Comments on: CBS News Reviews Meltdown

By: Florida Adjuster

Florida Adjuster — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 17:49:57 +0000

I think Greenspan is getting senile, today he said that you can stop asset bubbles by increasing capital requirements. That just increases the cost of credit. The next time you have a real estate bubble, you’ll have the same problem, assuming that banks are still in the business of loaning against real estate. If you want to stop this problem, then eliminate the federal subsidies for real estate development and investment, then require people in that industry to put their own money at risk instead of someone elses. If Greenspan really wants to change the banking system, though, then simply ban 95% and 90% LTV loans. Require a bigger equity cushion. BTW, the “too big to fail” argument is a fallacious one. During the Great Depression, Canada had no bank failures. The reason was that their banks were very large. The banks closed branches, etc., but none of them failed. By contrast, the US was dominated by thousands of very small banks, and we had more than 10,000 of them fail. So there is nothing inherently unsafe about a banking system dominated by large banks. The real problem with large banks is that during good times, they don’t provide enough competition for each other.

By: Andrew Fischer

Andrew Fischer — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:28:50 +0000

Milton Friedman sounds like an dolt when he says: “If you go back to the 1930s, which is a key point, here you had the Austrians sitting in London, Hayek and Lionel Robbins, and saying you just have to let the bottom drop out of the world. Youâ€™ve just got to let it cure itself. You canâ€™t do anything about it. You will only make it worse. You have Rothbard saying it was a great mistake not to let the whole banking system collapse. I think by encouraging that kind of do-nothing policy both in Britain and in the United States, they did harm.”

Does Mr. Doofus Twinkie actually believe any sort of do-nothing plicy was enacted? Or that the Austrians’ mere words caused harm (by somehow lessening the government interventions)?

By: T

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:34:41 +0000

Friedman’s comments that the Austrian Theory has caused a great deal of harm are completely absurd. How could a theory that is not being applied cause harm? Keynesian economics was applied during the depression and is being applied now. How much good is it doing? Anyone taking Friedman (or Krugman for that matter) seriously needs to have their head examined.

Read the book. It makes a great deal of sense. Some parts will require more in depth study to understand clearly, but an excellent primer to the causes and cure of our current economic woes. Particularly enjoyed the chapter on money. I hope it gets wide circulation. Thanks for the work. Now if we can only get enough people behind it to vote in Representatives like Ron Paul who are ready and willing to apply it in real life, there would be a reversal of our current trend towards financial collapse. Just in case, you may want to learn how to bake your own beans and bread, cut back on the meat and acquire a weapon with ample ammunition. Times may get a little tough thanks to the boy genius in office now with CFR advisors like Geithner and Summers.

By: Rich Phinney

Rich Phinney — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:37:41 +0000

The link inside of this story to Krugman’s ’98 article on Austrian cycle theory is worth the click. Thank you Tom, for all your good works! It was a joy to meet you in Colorado Springs and my daughter brought many friends to the Boulder campus appearance. You are a gentleman indeed. Godspeed you.