janet jellin of the san francisco bank was more enthusiastic left, she said that it's fitting greenspan to leave with the economy in such good shape, what you are handing off to the successor is like a huge tennis rack with a huge sweet spot. i recall in 2001, then chairman greenspan testifying before this committee that we were looking at more than a decade of surpluses and he wrestled with the question of what we would do after we had completely paid down the debt. what we would do with the surplus coming into the treasury, i'm just saying we are not always as good as predicting the future as we would like to be. >>> so, they were wrong. the minutes show that you were wrong during some of these periods also. common sense tells us, or at least me, tells me that more borrowing and more debt will make us weaker not stronger. as the last financial crisis proves that the future is hard to predict. we cannot predict what unknown event could set it off, we know we are on a collision course with reality. the longer we wait to develop a plan for a sensible financial future the graver the dange

well, it was painful, obviously. >> safer: and the fact was, greenspan had never even heard of madoff managing his retirement money had simply reinvested the $400,000 with madoff. >> i don't even think i read the prospectus. (laughs) i trusted the people i was turning my money over to, and i've always done that, and it's usually worked well except in this one case. >> safer: what did your wife say to you when you confessed that you'd lost part of your nest egg? >> "i told you so," 'cause i had tried to talk her into it, and she said, "i don't think so." (laughs) >> safer: what made her suspicious? >> maybe it was the word "hedge fund." >> safer: which brings us to wall street and the financial meltdown of 2008. poking through the wreckage, many experts believe the root cause was a perfect storm, a monsoon of gullibility colliding with a tidal wave of greed. >> this was a massive ponzi scheme, and it's the biggest crime against the american economy in our lifetimes, in fact, ever. >> safer: janet tavakoli is an analyst specializing in derivatives, the exotic financial instruments at th

in other words, i went with sandy to call on chairman greenspan. we told him we were contemplating this merger. but that it would required that the fed would be prepared to grant us permission. and we were assured that they would. we went and saw the chairman of the house banking committee, the chairman of the senate banking committee. and we said we're talking about this merger but it could not take place if we were not assured that it would be approved at the congressional level. we talked to the secretary of the treasury, i don't recall -- >> robert rubin? he was the secretary of the treasury at the time. >> yeah, we would've spoken to him, i'm sure. and had bob rubin said, "no, the treasury feels this is wrong," we would've been careful. because obviously, the treasury recommends to the president on an issue of this sort. and there was no argument. no one said, "we'll have to think about it." and so a consensus built up. i don't think it started in the fed. i would guess it started in the industry, it certainly got into the congress. >> by elim

and of course the you know this is a continuation on the theme of banking fraud so what did alan greenspan actually intentionally allowed wanted fraud to flourish and bank robbery to flourish because he said it would help the banking system so perhaps these robbers are just trying to unfreeze the liquidity that is happening in greece so perhaps this is what they were just listening to sir alan greenspan but i grant spence said that the inherent conflict of interest between the broker dealer a special system on the floor of the exchange which encourage insider trading was needed to facilitate liquidity or market making and so he turned and i way from obvious front running and stealing on the exchange but now that little piece wiggle warm a fraud has become the de facto operating system of the entire u.s. and u.k. economy it's all run on front running and fraud and the defenses always were market making what's what blankfein famously has claimed many times over again and what the all the bankers claim is that we're not stealing we're making a market it's not fraud it's f r. you d. it's trend

you've decided greenspan was a net negative?as a net positive -- >> until he became a net negative. >> i think that's absolutely it shall. >> we could talk three hours. >> it was a regulatory problem at least in the last five or ten. >> which would have prevented it? the ones we have now? >> no, i'm not suggesting we need new regulations. >> enforce the ones that we have. >> there was an interest ratish knew terms of how he thought about monetary policy. >> that i might agree with. >> and then the fact the fed at the time was not enforcing the rules within the banks. they could have called up some of these banks and said we're just not doing this today. >> the interest rates, that was in the wake of 9/11 to try and get things back up and running. >> i agree with you. it was keeping the rates as low as they were as long as they were. in any event -- >> that's different than the regulatory aspect. >> that's why i said there are two aspect and a the lot of other things. the book "ayn rand nation." >> you come back when you write th

army that remained behind the scenes what greenspan called the hidden hand. it was this policy in moderation, constructed around the principles of gradualism, caution, minimum government intrusion that eisenhower believed would offer the best sense, best chance, in other words, of solving the difficult problem of desegregation. we put this strategy to the test when he completed to be segregation of the armed forces and schools in washington, d.c. seeing eisenhower do this, many civil rights advocates hope that the activism would now be directed toward ending segregation throughout the country, but they would be disappointed. the same rationale that led eisenhower to the speedy desegregation of the armed forces in the nation's capital would preclude him from launching any presidential initiative to battle segregation in the schools of the individual straits. eisenhower knew that the real battles over the integration of america's public school system would occur in the deep south, and although he often stated his belief that the use of, quote, political or econ

so, i also recall in 2001, then chairman greenspan testifying before this committee that we were looking at more than a decade with surpluses and he wrestled with what we would do with the surplus still coming into the treasury a as being pron projected at that time. i'm just saying that we are not always as good at predicting the future as we like to do. they were wrong. and the minutes show that you were wrong during some of these periods also. common sense tells us, at least me, more borrowing and more debt will make us weaker, not stronger. as the last financial crisis the puf future hard to predict but while we cannot predict a day that a crisis may erupt or what unknown event may set it off, we now that we are on a crash course with reality. our majority leader has closed the's bridge and locked the wheel. he said that the democratic senate will decline to offer a budget for the third straight year, not once has happened since 1974. i'm glad that chairman conrad saying that he will markup a budget in committee, but it a doomed exercise if your own floor leader, majority leader decr

bailout on monday after chancellor angela merkel warned lawmakers of the risks of turning away from greenspan to financial advisor margaret bellary says the s. and p. downgrade didn't come as a surprise in view of current events. in my opinion you know he that he did exactly what the market both expected and he to do and what the markets are actually doing is really waited for although i have to be dotted and all the t.'s to be crossed really came to green and with private creditors it's worth the trade to secure our debt deal all ending that imbues waiting for was for those bags to be finalized who are they actually put into place you know when you know was that i have been here for months but that we just needed finalize to go easy what happens now i think we need to start taking a look at countries like ireland portugal spain i mean i think i remained in particular is a very interesting case to look at and they were at a very similar ization and a few years ago and they were able to play by the rules and you know do good within the european union and i think that was the receipt and it was

in the past several years has been right if you look at the statements of mr greenspan and mr bernanke you see that everything everything they've said over the fairest fewer years has been totally wrong and we know that their policies have been wrong this does not work it did not work in japan and the japanese of the last two decades the japanese stock market today lauren is eighty percent below where it was twenty two years ago that's not a typo eight percent below where it was twenty two years ago they tried this absurd policy didn't work there it's not going to work here do you think that's where the u.s. has headed to see a stock market decline that much and a lot decades. well we've already lost one of those we already have one last decade as you know the stock market is not not done very much in the list ten or twelve years the economy certainly hasn't done much in the last ten or twelve years it would but it's judged by real measures of course we're going to have another bed at least what worries me lauren is we're going to have another two or three bad decades where these guys

i was at a breakfast where i was listening tool an greenspan the other morning, and he said, i have analyzed the investments in our country and our country is doing everything except making long-term investment with fundamental innovation. that's the chilling effect of not knowing what the playing field is going to look like taxwise, regulatory. what battle are we going to fight if we announce some big investment? but therein is where the jobs are, therein is where the success for the company is. that's the thing we're trying to get. we have a lot of ideas, we just need to -- >> can i deviate from that slightly? this teaches us something about operating in a different country where the playing field is -- level is not the right word. you feel like you know what the future is, you can invest in a more long-term way, the regulatory environment is more welcoming and allows you to do things in a way you'd like to do it a little more. >> look at a place like germany. it's got very well established systems in the past few years. it came out of the recession better than it went in. i think that's -

some of you heard me, used to be the vice chair of the federal reserve when alan greenspan was chairman. he came before the finance committee on deficit reduction. he talked about health care. reducing costs of health care. we are doomed. everything else is window dressing. i said to him in a question and answer. what is the recommendation on health care? how do we save money here? he said i'm not an expert. he said this is what i do. i find out what works and do more of that. that's what he said. i find out what works and do more of that. you mean find out what doesn't work and do less of that? he said yes, that's right. we have seen this movie a couple of years ago. we saw it with the auto industry. what the auto industry has done is right size the enterprise. they had more employees and plants. with the market share that they held. they went from 1970 market share to 2009 from 85% to 45%. they wreren't making cars that people wanted to buy. that has changed. an industry in this country that a lot of people thought was dying has come back. a lot of people think the post office is a re

what thirty six percent of a condom is believe you can predict outcomes and it is the maestro alan greenspan i think that helped brainwash the economy into believing that you can create outcomes with this magical wand and magical thinking but that's exactly what stephen king says indeed bunking economics is that the number one chief. is ill conceived notion of economists is that you can predict economic outcomes or market outcomes and it's hard coded into the basic textbooks of economics that somehow economics is a science like chemistry where the outcome can be predicted that's false economics is like a social science where the outcome is completely unpredictable and the second you understand that the second you understand why ben bernanke and his crew are complete charlatans by putting forward some other theory it's simply not true look at the track record over the past ten fifteen fifty one hundred years based on the central banking theory it's been a catastrophe so as ever thanks so much for being on the kaiser report thank you matt. and albeit while our shirts match. it's a magical the

followed greenspan after to build bomb had taken a two one lead for the first leg of their delray semifinal against men on the wall this wednesday barcelona travel to balance the up at the start of their double header bossa and seven points behind wales adrift in the domestic title race keeping pressure on the coach but god knows these laws will be a tough task against balance the. very strong you know the. where is that huge this. will be the return. to woo hoo. tennis now maria sharapova has held her first training session in moscow ahead of russia's fed cup quarter final with spain which gets under way at the weekend the twenty four year old has only ever played in three cup matches but from an injury plagued the well known to three weeks straight you know confined to last week losing in straight sets to be. told which. i think you hypo to early season for helping russia which the fed cup semifinals. you know it's always great to be in the finals of a grand slam that's why you know you always want to be down to the us too and you know for me to be able to come to moscow in a few days obv

going to recession we dropped rates as low as eight and a half percent we had a recession again or greenspan the drop in the three then a drop in again to one and now we're at zero each time we've been dropping them we've been keeping them lower and keeping them lower longer and now we're at zero how much lower can rates go they can't go any lower you can go negative but there's a point i mean the fed is creating credit it's not creating capital right and credit is is just flushing through the pipes of the system and on jarring as much whatever capital is left to use. what do you say to that i mean how do you how do you get an economy going because you've got to differentiate between growth growth and bad grow. i for one am skeptical that the fed the fed has the tools to create growth i think it's doing what it can and i personally my view what i would like to see more fiscal stimulus actual investment into things i think that would probably help i think to some extent the fed is pushing on a string and you look at a lot of the if you look at the effects of q.e. sure they're buying up these

under president reagan came out of reforms proposed by a bipartisan commission chaired by chairman greenspan at that point, also not included in reagan's budget. that's good history and good example. so we've laid out both in the budget and outside the budget some framework for reforms, but that can only be the beginning of the process. never intended to be the end of the process. as you know, the way the balance of powers are written in the constitution, congress has the power of the pen and has to write the laws of the land. and again, finally, it's just obvious to say this, and this is the challenge we face, you cannot do these things without finding bipartisan agreement. we did some -- i know we were disappointed by the outcome, but we did very important foundation laying over the summer. those negotiations with the house republican leadership and democratic leadership. and we did some important foundation lay manage the super committee dialogue and we'll build on that going forward to figure out how to find a way to come closer together. >> maybe we need to see some of those proposals b

more frequently on this show why don't i play you a little but how about fed reserve chairman alan greenspan former one talking about why the us is credit rating doesn't matter. i was because we can always print more money to do that so. i love his face but let's stick on this ok let's let's listen to new york times columnist and nobel prize winning economist paul krugman talking about why the u.s. government should spend spend spend its way out of the doldrums as he explains it and is asked by for reid's a korea they're going to borrow more spend more but that is what the economy needs right now not worries about the deficit and i think in a way we may. we may be approaching a somewhat advantages position for that so the mainstream the establishment get involved in the economy spend spend spend print print print and kirkman wrote his last column not last one but in a column last month that the fed shouldn't start raising interest rates any time soon you know they're near zero have been and are expected to continue to be so washington consensus again do something intervene whether it's in a

working people the banks were basically borrowing money very very cheaply and in fact under alan greenspan they could get money basically almost at that at zero cost and when you can get money that capably well what how do you make money will you make money by pushing the money out in terms of loans and so the banks were basically providing loans to anybody who could stand up straight they were doing it but many of these loans or these mortgage loans were you know had balloon clauses at the end people didn't even know what they were getting now you might say people should have been away or but i don't know about you i have i've bought houses before it's not easy to go through line by line annoyed exactly what you're doing you have to trust that somebody knows what they're doing and trusts basically was not called for because the banks were trying desperately to move the money to create loans to create this entire subprime loan market that padded the pockets of a very a lot of very very wealthy investment bankers and traders and and others but ended you know who ended up holding the bag and

