Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘politics’ Category

It has been abundantly obvious from day one that Ben Bernanke has no understanding of “liquidity” — whatsoever.

Only 2 months (?) after Bernanke helicoptered $122 billion to AIG, AIG has come cap in hand to Uncle Sam with a down face and a confession: “The money’s all gone.” AIG supposedly wants $200 billion in new money.

AIG in talks with Fed over new bail-out

By Francesco Guerrera in New York

Published: November 8 2008 02:00 | Last updated: November 8 2008 02:00

AIG is asking the US government for a new bail-out less than two months after the Federal Reserve came to the rescue of the stricken insurer with an $85bn loan, according to people close to the situation.

AIG’s executives were last night locked in negotiations with the authorities over a plan that could involve a debt-for-equity swap and the government’s purchase of troubled mortgage-backed securities from the insurer.

People close to the talks said the discussions were on-going and might still collapse, but added that AIG was pressing for a decision before it reports third-quarter results on Monday.

AIG’s board is due to meet on Sunday to approve the results and discuss any new government plan, they added.

The moves come amid growing fears AIG might soon use up the $85bn cash infusion it received from the Fed in September, as well as an additional $37.5bn loan aimed at stemming a cash drain from the insurer’s securities lending unit.

AIG has drawn down more than $81bn of the combined $122.5bn facility. The company’s efforts to begin repaying it before the 2010 deadline have been hampered by its difficulties in selling assets amid the global financial turmoil.

AIG executives have complained to government officials that the interest rate on the initial loan – 8.5 per cent over the London Interbank Borrowing Rate – is crippling the company.

They compared the loan’s terms with the 5 per cent interest rate paid by the banks that recently sold preferred shares to the government.

One of AIG’s proposals to the Fed is to swap the loan, which gave the authorities an 80 per cent stake in the company, for preferred shares or a mixture of debt and equity.

Such a structure would reduce the interest rate to be paid by AIG and possibly the overall amount it has to repay. An extension in the term of the loan from the current two years to five years is also possible, according to people close to the situation.

The renegotiation of the loan could be accompanied by the government’s purchase of billions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities whose steep fall in value has been draining AIG cash reserves.

AIG is also proposing the government buy the bonds underlying its troubled portfolio of credit default swaps in exchange for the roughly $30bn in collateral the company holds against the assets.

Losses on the mortgage-backed assets, which were acquired by AIG with the proceeds of its securities lending programme, and the CDSs caused the company’s collapse.

Since the government rescue, they have continued to haunt AIG, which is required to put up extra capital every time the value of these assets falls. AIG and the Fed declined to comment.

Red staters get a lot of sh*t from their coastal cousins for being stupid. I will say one thing in red staters’ defense, though: it truly takes a blue coast, blue-blood stupidity to concoct such dangerous national policy as Bernanke’s.

It’s the kind of stupidity that only an Ivy League education can buy.

What is Bernanke going to do when he issues $2 trillion in Treasuries next year, and nobody buys?

All the people who thought they got a great deal when Pepsi priced its last bond at 7.5% are going to feel pretty damn stupid 12 months from now. Either that, or AAA corporates will have lower yields than Treasuries.

At the primary dealer desks, there is no net Asian sovereign demand for US sovereigns anymore.

Right now, Uncle Sam is printing the money and planning to float Treasuries “soon.” I am not exaggerating. It is the dirty secret that every FX macro desk at every major institution knows: the Treasury is printing now and issuing later.

In the ivory towers at Treasury and the Fed, “printed” money will be converted to Treasuries soon, because the Fed and Treasury (okay, just the Fed) think that there is an “irrational” “liquidity crisis”, which will abate any day now.

It won’t abate. It will get worse: all bond yields are based on Treasury yields. Treasury yields are definitely going up in the next year. All other yields (corporates … munis … ) will go up too.

That will be the real “credit crisis.” We are just mostly through the second act.

Read Full Post »

Criminal

The most criminally ingenious short squeeze in history, engineered by those cunning Germans at Porsche.

Fortunate for them that they’re a “car company.” If a hedge fund had tried to pull that in Germany, the managers, the PMs, the traders, the analysts, the back office IT, and everybody else in the same building would have already been packed off to the gas chambers by now.

Since hedge funds are “bad,” and Hank Paulson is “out to kill the bad HFs and regulate the rest,” David Einhorn can be allowed to squirm in his final moments, instead, as he chokes on a large short position.

All the prime broker intermediaries (GS, MS, Soc Gen, etc) will be repaid the difference in money printed at Treasury, so at the end of the day, what do they care, whether they were caught on the wrong side or not?

GS told us to post 500 percent margin today to keep our VW short position.

(We posted it.)

It was a small position, luckily.

Read Full Post »

Complacency triumphant:

The pollsters for John McCain’s campaign sent out a memo challenging the findings of a poll conducted by the Los Angeles Times and Bloomberg. Hundreds of polls are released during a typical campaign without such a public objection. One finding in particular caught their attention. According to the L.A. Times, 22 percent of those surveyed identified themselves as Republicans, 39 percent as Democrats, and 27 percent as independents. The party identification in this poll, argued McCain’s pollsters, “is greatly out of line with what most other surveys are reporting.”

They’re right. And that fact probably helps explain why the L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll has Barack Obama beating John McCain by 15 points (in a field including Nader and Barr)–a much larger margin than most other respected polls. (The Gallup daily tracking poll, the McCain campaign eagerly points out, has McCain down just 3 points.)

McCain’s pollsters point to the findings of other surveys on party identification. That they would do this suggests just how damaged the Republican party brand is heading into the 2008 general election. Although the L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll shows a larger gap between Democrats and Republicans than all others–+17 for Democrats–the news for Republicans is uniformly bad.

Among the numbers the McCain campaign highlighted: AP/Ipsos’s +14 for Democrats; CBS News/New York Times‘s +14 for Democrats; and Democracy Corps’s +12 for Democrats. The average advantage for Democrats in the ten surveys the McCain campaign cited was 9.3 points. So Republicans are clearly at a significant disadvantage.

The conventional wisdom, adopted and internalized by many on the McCain campaign, is that McCain must move to the center to appeal to independents. So that’s largely what he’s done. Immediately after McCain became the de facto nominee, he toured the country touting his biography. Shortly after that he spent a week on a trip informally dubbed the “Places Republicans Don’t Go” tour. Not long afterwards, he traveled to Washington and Oregon talking about global warming. He has launched radio ads explicitly targeting Hispanics and last month held secret meetings with Hispanic and gay leaders. Twice in recent weeks, McCain has participated in virtual town halls targeting disaffected Democrats and moderates.

[…]

“Where are they going to go?” asks one McCain adviser, expressing a sentiment I’ve heard from several others.

One possibility: nowhere. Unmotivated by a candidate who would rather talk about global warming than gay marriage, conservatives might simply stay home. This lack of enthusiasm for McCain among conservatives was evident in the Washington Post/ABC News poll taken in mid-June. Ninety-one percent of those who identified themselves as Obama supporters say they are “enthusiastic” about their candidate; 54 percent say they are “very enthusiastic.” Seventy-three percent of self-identified McCain supporters say they are “enthusiastic” about his candidacy; but only 17 percent say they are “very enthusiastic.” More ominous, while almost half of the liberals surveyed are enthusiastic about Obama, only 13 percent of conservatives are enthusiastic about McCain.

Republican pollster David Winston believes that McCain can close this enthusiasm gap by campaigning on issues where there are sharp differences between the candidates. “We are still a center-right country,” says Winston. “And voters will still prefer a center-right candidate to a liberal one.” …

All surveys are showing declining Republican affiliation over their time series. Whether it’s Dems +8 or Dems +15, Republican party ID has collapsed over the past 12 months.

At this point in the horse race, the guy arguing against the data trends is the guy who’s losing.

Oil prices aren’t going anywhere until Asian economies stop subsidizing oil consumption, which incidentally would cripple the Asian export advantage by forcing businesses to pay the full cost of energy. Therefore, inflation-driven discontent against the incumbent administration won’t subside in the near term.

Read Full Post »

Limits Put on Some Oil Contracts On ICE Amid Outcry Over Prices
By IAN TALLEY
June 17, 2008

WASHINGTON — The U.S. commodity futures regulator Tuesday said ICE
Futures Europe has agreed to make permanent position and
accountability limits for some of its U.S.-traded crude contracts,
subjecting itself to the same regulatory oversight as its New York
based counterpart.

