may be validity to it.

2007-09-19 12:17:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

A sampling of quotes doesn't do Greenspan's messages any justice. He is meticulous and thorough in his explanations. I'm troubled by what he says, but curious. I will be reading his book, but I'm not going to believe a word of your biased cherry-picking.

2007-09-19 12:13:33 · answer #6 · answered by Pfo 7 · 1 4

Greenspan is a traitor who hates America and loves the terrorists.

Send in the death squads!!!

2007-09-19 12:19:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

Did he manage to say anywhere how we do any of that.

2007-09-19 12:15:56 · answer #8 · answered by Greg 7 · 0 0

I quite agree with him.

2007-09-19 13:52:01 · answer #9 · answered by Lily Iris 7 · 2 0

Lots of people say lots of things...some want to sell books and make waves...yippee.

2007-09-19 12:12:30 · answer #10 · answered by makrothumeo2 4 · 1 6

fedest.com, questions and answers