. >> it's something greenspan has told us, too, in fact, president bullard and i have talked about itly ignoring the dual mandate, you focus on the one and figure the second mandate will come by keeping the first mandate. >> by providing stable prices in the economy, you allow the prices to send the right signals to all the suppliers and demanders in the economy. you get the best allocation of resources that you can get. so, this is -- this is the way you get the highest -- the best employment that you can get. >> if you had seen inflation much worse when we were at 10% unemployment, are you saying that you wouldn't have -- that the fed would not have remained as accommodative if unemployment was still at 10% but inflation expectations were much worse, you would have cut -- you would have tightened at that point, even with 10% unemployment? >> there's always trade-offs to make and you got to make a judgment. and that would still be there, but this is a question about, you know, what is the mandate and what can the central bank do. >> it sounds like you have a dual mandate that you ign

rich you know just buy a house and flip it housing prices are going to go up forever they you know greenspan was pumping over the money like there is no doubt america wasn't one of those commercials dietetic it was you know but it was all these it was exactly all these companies that were then selling their mortgages to the big banks that were then truncheon them and then selling them a c.d.o. i think the reality is you can't solve the problem by taxing the banks because the fat point the banks are going to say what you know how do they make up that difference do they have to like let go of more people do we end up with more unemployed people you know how do you solve the problem goes if you raise fees on the rest the populations everyone else has to pay for their troubles i mean that's not fair either i don't think you fix the problem by raising taxes in this situation and also you're not really punishing the people who are responsible and the fact the matter is that you have a you know it has nothing do with politics i mean there were a lot of people involved this was their hands on the si

alan greenspan called him a republican alice rivlin and he behaved that way. he came and and reinforced the things that she had said and once that happened and the next director followed him and did pretty much the same things, they were often running in the sense that once you create a culture you sustain it over 10 or 15 years, it is pretty well ingrained. >> has the cbo been used as a political football in the past? >> absolutely. the one nothing you can say about organizations that produce information, they cannot use that information. whoever it is might be a supporter or opponents of a particular policy can clearly use a cbo cost estimate to have a bad policy or good policy, the clinton health care reform. in 1993 or 1990 for the cbo came up with a network that the clinton health care reform, saving money which the clinton administration could cost money. that someone could look at, a good reform or a bad reform but people who posted reform grab that particular conclusion and tried to use it to their best end which was to try to see if they could kill th

when chairman greenspan left, she said, is bidding for chairman greenspan to leave with the economy in such solid shape. the situation you are handing off to you a successor is like a tennis racket which they gigantic sweet spot. in 2001, chairman greenspan testified before this committee that we were looking at more than a decade of surpluses and wrestled with the question of what we would do after we had paid down our debt. i am just saying we are not always good at predicting the future. they were wrong. you were wrong during some of these times also. common sense tells me that more borrowing and more debt will make us weaker, not stronger. the future is hard to predict. we cannot predict the day a debt crisis will erupt or what unknown events might set it off, we know we are on a collision course with reality. the longer we wait to change that courts to develop a plan for a sensible but at the future, the more grave danger. the majority leader has locked the wheels. he says the democratic senate will decline the budget resolution for the third straight year. not once has this occur

. >> it's not their fault legal an greenspan running the economy so no one can get a job. that wasn't their fault. you paid insurance and something bad happened, they let the bubble in housing go nuts. >> that's not their fault. >> if they're not going go out and get a job -- >> steve, we have 10 million jobs missing. 10 million jobs missing. >> i still don't -- i still think quite apart from this which is an interesting debate. i think the republicans are nuts not to call to pay for all these new benefit, but dean baker, what do you make about president obama's budget today? it seems like he wants to raise tax rates on the most successful earners, but he doesn't want any spending cuts. you want that? do you think that will help the economy grow? >> some spending cuts, but in the short term, we need to fuel this economy. we lost with the collapse of housing bubble. we lost 6 billion from the real estate construction and the housing wealth, there's no one to replace that except the government. i might not like it. no one else, businesses aren't going to invest just because

alan greenspan right before the monumental doubling! so is all of this bubble speak, is it warranted? or has skepticism become so thick as to be, well, too thick? can beso skeptical we descend into being cynical, or perhaps irrationally negative. i don't like the market today. i didn't like the way it acted, didn't like the plunge in gold. that's been european weakness, i didn't like the decline in europe. i don't like the transports going down seemingly bad today. . i do see lots of problems short-term. including an israel/iran missile crisis that could end worse than our own cuban missile crisis. still, i come back to thinking we have become irrationally unexuberant. i've got to do more than that. i've got to show you the differences between now and last time we were at these levels and we should've had the wand out last time. so you understand why this generation's current bubble heads are full of hot air. all right. first let's tackle the dow. all right? let's deal with it. in 2008,]v"c we traded above 13, the excitement, it was pal

he didn't warn greenspan at the time.o i would say that be careful in using him as your expert witness. >> let me ask you what a president paul would do. if you were president at this moment in a couple of world hot spots. number one syria. the united nations security council did not pass a resolution putting more pressure on president assad. the president of the united states has said he believes assad should step down. you've seen videos i'm sure of the killing and bloodshed. what would president paul do about that right now? >> well, that problem has been going on for many, many years if not centuries. bad governments. look at what they did to communists. killed hundreds of millions of people. so it's a tragedy that happens in africa all the time. but i'm not representing those countries as a congressman and as a president. i represent the united states. and i don't think it's a wise thing to get involved in the civil war that's going on in syria. that would cost money, it would cost lives, and it may well spread. and

as a matter of fact, i have asked both alan greenspan and ben bernanke in committee about this, about the morality of an economic summit, and they said -- and the economics of it, and they said they have to keep interest rates low and do this to look at the big picture, and some peoplethat is not very nic. guess who suffered? there are people living on social security. and their cost of living is going up a lot more than 2%, so he said that is a consequence it could be six or seven or eight%. the other thing when the fed gets involved, people do things they should not be doing. they invest because they think there is going to be a lot of savings. they may build too many casinos in las vegas and all the different things, so this is the mischief of the federal reserve, and eventually, it will be dealt with. when they finally destroy the currency they have to go back to somebody people know about and they trust. they have run away inflation, but only gold and silver can be legal tender. they also said you could not emit hills of credit, which is paper money, and they also said we give yo

[ applause ] as a matter of fact, i've asked both greenspan and bernanke in committee about this, about the morality of it and the economics of it. they said, well, we have to keep interest rates low and do this to keep the economy going. we have to look at the big picture some people are just going to suffer. now, that, that is not very ni nice. ha-ha. because guess who sufs? the very people who might want to take care of themselves, the people would save money, the people in retirement, people living on social security, because their cost of living right now is going up a lot more than 2%. so he says that's a consequence. now, if you had a free market, you know what people might make on their cd's? 6% or 7% or 8% because that's where the market would be. the other major problem when the fed gets involved and artificial lower interest rates, it calls what we call malinvestment. people do things they shouldn't be doing. even if you don't see the prices rising, they invest because they think there's been a lot of savings. they might build too many houses or build too many casinos down in

the global savings glut, talked about bernanke and greenspan at the time, they didn't talk about what. this huge wave of globalization, which was unprecedented in financial history. created enormous liquidity. looking for a home. and there was no place to go. we actually had less aaa securities out at that point in time. when you had this enormous demand for aaa securities to park in. something was going to fill that gap. in the united states was mortgage-related paper. in europe, it was peripheral sovereigns and they all, we had to create fake aaas for the market, nature abhors a vacuum. >> you were hungry for paulson to take the other side of the trade. thought he was a mooch. they were dying. that's why it was so ridiculous. in hindsight we look at him like he knew exactly what was happening and put, loaded it up with -- those banks over in europe were like give me more, give me more, i want more. >> but that's about what you talk about the regulators. the banks over there were basically saying i have no capital charge, as long as it's a aaa. so i can make a high return. and you kn

alan greenspan, the chairman of the federal reserve, kept interest rates low. he did this because he saw no wage pressure. wage pressure would have prevented the bubble from occurring in housing. however, what was not discussed was the fact that we had millions of undocumented workers coming across the border for work in this country. at low wages. the cows are out of the barn. nothing can be done about that. we will get our way out of this mess slowly. we have to have a comprehensive immigration process to defend bubbles like this in the future. host: talk about his concerns about people coming across the border illegally to take u.s. jobs. guest: if somebody is doing something illegal lay, i am not a lawyer and not making a judgment on the legal side. in terms of the economics and the effect that will have on jobs in the united states and the unemployment rate in the united states, it depends on whether legal american workers would be willing to take those jobs that the legal immigrants are taking. if they are doing work that other americans would not prefer

however, alan greenspan kept interest rates below because he saw no wage pressure.e pressures would have prevented the bubble from occurring in housing. what was not discussed is the millions of undocumented workers coming across the border for work in this country of low wages. the cows are out of the barn. we will dig out of the mess slowly. we have to have a comprehensive immigration policy that is effective to prevent bubbles like this in the future. host: talk about his concerns about people coming in across the border illegally to take jobs. guest: i am not a lawyer or making judgments on the legal side. in terms of the economics, the effect that will have on jobs and the unemployment rate, that very much depends on whether legal american workers would be willing to take those jobs that illegal immigrants are taking. if they are doing work that other americans would not take, it is not going to have a big impact on job creation. if they were doing jobs americans would be willing to take, it would have a bigger impact on the labour market and unemployment. host

report from "nbc nightly news" in 2004 on code red warning from then federal reserve chairman alan greenspannistration's projected $521 billion deficit for this year now threatens to short change social security. this is the baby boomer generation. >> the change is certain to place enormous demands on the nation's resources. demands we almost sure will be unable to meet unless action is taken. >> that was a big number. 521, if only, what a difference eight years make, two wars, one recession adding to it. earlier this month president obama's budget prediction predicted a $1.3 trillion for the ongoing fiscal year. the deficit would drop to $101 billion under the tax and spending policies. >> the academy award shows this weekend along with new movies in the theaters. here's a look at the film starring jennifer aniston and paul rudd. >> why are you not at work, george? >> i got fired. >> as soon as we can get back on our feet we'll come back to new york and right now my brother offered us a job and atlanta is the best place to be. >> that was "wanderlust." joining us now is amy palmer. good day

allows us to reinvest and i was at a breakfast where i was listening to alan greenspan the other morning and he said i've analyzed the investment in this country and our companies are doing everything except making long-term investments with fundamental innovation. and that is the chilling effect of not knowing what the playing field is going to look like taxwise, regulatory. you have to fight, what battle are we going to fight if we announce some big investment? and it's, but it's, therein is where the jobs are. therein where the success for the company is. that is the thing for success. we have a lot of ideas. >> can i deviate from that slightly? >> sure. >> teach us about operating in a different country where the playing feegd is -- field is, level is -- you can identify it. >> jeff gave the best speech on that one. >> you feel like you know what the future is. you can invest in more long-term way. the regulatory environment is more welcoming and allows you to do things in a way you like to do it in a little more -- >> david, look at a place like germany. has got well-established inv

people -- i think he came 5, 6, when greenspan suggested had el come in during the last banking crisis. he's a grate investor. i listen to him closely. >> but he's owned it for 20 years and he never sells. >> right. the stock is basically, if you back out the reverse split, three and change. >> well, i don't -- it's different splits or -- >> i think pandit is a controversial figure, because people feel it should have been moving already. he does not talk about the -- the analysts say action look it was so horrible. if you think international bank is going to come back, he would be the play. >> the sprains also talked about oil yesterday with maria. here's what he had to say. >> there's an element here, because what may happen with iran and the possibility of closes the hormuz strait, but there's a sense that both the consumers and producers are satisfied with the price. and so they went public saying they will not led the -- which means we can use our leverage, excess capacity, to be sure to pump more if needed while they're getting out of the economy, slowly but surely hopefully. >> s

i also recall 2001 chairman greenspan testified before this committee beaver looking at more than a decade of surplus for what we voodoo have to repay down the debt? what do we do with their surplus at that time? we're not always a good as predicting the future as we would like to be. but they were wrong. and the you were wrong also. it tells me that more borrowing and debt will make this week your comment at stronger as the last financial crisis proves the future is hard to predict but while we cannot predict where the debt crisis would be wrapped what might said enough we know we're on a collision course with reality. the laundry way to change the course to develop a plan for a future they graver the danger becomes. but then he says a democratic senate will decline to offer a budget resolution for the third straight year. i am glad chairman konrad has said he will have the committee but it it is a doomed exercise if the majority leader decrease the budget process is shutdown. and to declare of budget is dead on arrival. to be, if we don't have a different approach from the fundamental re