Following intense scrutiny and censure by Congress over skyrocketing
oil prices, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission also said it
would require daily large trader reports, and similar position and
accountability limits from other foreign exchanges.

Many in Congress have criticized the agency for not doing enough to
rein in what they believe is rampant speculation contributing to
record energy prices and have pointed the finger in particular at
trading on IntercontinentalExchange’s ICE Futures Europe.

ICE and other foreign exchanges have been exempt from the many of the
rules that govern the New York Mercantile Exchange, which critics
charge has attracted a host of financial investors intent on pushing
prices higher. The new agreement, made in consultation with the U.K.’s
Financial Services Authority, will subject ICE to the same oversight
as Nymex.

“This combination of enhanced information data and additional market
controls will help the CFTC in its surveillance of its regulated
domestic exchanges,” while preserving the integrity of its
cross-border cooperation with other regulators, acting CFTC Chairman
Walter Lukken said in prepared testimony.

“We have not found a smoking gun… [but] we’re definitely taking
constructive steps to make sure the markets are working correctly, to
make sure there is not excessive speculation driving the markets,” Mr.
Lukken said.

Specifically, the agreement will require trader reports on positions
in the benchmark U.S. crude contract — the West Texas Intermediate
contract — traded on the ICE Futures exchange. The contract is linked
to the WTI contract on the regulated New York Mercantile Exchange.

ICE has 120 days to implement the new reporting requirements.

On the Nymex, where the majority of oil futures are traded, most
traders face accountability levels and position limits on their
positions in crude oil and other commodities. Accountability levels
are guidelines for trading in all futures contracts, while position
limits are hard-and-fast caps on the number of front-month contracts a
trader may hold in the last three days before the contract expires.

Traditionally, the U.K.’s FSA has had informal accountability levels
of 10,000 contracts in West Texas Intermediate crude, but no position
limits, an ICE spokeswoman said. The new CFTC rules will make ICE oil
trading consistent with practices on Nymex: a 3,000 contract position
limit in the last three days of trading, and a 20,000-contract
accountability level.

Lukken said the same oversight requirements would apply to the Dubai
Mercantile Exchange if it were to also offer the WTI contract.

The Nymex and DME have been mulling offering such a contract and will
decide in the next few months, said Nymex chief executive James
Newsome.

ICE Warns Oversight Won’t Lower Prices

The CFTC will incorporate the ICE data into its commitment of traders
report, a weekly report categorizing positions held by speculators and
companies that use futures contract to hedge against operations in the
physical energy market.

ICE said it would comply with the new regulations but warned tighter
oversight won’t lower oil prices.

“With a mere 15% market share of global WTI, on a futures equivalent
basis, we feel it is highly unlikely that the ICE Futures Europe’s WTI
market is the primary driver of WTI prices,” Charles Vice, ICE
president, told a special Senate committee exploring exploring
oversight and resources for the CFTC.

“Therefore, any expectation that WTI crude oil prices will fall as a
result of increased restrictions on this relatively small portion of
that market are likely to go unmet,” he said.

Jennifer Gordon, an analyst at Deutsche Bank in New York said the
greater regulatory oversight was driving volatility and leading to
less liquidity in the oil markets. “So whatever the CFTC is doing, it
is certainly scaring away the marginal player,” she said. Ms. Gordon
noted that the CFTC move was “adding to the bearish tone on crude,” in
Tuesday trading.

Oil prices climbed within shouting distance of $140 a barrel on Monday
before slipping towards $134.03 on Tuesday, down 58 cents. Prices are
still up about 40% so far this year.

The CFTC action follows rebuke by Congress, which has ratcheted up its
efforts to regulate oil-markets trading. Several of the most powerful
U.S. senators and representatives have introduced proposals that would
give more money and power to the agency.

In the past several weeks, the CFTC has announced a raft of
investigations and new initiatives targeting speculation, the role of
financial participants in current prices and the potential for market
manipulation. Mr. Lukken said the agency couldn’t rule out that market
manipulation was going on in the commodity markets.

The agency disclosed in late May that it is conducting a broad
investigation into practices surrounding the purchase, transportation,
storage and trading of crude oil and related derivative contracts.

Mr. Lukken said the agency was studying the impact of swaps deals and
index trading in the commodity markets and would report back to
Congress by Sept. 15.

The agency said the massive increase in commodity trading, the growing
complexity of the market and an aging CFTC workforce meant that it was
just about able to maintain a business status quo.

“This agency’s lack of funding over the course of many years has had a
negative impact on our staffing situation, rendering it unsustainable
for the long run,” Mr. Lukken said.

“Given our staffing numbers, the agency is working beyond its steady
state capacity and is unable to sustain the current situation for much
longer without being forced to make…choices about which critical
projects should be completed and which ones will be delayed,” the
acting chairman said in his testimony.

The agency is now requesting a 20% rise in its funding for the next
fiscal year to $157 million, from $130 million previously requested.

Read Full Post »

Thomas Palley, Open Society Institute pontificator emeritus cum DC-cocktail laude, mocks himself best when he’s most honest. As do most political people.

Defending the Bernanke Fed

Filed under: U.S. Policy, Uncategorized — Administrator @ 6:37 am

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has recently been on the receiving end of significant criticism for recent monetary policy. One critique can be labeled the American conservative critique, and is associated with the Wall Street Journal. The other can be termed the European critique, and is associated with prominent European Economist and Financial Times contributor, Willem Buiter.

Brought up on the intellectual ideas of Milton Friedman, American conservatives view inflation as the greatest economic threat and believe control of inflation should be the Fed’s primary job. In their eyes the Bernanke Fed has dangerously ignored emerging inflation dangers, and that policy failure risks a return to the disruptive stagflation of the 1970s.

Both argue the Fed has engaged in excessive monetary easing, cutting interest rates too much and ignoring the perils of inflation. Their criticisms raise core questions about the conduct of policy that warrant a response.

At least he didn’t call us “liquidationists.” Generous.

Rather than cutting interest rates as steeply as the Fed has, American conservatives maintain the proper way to address the financial crisis triggered by the deflating house price bubble is to re-capitalize the financial system.

Correct.

This explains the efforts of Treasury Secretary Paulson to reach out to foreign investors in places like Abu Dhabi. The logic is that foreign investors are sitting on mountains of liquidity, and they can therefore re-capitalize the system without recourse to lower interest rates that supposedly risk a return of ‘70’s style inflation.

“Supposedly.

The European critique of the Fed is slightly different, and is that the Fed has gone about responding to the financial crisis in the wrong way. The European view is that the crisis constitutes a massive liquidity crisis, and as such the Fed should have responded by making liquidity available without lowering rates. That is the course European Central Bank has taken, holding the line on its policy interest rate but making massive quantities of liquidity available to Euro zone banks.

In other words, the Buiter critique advocates one set of interest rates for banks, and a very different one for individuals, without regard to respective credit risk. Presumably, there would be no arbitrage between these two bifurcated markets. Presumably, liquidity provisions to other banks–“inflation by other means”–would both 1) save the banks, and 2) not institutionalize higher prices on the tabs of the people who didn’t take the stupid risks.

Never made much sense to me either. [I used to like Buiter because he was the only person who trashed Bernanke way back in the day. Unfortunately his “lender of last resort” bailout loophole was an unforgivable leap of illogic, and while formally very different from the Bank of Japan’s disastrous early-1990’s bailout, was functionally indistinguishable.]

According to the European critique the Fed should have done the same. Thus, the Fed’s new Term Securities Lending Facility that makes liquidity available to investment banks was the right move. However, there was no need for the accompanying sharp interest rate reductions given the inflation outlook. By lowering rates, the European view asserts the Fed has raised the risks of a return of significantly higher persistent inflation. Additionally, lowering rates in the current setting has damaged the Fed’s anti-inflation credibility and aggravated moral hazard in investing practices.

The problem with the American conservative critique is that inflation today is not what it used to be.

It’s different this time.

1970s inflation was rooted in a price – wage spiral in which price increases were matched by nominal wage increases. However, that spiral mechanism no longer exists because workers lack the power to protect themselves. The combination of globalization, the erosion of job security, and the evisceration of unions means that workers are unable to force matching wage increases.

DC establishment liberal: “Inflation is okay now, because workers have to eat all costs themselves.” As if workers will just sit back and take this? As if they can’t read these internet posts, which presume weakness, ignorance and stupidity on the part of American workers?

The problem with the European critique is it over-looks the scale of the demand shock the U.S. economy has received. Moreover, that demand shock is on-going. Falling house prices and the souring of hundreds of billions of dollars of mortgages has caused the financial crisis. However, in addition, falling house prices have wiped out hundreds of billions of household wealth. That in turn is weakening demand as consumer spending slows in response to lower household wealth.

Different. This. Time.

Countering this negative demand shock is the principal rationale for the Fed’s decision to lower interest rates. Whereas Europe has been impacted by the financial crisis, it has not experienced an equivalent demand shock. That explains the difference in policy responses between the Fed and the European Central Bank, and it explains why the European critique is off mark.

The bottom line is that current criticism of the Bernanke Fed is unjustified. Whereas the Fed was slow to respond to the crisis as it began unfolding in the summer of 2007, it has now caught up and the stance of policy seems right. Liquidity has been made available to the financial system. Low interest rates are countering the demand shock. And the Fed has signaled its awareness of inflationary dangers by speaking to the problem of exchange rates and indicating it may hold off from further rate cuts. The only failing is that is that the Fed has not been imaginative or daring enough in its engagement with financial regulatory reform.

Copyright Thomas I. Palley

The bottom line is, DC policy emerati are profoundly ignorant, sycophantic, and irresponsible people.

Read Full Post »

As noted here time and again, Iran has nothing to lose by waiting out the end of George Bush’s term.

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said May 29 that Iran thinks U.S. voters want to change the foreign policies of President George W. Bush, and he said that the present U.S. presidential campaigns make that clear, The Associated Press reported. Mottaki, who would not endorse a candidate, said that foreign policy would play an important part in the election of the next U.S. president.

Iran could not have had a better March-May. A rumored Israeli Gaza offensive, against Iran’s proxy Hamas, failed to materialize. Hezbollah, staked by Iran, was forced to go all-in in Lebanon, won, and has returned to a defensive crouch.

Mottaki’s announcement is a signal to Ahmadinejad’s domestic foes that Iraq is worth waiting for for a little while longer. He happens to be right.

US econo-political analysis is divided into two camps. The “mainstream” camp sees US growth figures as credible, and takes at face value the idea that the US, by sheer economic vitality, has avoided a recession. This school views US inflation as temporary. It views 10/90 “right track/wrong track” numbers as merely a dubious poll, a product of stampeding pessimism, spawned by the media’s sensationalizing of US malaise. This group has faith in government and banking institutions, and little faith in consumers’ ability to assess or predict their own behavior. Curiously, this group is also disproportionately Republican and “free-market.” It does not see much potential for an economic- or inflation-driven political upheaval in November 2008.

The “cynics,” e.g., Bill Gross, Mish Shedlock, and John Williams, trust consumers’ perceptions over the government’s. Cynics argue that consumers are telling the truth when they say how pessimistic they are, and trace the dissonance between official and consumer perceptions to vagaries of BLS unemployment and inflation accounting–a story flogged to death here, and much more persuasively on other sites.

The cynics see much higher potential for political upheaval in November 2008.

Apparently, so does Iran.

Bush Administration policy vis-a-vis Iran/Iraq usually means dialing up tensions over Iranian nukes and weapons supplies into Iraq, bringing up aircraft carriers, launching large operations against Iran’s Mehdi Army Iraqi proxy, slapping sanctions on Iranian banks, using its own militias to incinerate strategic people inside Iran, etc.

After Hezbollah routed the US alliance in Lebanon (followed by an abrupt end to the US/Iraqi crackdown on Sadr in Baghdad) one would assume that the Bush Administration policy of “we’d like to talk, but we’re happy to pull the trigger too” attitude has lost credibility. Iran is quietly leveraging its gains by edging the US out of Iraq:

May 29, 2008 1419 GMT
Senior Iraqi official Sa’ad Javad Qandil told Alalam television May 29 that a draft of an agreement to extend U.S. troops in Iraq beyond 2008 was problematic, especially any condition that would allow the U.S. to establish a military base there.

Predictably, Qandil is a member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, Teheran’s “mainstream” Iraq proxy (the Mehdi Army is, most of the time, its militant proxy). Hezbollah’s unanswered victory in Lebanon has ramifications across the entire region, not so much in the eyes of Americans as in the eyes of Arabs who were reminded, once again, that the personal bonds between Ahmadinejad and militia leaders can result in very quick and decisive action when Teheran’s interest are threatened.

Anyway, Iran hasn’t been deterred by US tough talk in the past, and there’s less reason than ever to think that louder tough talk will change Iran’s behavior at all. Lebanon has changed the game.

I would repeat my “sh*t or get off the pot” mantra about the US and Iran, but the US has backed down one too many times. I’m beginning to believe we should throw the Saudis the keys as soon as possible, to hedge against a probably adverse US election outcome while it’s still possible.

Read Full Post »

“With Bold Steps, Fed Chief Quiets Some Criticism”:

[…]

“It has been a really head-spinning range of unprecedented and bold actions,” said Charles W. Calomiris, professor of finance and economics at Columbia Business School, referring to the Fed’s lending activities. “That is exactly as it should be. But I’m not saying that it’s without some cost and without some risk.”

[As yours truly noted back in November, Charles Calomiris wrote a verbose and obtuse article for VoxEU which proclaimed that there was no credit crisis — a restatement of his August claim that there was no credit crisis. I guess that makes him almost as good a forecaster as Bernanke is. ]

Timothy F. Geithner, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and a close Bernanke ally, defines the Fed chief’s “doctrine” as the overpowering use of monetary policies and lending to avert an economic collapse. “Ben has, in very consequential ways, altered the framework for how central banks operate in crises,” he said. “Some will criticize it and some will praise it, and it will certainly be examined for decades.”

Mr. Bernanke’s actions have transformed his image as a self-effacing former economics professor.

“I am tempted to think of him as somewhat Buddha-like,” said Richard W. Fisher, president of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank. “He’s developed a serenity based on a growing understanding of the hardball ways the system actually works. You can see that it’s no longer an academic or theoretical exercise for him.”

Did he just say “Buddha-like”?

Within the Bush administration, Mr. Bernanke’s willingness to work with Democrats in Congress on measures to prevent mortgage foreclosures has stirred unease. “The fact that he, an appointee of George Bush, has come very close to advocating — though he hasn’t quite advocated it — a piece of legislation that George Bush threatened to veto is an illustration of his willingness to put his head on the chopping block,” said Alan S. Blinder, a professor of economics at Princeton and friend of the Fed chief.

One reason Mr. Bernanke is sticking his neck out is that he believes the broader economy’s recovery depends on the housing sector, which remains in a serious slump. Plenty of new evidence surfaced on Tuesday that this year’s spring home-buying season will be dismal, with one report showing that prices fell 14.1 percent in March from a year earlier and another that new-home sales are down 42 percent over the last year.

Among Democrats, Mr. Bernanke, a Republican, had previously been criticized by such party luminaries as the two former Clinton administration Treasury secretaries, Robert E. Rubin and Lawrence E. Summers, who worried that he was downplaying the dangers of a recession. But that view has changed.

“I think in the last few months they’ve handled themselves very sure-footedly,” Mr. Rubin said of the Fed. Many Democrats in Congress agree.

“They say that crisis makes the man,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the Joint Economic Committee. “He’s made believers out of people who were just not sure about him before.”

To lessen the chances of a financial collapse, Mr. Bernanke engineered the takeover of one investment bank, Bear Stearns, and tossed credit lifelines to others with exotic new lending facilities — the Fed now has seven such lending windows, some of them for investment banks as well as commercial banks.

He also allowed the Fed to accept assets of debatable value — mortgage-backed securities, car loans and credit card debt — as collateral for some Fed loans. For the first time ever, he installed Fed regulators inside investment banks to inspect their books.

Much to the dismay of conservative economists, Mr. Bernanke has also presided over an extraordinarily aggressive series of interest rate cuts, lowering the fed funds rate seven times, to 2 percent from 5.75 percent, since last September, though it has signaled a pause in further rate-cutting barring a further crisis. …

Bernanke and Paulson are the worst thing that’s happened to capitalism since Arthur Burns and Richard Nixon. Carter would have been awful, but conditions were so bad by 1979 that he had to authorize significant deregulation and capital gains tax cuts (from 35% to 28%, from memory) kicking and screaming.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »