Talk:Alan Greenspan

Money Supply Growth figures

What is the point of an article on former head of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan that contains no money supply growth figures for his term? Someone could read the entire article and still not know how much any of the various measures of money supply grow over the period that Alan Greenspan was at the Fed.84.65.212.196 (talk) 19:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Contact Info

Does anyone know how I can get ahold of Alan Greenspan? possibly Via email, I have a huge econ question. Thanks

Contacting Alan Greenspan

Why not ask your question here? It may very well get sent to Greenspan. Economics is a field with many possibilities and few certainties, so most question have several answers, prompting President Harry Truman to wish for a one-handed economist --Samatva 14:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Any direct e-mail or fax # to Alan Greenspan? I have a confidential letter to be mailed to him. Is he in London now? Or in NY city?

• is that some kind of a joke ^? you have a confidential letter to Alan Greenspan but don't know how to contact him, so you decide to go on Wikipedia to learn about him and see if his fax, cell phone, etc is on his page?? You would think if someone had a confidential letter for Alan Greenspan you would know his contact information if you couldn't contact him personally or otherwise know him enough to get it without resorting to Wikipedia... That is the most retarded thing I've ever heard. -Anon

Yes, it is totally absurd to think that the lower classes should have any contact with their betters, the nerve. He may know that we don't need a higher minimum wage, but to imagine that he would mix with the natives is ridiculous.

Alan Greenspan

Um,,,, hi! My name is So Young and I have a question to ask for ya' guys. Is Alan a Jewish? I think his Amercian because he was born in U.S, but what about his father and mother. Is there anyone who is Jewish in his family? Please tell me.

Alan Greenspan's Ethnicity/Religion

As the article states, Greenspan was born to a Jewish family, Grynszpan. Whether or not he currently considers himself a Jew is up to him, I would think - see Who is a Jew?

His father-in-law (as of 1997) was the president of a synagogue from 1952 to 1992, but Greenspan and Andrea Mitchell were married in what seems to have been a secular ceremony (Ruth Bader Ginsburg officiated at the Inn at Little Washington). Their descision to have a non-religious, public ceremony may have been for many complex reasons, and may have nothing to do with their beliefs and relgious practices. --Samatva 14:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Greenspan's cousin, Perry, is my grandfather. Although I've never met Alan, I can attest that his ethnicity is Jewish/Hebrew. Of note - I remember hearing through the family grapevine that he dated Barbara Walters at one time, although, I don't have any source on that. -Brian from Dallas TX —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.234.10.6 (talk) 18:36, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

If Greenspan was "converted to Objectivism", doesn't that make him an athiest? -Anonymous

The verb "convert" can have different meanings based on context. Yes, it is used to describe religious conversion, but also certainly for political conversion "he was a Democrat, but his wife converted him to a Republican," or diet "she converted to vegetarianism after seeing news reports of the poorly-run slaughterhouse," or surely any number of ways, including a philosophical conversion. Dictionary.com lists the first two meanings (the second is the applicable one) as "1. to change (something) into a different form or properties; transmute; transform. 2. to cause to adopt a different religion, political doctrine, opinion, etc.: to convert the heathen." Anyone interested can go look up the other meanings they have there. I think it is perfectly fine to use the word "convert" to describe a change in philosophical belief system. However the word "introduce" terribly plays down AG's involvement in Objectivism, as supported by the references. DanielM (talk) 12:15, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

In his info box, doesn't it make more sense to change the label "Religion" to "Ethnicity?" He certainly is not religious -- but is certainly ethnically Jewish.

The Mexican

Due esp. to his appearance, Greenspan had/has many nicknames on Wall Street including (as you visualize his appearance), "slick" (due to his slicking back his few strands of hair backwards) AND "the Mexican Hairless" or "the Chihuahua" after his similarity to the small Mexican chihuahua dogs some breeds of which are hairless. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.192.1.172 (talk) 17:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

Middle name

Does anybody know Greenspan's full middle name? --MZMcBride 03:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

=-=-=-=-=-

Here is the only citation I could find for the middle initial "C" http://www.senate.gov/~foreign/hearings/2006/hrg060607a.html

=-=-=-=-=-

I'm re-adding the {{fact}} tag because I have yet to find proof that his middle name is "C." I've been searching for the past week, and nothing indicates what his full name is. Some websites list him as "Alan J. Greenspan,"[1] while every news source I've seen (and I've searched using Nexis and others) has listed him as "Alan Greenspan." If his middle name does begin with the letter "C" as I'm inclined to believe by these results (though they are few), then what the 'C' stands for should be included in the article. Any help on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. --MZMcBride 16:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

=-=-=-=-=-

OK, I've seen the "J" as well, but I also note the few sources from them I've checked don't have a citation. ;-) Considering the citations are coming off of the web, and "the web" has both "J" and "C", what kind of citation will it take? I'm not trying to get defensive about my citation... just noting the difficulty of using web citations when there is conflicting information on the web. Hopefully it will be in his book. (And, I've yet to find his middle name on the web either.)

=-=-=-=-=-

I'm looking for at least two reliable sources that list his middle name. At least one news source is necessary. Also, it's pretty uncommon for a person to only have a single letter for their middle name, so beyond figuring out whether it's a J or a C, what the letter stands for is also important. It seems very odd to me that his middle name is so difficult to come by. Thanks for any help. --MZMcBride 19:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

None of the Greenspan biographies, none of the official pages, none of the NY Times articles include any middle name OR initial. That "C" on the HTML page at the Senate isn't even confirmed by the full PDF it links to. One of the top Google results for "alan c greenspan" is this Wikipedia reference desk question from a couple of weeks ago. I'm leaning toward the opinion he may not have a middle name. Here's a source I'd possibly accept: Columbia U. In any case, unless we can confirm a middle name, I don't think we should confirm a middle initial when there seems to be confusion. --Dhartung | Talk 19:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's another place you'd expect his middle name or initial to be used: NYU honorary degree (since he was an NYU alum). The bottom line is that he doesn't seem to use any middle part of his name professionally. --Dhartung | Talk 19:31, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Housing Bubble

The housing market has yet to really "bubble," that is, increase exponentially over a short period of time and then burst. Even while many economists predicted a burst of the housing market in 2003, 2004, and 2005, it's decline has been far more gradual than many expected. I'm just questioning whether we should call it a bubble, when we also call The South Sea Company and the 2001 Dot Com markets 'bubble' markets. Those grew exponentially over a short period of time and then burst... housing hasn't exactly done that. The very definition of a 'bubble' is that you cannot tell it was a bubble until a good deal of time after the burst. Arguably, the real estate market has yet to crash and many economists have simply been wrong, even when talking about inflated markets like those of the coasts. Mike Murray 20:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I deleted it at one time because I wasn't clear that it was generally accepted, but then another editor came back and restored it and sourced it pretty well. Since then I've seen many, many more references in the news to the real estate bubble and Greenspan's role in it. I never heard that the very definition of a bubble is you can't tell until a good deal of time after the burst. Investopedia defines bubble as "1. An economic cycle characterized by rapid expansion followed by a contraction" and speculative bubble as "a temporary market condition created through excessive buying, and an unfounded run-up in prices occurs." I think what we've seen in the case of housing prices is indeed a rapid expansion. To me the section seems okay. DanielM 23:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it's something we should leave up for now as fears of an imminent collapse in the housing market persist. However, regardless of the first of three definitions offered by investopedia, bubbles end by popping, not slowly deflating. If we see a gradual easing of home prices that ends with prices settling lower than they were at their peak, but significantly higher than when the increase began, I have trouble characterizing the housing market as it existed in the early part of the decade as a "bubble." Jim Campbell 00:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Please revise the 'Housing bubble' blame on Greenspan. No one that has actually looked at the data could pin this on Fed Policy see: "International Capital Flows and U.S. Interest Rates". The real culprit is consumer spending on imported goods, the profits of which end up in foreign banks that in turn invest in US T-bills, reducing these rates by as much as 150 pts, or about 40% of their ~2.5% rate. As yeilds for 10 year T-bills drop, investment spill over to the slightly riskier and thus higher interest mortgages, increasing their demand; this competition drives their rates lower. There is no correlation between the Fed and mortgages over the past 4 years, as even a cursory review of the data shows:

Lower Fed rates influence lower credit card, construction loans, and other short term borrowing, which induces consumer spending. This section might as well read "...Greenspan conspired with Bush to pump up the housing 'bubble', by sending money through ten or more arms length transaction across multiple continents...etc."

Dnakos 05:30, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Given the research you've already done on this, I'd suggest you revise the section to at least include the information you gathered. I'm bothered by the whole section for several reasons. The reason I'm not getting too involved, however, is because I'm not convinced the housing market will crash. I think they'll be a downward adjustment, but I don't think there'll be a crash. If we don't see a housing market crash in the next couple years, I think the label of bubble will go away and that entire section will be pulled down anyway. Jim Campbell 19:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Less Politics, More Economics

Greenspan's legacy is stability in spite of high government spending (both Democracts and Republicans), Wall Street Sirens and their mesmerized investors, and the foreign money markets proping up our houseing markets.

The Fed is not an 'Economy Tzar'. All the fed can do is state their reseach to congress on monetary policy, and change the Discount Rate [2].

This does not translate into mortgage rates, and can not directly create a 'housing bubble' which we all fear but is not definable yet as is exemplifed in the reference to a 2004 Business Week Article (it is August 2006 as I write and still no burst).

My advice is to drop the politics, and talk economics. Dnakos 01:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Jim Campbell 00:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Can you source your edit that Greenspan supported Clinton's deficit reduction plan? That really is not how I remember it. To my recollection Clinton formed his plan in part on what Greenspan was advising him. DanielM 21:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

My source was chapters six and seven of Bob Woodward's book Maestro. I didn't cite it specificlaly at that point since the entire book was listed as a reference for the Wikipedia article as a whole. If you need something more specific, page 110 in the hardback edition states, "The only real Republican support [for the deficit reduction plan] had come from Greenspan." Woodward also cited Greenspan's July 20 testimony before the House Banking Committee. Also, I don't think Clinton basing his plan on Greenspan's advice and Greenspan supporting the plan are mutually exclusive. If anyhting, I'd expect Greenspan to support a plan he so heavily influenced.Jim Campbell 19:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree; this article dwells far more on the last three years than all he did prior. It seems far too focused on political criticisms of Greenspan as a proxy for President Bush. For most of his career Greenspan has been highly respected and this recent "criticism bubble" is distorting that. Shamanix (talk) 05:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Criticism of Greenspan's role in policies that lead to the disastrous mortgage crisis is not necessarily political criticism. It's economic criticism. That section is long, but that is probably because we're in the middle of that crisis right now and topical issues get more attention in Wikipedia. The text where he is criticized for supporting Pres. Bush's tax cuts and Social Security policies on the other hand is very limited and comes from notable sources, including a Republican source. The article devotes a great deal of text to his long career before three years ago and doesn't downplay that in my opinion. DanielM (talk) 09:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Relation with Nightly Business Report (NBR)

The first regular commentator on the program was Alan Greenspan, then private economist, who remained as an NBR commentator until his appointment as Fed chief in 1987. Acquired from [3]. --70.111.218.254 14:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

A Scientist?

Category:Jewish American scientists has Greenspan as a scientist. I don't think this is an appropriate label.--Loodog 01:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Why not? He holds a Ph.D. is that not an academic qualification? How do you define scientist? Does Greenspan add to the volume of structured knowledge? Noserider —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 09:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

He holds a PhD but it is not earned. He never completed a dissertation, and according to an article in barron's this weekend, 3/29/2008, was completed in only a few months. A book will be out in May '08 detailing this. 69.209.56.77 (talk) 19:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Media Expert

Alan Greenspan's greatest achievements have nothing to do with economics or with the US Ecnomy or with US markets...

they are / were his masterful manipulation of the US esp media to take credit for what he had almost nothing to do with ... -- that is, the handling of the market crisis in 1991 when Salmon Bros almost collapsed ...(SEE THIS PARAGRAPH)

AND the bull market of the 1990's ....

See next paragraph

Markets

In 1991, in the US gov'/t bond scanDal involving Salomon Brothers, Greenspan was silent and led by the nose to get in line in approving the US Govt wrist slap of Salomon Brothers as Soly was the sole financier for the whole US Gov't; so the US Govt could not indict Soly or face no financing for its then $1.5 trillion in annual borrowing

as no other Wall Street firm could handle this 30-50 billion/ week (and no bank or group of US or all global banks could either)

(so if no financing for US Govt, there would have been a US default AND SO besides collapse of Soly, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN a global market meltdown)

Greenspan had nothing to do with knowing any of that or with leading the US Govt to leave Soly alone (this writer did all that)

and similarly, in the bull market of the 1990's before that bull run started Greenspan was doing what all his predecesors did - that is, jawbone the markets to remain down or have no more than a 5-7 % market advance a year.... as it was considered any more of an advance would be inflationary

this writer savaged Greenspan to the Congressional committees (House Banking & Senate Finance) to shut him up as there was never any real data to show that markets going up caused inflation and IT DID NOT during the bull market of the 1990s when the DJIA went from 2,000 to 12,000 with inflation remaining LOW, and stable...

(and Greenspans predecessor Volker has wrecked the US economy sending an estimated 50 million jobs permanently to Asia with his Don Quiote, crazy gyrations of interest rates-including keeping interest rates at levels 2-4 times higher (12-22 % for prime) than the normal 3-6 % (for the prime)

now almost every reader credits Greennspan with all that esp with the Bull market run of the 1990s when in fact he WOULD HAVE FOR CERTAIN prevented it with jawboniing IF NOT SHUT UP by this writer ....

SO Greenspans's greatest feat was his taking credit for these two major things he had nothing to do with ...

and for which he received a Medal of Freedom and also received in UK a KCBE medal-Knighting as Knight Commander of British Empire ... all for mainly these things he had nothing to do with ...

so he is esp slick slick slick

Links need adjustment

the following links, suggesting that Alan Greenspan was "encouraging borrowers to take out nontraditional adjustable-rate mortgages" seems to have a problem.

^ http://www.economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2461875

Only Members can read the article.

^ http://www.morganstanley.com/GEFdata/digests/20050425-mon.html

Article not found

^ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/067003486X/

Attempt to sell a book titled "American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21stCentury (Hardcover)"

None of these appear to support the contention that Greenspan was pushing ARMs on people. I am replacing these with a cn flag. CodeCarpenter 22:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

New article: Greenspeak?

Do you all think that there would be enough information to create an article on Alan Greenspan's 'notorious' Greenspeak, that being his cryptic, complex, and circuitous way of speaking about economics and economic policy? It is common parlance in academic, economic, and financial circles, and quite a bit of information can be found on the web about it (much of it humorous, but not all of it). --WassermannNYC 05:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Enron Prize Winner!!!

"Ken Lay presents the Enron Prize to Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve" -Enron: The Smartests Guys in the Room —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.167.62.224 (talk) 06:37, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

Kitchen Fed

Who/what is the real(US) Federal Reserve Bank?

During a portion of his tenure -from approx 1991-2006, Alan Greenspan was a stooge who merely followed, in toto, the signals of the actual de facto Fed Chairman - an unknown person, hidden hand, who is the Real Fed Res/Red Res Chairman.

And today, in lockstep, Greenspan public announcements as his recent remark about possible recession are in lockstep to the real Fed Ch /Fed Kitchen Chairman. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.195.77.163 (talk) 19:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

Greenspan encouraged nontraditional ARMs?

This was recently added by User:Frothy. "Furthermore, in a speech on February 23, 2004, Greenspan encouraged homebuyers to take out nontraditional adjustable-rate mortgages.". I am not going to get into an edit war over this, but can someone show me where the reference says anything about him encouraging homeowners to take out nontraditional ARMs? He does say that over the previous decade (one in which the rate lowered from 1994 to 2004), a regular ARM holder would have paid less than a fixed rate holder. However, that does not imply anything about nontraditional (hybrid, I/O, subprime, etc) loans, and does not suggest taking out ARMs. Unless someone else here sees it, I am figuring this comment and ref should be removed. CodeCarpenter 12:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I was about to say that text is totally unfounded and should go, but look at the reference, Remarks by Alan Greenspan, Feb. 23, 2004: "Indeed, recent research within the Federal Reserve suggests that many homeowners might have saved tens of thousands of dollars had they held adjustable-rate mortgages rather than fixed-rate mortgages during the past decade, though this would not have been the case, of course, had interest rates trended sharply upward... American consumers might benefit if lenders provided greater mortgage product alternatives to the traditional fixed-rate mortgage..." There appears to be some basis for the statement in the article. You appear to differentiate between a "regular ARM" and a "non-traditional ARM" but the gist of his comments seems to me to be that he is speaking in favor of subprime lending tactics (codespeak: "mortgage product alternatives") that have since contributed to placing the economy in danger today, according to current press reports. I think the text could be clarified and should be expanded on. I certainly am against removing the reference. DanielM 10:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I figure it is reading between the lines that he "engineered" (implies negative intent) the housing bubble. The foreclosures occurring to people that overbought with subprime ARMs is not the fault of Greenspan. That would be the fault of the borrower and the lender in each case that allowed for a 90+% LVT purchase, with their current income barely able to afford the payments. When the rate was 1.25%, it was reasonable to expect the rate was more likely to go up than down, yet people and companies gambled and speculated. The subprime lenders are going out of business, but blaming the Fed in general (or Greenspan in particular) seems a stretch to me. I figure though that others with more experience and the call of history can decide the final location for blame. CodeCarpenter 23:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The problems here had to do with poor judgment, both by borrowers and by lenders. Brian Pearson 17:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

American Jew

Alan Greenspan (born March 6, 1926) is an American Jew & economist and was Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve of the United States from 1987 to 2006.

declaring that Alan Greenspan is an American Jew as the very first description is the sillyest thing i've ever read. Jkister 07:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Well I see it as fit. That is after all where age, profession, background, or achievements etc. would be listed. I hope it isn't because you have anything against him for being Jewish. He was a fine Fed chairman. Bridarshy 02:25, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It has no place in the opening sentance. Look at Ruth Ginsburg or Albert Einstein. do they shout "Ruth Ginsburg is an American Jew and Justice" or "Einstein is a Jew and Mathmetician" ? Of course not. because it belongs in a more appropriate setting. and insinuating that i'm antisemitic is completely premature -- what do you know about me? Jkister 08:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Take it easy. --Iriseyes 19:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Are you saying I'm attacking someone? or are you saying that "what do you know about me" is an attack ? LOL Jkister 05:48, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Jkister, you'd be hard pressed to find another entry for a Jewish economist which mentions their religion/ethnicity in the opening paragraph. Have a look at the pages for any of these Jewish economists: Akerlof, Arrow, Becker, Bernanke (*the current fed reserve chair*), Friedman, Harsanyi, Krugman, Sachs, Samuelson, Stiglitz, Summers. None of these pages mention being a Jew in the first sentence, it is usually discussed in relation to family or upbringing in the biography section.Edwin s 15:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Much better now. Labeling him Jewish in the opening sentence is as inappropriate as "Alan Greenspan is white and an economist". That's a good analogy, actually.Jkister 05:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Yay he is a white economist. White Jewish economist. Funny you don't want the world to realize the Jews run everything. 24.94.2.112 18:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Antisemitism is probably one of the mindsets you don't want to express on wikipedia, 24.94.2.112. --Iriseyes 19:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

You just don't get it. perhaps a few more years of life will help. Jkister 05:48, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Questionable Uncited Text

I removed the uncited text about Greenspan being a "well-known Zionist" because I'm not aware that this is accurate at all, much less well-known and I think it is a loaded term. DanielM 15:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Final Sentence of Introduction

The word "nonetheless" in the following is an incoherent transition from the previous paragraph: "Greenspan was nonetheless still generally considered during that time to be the leading authority on American domestic economic and monetary policy, and his active influence continues to this day."

In addition, the references do not cite Greenspan as the "leading authority on American domestic and monetary policy." Instead they indicate that he speaks with great authority on the economy. The end of the sentence should be changed to: "the nation's leading authority on the state of the American economy." Haberstr 04:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Improve it if you like. That's the idea of Wikipedia. The word "nonetheless" comes in because the paragraph is critical and points out his housing bubble-leading policies, but says he was still the authority. The last point you make sounds good to me. The text should track the reference. DanielM 22:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Later career

In this section several of Mr. Greenspan's comments regarding former presidents are cited. However, missing are any comments about Ronald Reagan. I have added one comment from "The Age of Turbulence." On page 87, Greenspan writes "What attracted me to Reagan was the clarity of his conservatism." This comment should provide for a more complete compilation of comments by Mr. Greenspan concerning past presidents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrick Henry 1776 (talk • contribs) 05:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

The other quotes were cited in various articles about the book - would be better to use such 3rd party quotes, I think, for consistency and to avoid original synthesis. Tvoz |talk 08:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Religious background

I am adding his religious background as Jewish. Graham Wellington (talk) 21:22, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

The fact that he is Jewish has been in the article for over two years - see first sentence of Biography section. I don't see its relevance or necessity in the infobox. Tvoz |talk 22:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Jewish economist?

Any reason why we have the first sentence of his article say "jewish economist?" yes, he's jewish. yes, he's an economist. Does it particular matter he's the two together? most importantly, does it matter in the first sentence that we have to mention that he's jewish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.83.150 (talk) 21:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


I agree: in Greenspan's memoir I'm pretty sure he mentions the word "Jewish" once so I doubt he would be amused. I think it is a bit disrespectful to classify him by religion (irrelevant) rather than his accomplishments (relevant).

Bias regarding The Age of Turbulence

Greenspan's recent book, The Age of Turbulence, is broken up into two sections. The first section is both autobiographical and historical, incorporating synopses of economic affairs from the Nixon administration to present. The second section discusses the current world (China, Latin America, Russia, US health care and social security, global warming, etc., and concludes with predictions for the US and world economies in 2030. The 500-or-so page book is not Bush-bashing liberal propaganda. Only one of the twenty-five chapters in the book relates to the presidency of George W. Bush. Greenspan does not "rail against" Bush; he disagrees with the lack of fiscal conservatism (and therefore inability to pay debt) during Bush's presidency. My issue with this section of the Wikipedia article is that it portrays The Age of Turbulence as being Anti-Bush propaganda. I question the allegedly unbiased opinions in the article. The 500-page, 25-chapter book only mentions in passing that Greenspan disagrees with one of Bush's policies. Too much people want to pick one line out of context and make it political (especially lately since many people disagree with George W. Bush). Wikipedia should not display the memoir as a "railing against Bush," it should display it as a piece of literature incorporating biography, economic history, and economic forecasting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.58.20 (talk) 06:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore, Greenspan does not praise Clinton above all others. He praises Clinton's fiscal conservatism (along with the Congree during Clinton's years as president), while acknowledging the fact that economic growth of the 90s made fiscal conservatism easier. Greenspan praises Gerald Ford throughout the book. He does say that Clinton and Nixon are the most intelligent presidents he's met. However, he spends much more time praising Ford. It seems very clear that left-leaning political views are apparent in the "Later Career" section of this article. It essentially says Greenspan hates Bush and loves Clinton. False and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.24.220 (talk) 07:06, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't write any of that section's text, 68.44.58.20, but the sentence where it says "rails against" is sourced to a Reuters article that says "sharply criticized" and also gives specific examples of rather stern criticism. "Rails against" is not a warped characterization of the comments expressed in that article, but sure it might be possible to find a better way to say that part. I think Greenspan disagrees with more than one little bit of Bush's policies in that book though; I think there were more quotes than that in the article alone. In general that overall section needs to be organized better and cleaned up some, but I don't read it at all as a "loves Clinton, hates Bush" thing. DanielM (talk) 00:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

As speaker

Greenspan must have spoken in many places after leaving the Fed..I added the 2008 Jeddah Economic Forum. Where else has he spoken? Abo 3adel (talk) 07:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

- I don't know what happened here...I just added one sentence about him speaking at the Jeddah Economic Forum and the whole page goes crazy...!!!! I tried to fix it but I couldn't....can someone check the history and show me how to add it so that it doesn't look like I'm trying to vandalize the page......................! Abo 3adel (talk) 07:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't know exactly what happened so I restored the most recent page before your edits, then copy-pasted your addition after that. I think it is okay now. It may have had something to do with the reference formating. In order to make the references appear nice and neat and informative at the bottom, we have to use the special formating instead of just brackets around the reference URL. It's a bit harder. I didn't do that part, which is needed on other text besides your addition. Right now the reference styles in the last section don't match, but it's okay as an intermediate fix IMO. DanielM (talk) 13:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much DanielM. Maybe I should experiment with it a little in the sandbox :D Abo 3adel (talk) 14:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

update needed

"He currently works as a private advisor, making speeches and providing consulting for firms through his company, Greenspan Associates LLC." he died 1/31/2006 Anubis1055 (talk) 21:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Birth Year

1926 is listed as his birth year in beginning of article, 1936 in the biography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.10.45 (talk) 08:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Savings and Loan (S&L) crisis

As stated in his autobiography, The Age of Turbulence, Alan Greenspan was closely involved in the Savings and Loan Crisis.Townsend-Greenspan accepted a request to conduct a review of the Lincoln Savings and Loan which was headed by Charles Keating. The report was extremely positive, describing the management as "seasoned and expert" and having a "record of outstanding success in making sound and profitable direct investments". This report was of critical importance as it was cited by Senator John McCain, one of the Keating Five, in his defence when responding to the United States Senate Select Committee on Ethics.
Dean Armond 12:10, 8 June 2008 (UTC)