The Questionable Legacy of Alan Greenspan

Amid the fawning retrospectives, a critical reading of his eighteen-year tenure at the Fed

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Alan Greenspan will retire as Chairman of the Federal Reserve in January 2006,
and his retirement promises a flood of swooning retrospectives. Writing anything
else at this moment risks the charge of churlishly raining on the parade. However,
there are good grounds for a more critical reading of Greenspan’s eighteen-year
tenure at the Fed.

As Fed Chairman, Greenspan has been one of the world’s most powerful policymakers
for almost two decades. During that time he has been a leading booster of globalization
and financial deregulation, developments that have contributed to a new U.S.boom-bust
cycle founded on financial exuberance and cheap imports. Financial exuberance
has driven up asset prices and supported consumer borrowing and spending. Cheap
imports have contained inflation and partially compensated households for wage
stagnation and heightened economic insecurity. The new cycle is a Faustian bargain,
the price of which will be paid when the bust phase begins.

The Greenspan Fed’s support for this new boom-bust cycle is evident in its
disregard of the over-valued dollar and persistent growing trade deficits, which
have damaged U.S. manufacturing. To Greenspan, the over-valued dollar has been
a boon that has helped contain inflation by cheapening imports. Side-by-side,
the trade deficit has been viewed as the product of “consenting adults”
taking advantage of beneficial trading opportunities afforded by globalization.
Meanwhile, manufacturing has been tacitly analogized to agriculture, and its
decline rationalized as part of an inevitable transformation into a post-industrial
society.

Lastly, the Greenspan Fed has shown a deep aversion to financial market regulation.
Thus, it refused to use existing regulatory instruments (margin requirements)
to curb the stock market bubble of the 1990s. And more importantly, it has refused
to contemplate new regulations that could have helped curb the subsequent housing
price bubble.

The chickens are now coming home to roost. Though the housing price bubble
helped escape the recession of 2001, it has left households saddled with debt.
However, the economic expansion has still proven fragile owing to the massive
leakage of spending out of the economy via the trade deficit. This leakage is
a problem, but it is difficult to address owing to de-industrialization and
the new economic environment associated with globalization and financial deregulation.

In the pre-globalization era large trade deficits could be corrected by dollar
depreciation (as happened in 1985). To prevent inflation from increased domestic
consumption and reduced imports, interest rates could be increased. Taxes could
also be raised and government spending cut.

However, such corrections are now far more difficult. First, globalization
has allowed the trade deficit to reach record levels, making the scale of adjustment
unprecedented and the inflation danger greater. Second, de-industrialization
means that America may lack the manufacturing capacity to replace imports, which
means the only way to close the trade deficit may be through recession and unemployment
that lowers incomes and import purchases. Third, higher interest rates could
burst the housing bubble, triggering recession.

Unwinding structural imbalances is always difficult, but the current difficulty
is compounded by scale and circumstance. Debt-financed consumption has borrowed
demand from the future. That means even without economic shocks, the economy
is already headed for a period of weaker demand. If house prices fall, wiping
out consumer wealth, that weakness could be severe and the Fed may have difficulty
containing it. Lowering interest rates, to stimulate the economy, may be little
more than “pushing on a string.” With expectations of falling house
prices, buyers are likely defer purchases no matter what the interest rate,
as happened in Japan after its property bubble burst in 1990.

The Greenspan Fed has cavalierly allowed imbalances to develop, brushing aside
dangers with blithe references to the flexibility of the U.S. economy. The next
Fed Chairman must take exchange rates and trade deficits seriously. Globalization
means that exchange rates matter more, not less. The system of financial regulation
must also be rebuilt. Financial innovation makes asset price bubbles more powerful,
and the Fed must be able to contain them without recourse to the blunderbuss
of interest rates that wreaks havoc on innocent sectors.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate