greenspan. today marks the first anniversary of the launch of the march of dimes prematurity research center at the university of pennsylvania. tell us about that and what the center does. >> this is a very important venture for the march of dimes. it's a way of figuring out why so many babies are born prematurely. they'll be concentrating on certain areas that will hopefully lead to some cure, some answers to the problem of prematurity, 15 million babies are born prematurely each year in this world and 500,000 in this country. so there's a lot of work to be done and we think this research center will help us find those answers. >> are there other events planned to help raise awareness? >> there's quite a bit planned for this world prematurity day. as you mentioned buildings will be lit up. i encourage people to go to marchofdimes.com to get the word out. a lot of what we're trying to do is awaurness of this as a national problem. and we're not doing as well as we want to be doing and we have a

by the beginning of 1995, greenspan had doubled the federal funds rate from 3% to 6%. betty: incredible. not what we are expecting now. mike: every meeting was a live meeting, and then he would bring it back down. there is the famous quote that he viewed it as sitting in a bathtub, fiddling the hot and cold with his feet. it is during image, but it is interesting what wimps we have become when he was improving it at half a point, three quarters of a point at a time. betty: when you talk about someone that is bold right now -- mario draghi, i want to play what he played to parliament. guys, can we prevent? mr. draghi: price pressures, such as producer prices remained very subdued. signs of a sustained turnaround in core inflation have somewhat weakened. while theeconomy -- recovery will gradually strengthen the impulse underlining the inflation process, the protracted economic weakness of the past years continues to weigh on nominal wage growth, and this could moderate price pressures as we move forward. simon, if the ecb does, in fact, in december add more stimulus or

but greenspan's view was if the fed banks have sufficient capital it should not be too burdensome. >> end i understand. >> why did t.a.r.p. funding with baker bailouts work better than what we try to do with other programs like hamp as you push through congress the elected members what did they try to do for homeowners? >> we needed to stabilize wall street and then to stabilize wall street is really wasn't a federal reserve possibility and then fannie and freddie by that time were partially -- partially nationalized by treasury. the one that was created to oversee the t.a.r.p. many but there was a lot of effort were you doing and can you do more? people didn't its - - respond to the calls after the modifications were done. allied did get done but i share your frustration but the administration was working on this. >> you spoke to congress many times and you didn't show it in your face by a understand from your book you were not having the time of your life. in to give you more of a chance. that criticism can comeback but here is a hero. to testify i always dislike them. >> i thought

already as greenspan said was already illegal. vs a sub prime lending. >> host: i will go from a different angle. i also don't think they spoke about those dealings. i don't think that was captured or regulated in the sense they perceived it to be in their own career or financial interest but they were open to the regulatory burden that should not be excessive in the competitive market forces i worked in the institution where lobbyists are omnipresent you may remember after dodd/frank and now it is halftime i imagine a place where lobbyists come matt you regularly over time because our staffing endure regulators 10 to hear from the most tv to it is easy to get socialized. to stay in the white house tuesday after running get my public opinion that doesn't strike me as the place to go and smell. that does not strike me that way. but to be aware of the pain that it wishes to understand that. >> that the reserve bank in the country they would report to west it is and wrong at all. and well before the crisis from a philosophical perspe

like measuredds in alan greenspan. the way he said "measured."basically every other meeting. vonnie: how high will they hike it? at the most, four, i would say. ira: i do nothing 10 year bonds and 30 year bonds have to go down in price very much. if they do go at this extremely slow pace, actually if you look at where the market is pricing, they are not even pricing for four hikes next year. it is only three hikes in calendar 2016. tom: how does the market desk at the new york fed affect this transaction, this trajectory? richard: essentially that will be two rates to follow. the fed pays on access reserves, and then there will be this new reverse repo rate. look at the interest on reserves in the reverse repo rate. francine: what are you expecting to hear from janet yellen in december? fine balance to say we are hiking if she does hike, but this year it will be subdued. it will be all in the language on how bondholders read what you think she will do in 2016. richard: the message thus far is do not pay attention to the first hike. she will say p

when you think about moments of roads not taken -- let's just say that henry kissinger and alan greenspan managed to make the deal happen and put a reagan ford ticket, it would have one. neither george bush would have been president. i asked them both. and 243o the president if ford hadsaid become president, would you have become president, they both said no. tookodern political world shape in detroit in the third week of july of 1980. charlie: george bush was on the ticket as vice president, he was defeated by bill clinton. you think that defeat marks the end of the 20th century politically? jon: i do. the emergence of a boomer generation that viewed the world to friendly. -- to friendly. differently. bush.eagan grew to like mrs. reaganan -- never signed on to the bush family. put on joggingld shorts and run through snow drifts to get pictures taken to show off that he was 55 years old and ronald reagan was 69. there was in a location that reagan was too old -- implication that reagan was too old. it is wildly unfair. you cannot imagine a more loyal set of people. was in the news today,

. >> a guy who gets his hair cut at supercuts and doesn't wear shoes knows more about alan greenspan. >> yes, he does. >> reporter: bale said a plan only outsiders could pull off. >> it was necessary because the insiders were rtying so much and couldn't see it from the trees. >> getting screwed by the big banks. >> halfway through we are as angry as you. you really become the people. >> he is up against these insurmountable odds and he sees something that he believes nobody else sees. all this fraud. >> reporter: bryan pitt and ryan gosling also stars in the film. bale says offers a portfolio of emotions. >> incredibly entertaining and funny and next beat, very poignant and heart breaking. >> reporter: all for the price of one movie ticket. suzanne marquez, cbs news, los angeles. >>> thanks for watching "cbs

this term that greenspan had, the federal reserve was sensitive to downward shocks and asset prices. they said there might be the emergence as the yellen call. as profits rise, that might encourage her to hike more quickly. guy,w you're not a stock but what you make of this? as prices rally, that would spur faster rate hikes? ric deverell: anything is possible. they goes back to where you think monetary conditions are at. i talked about the bond yields, the dollar, then you go to other things, equity prices matter. pricing isin, equity rallying, that probably makes you more comfortable. the market face -- focus is way too much on very short-term fluctuations in equity prices. joe: you think there will only be four-next year. -- hikes the next year. something else you pointed out was concern over inflation is overblown. and a lot of measures of inflation -- everything else basically is trending up as you can see a chart. are you worried at all that the inflation measures really are going to pick up and we will have to have a faster pace of hikes then you and the market are expecting?

greenspan's view was that if banks had sufficient capital, you didn't have to watch them to carefully. the regulation shouldn't be too burdensome. while it wasn't done right either. let me ask you in a different way why did tarp funding, why did that work better than with what we had to do with other home programs? clearly your conception if you will in your pushing through congress that didn't really want to do this. why did that work better than what we should have been doing or try to do for homeowners? first we needed to stabilize wall street because we were afraid the effects of the collapsing system on the canon economy would be catastrophic so we work to stabilize wall street. the treasury led, this wasn't really a federal reserve responsibility, the treasury led the effort to do modifications and refinances working with franny and fatty which were partially owned and nationalized i was aware of what was going on because i was on the committee to oversee the use of the heart money. i got regular reports and i understood what was going on. all i could say is there was a lot of e

." >> guy who gets his hair cut at greenspan. >> do you do you make exuberant comedy about the financial apocalypse of tuwaitha also elucidates the labyrinth fraud at the heart of the economy? director adam mckay leaps to the occasion working for michael lewis' book on the collapse of the subprime mortgage market. it's part goofy comedy, part thriller, part documentary that leaves you with actual knowledge. >> fueled by stupidity. >> that's fraud. >> tell me the difference. >> you root for maverick bankers and hedge funders, played by amuck others, steve carrel, ryan gosling, christian bale and brad pitt to be proven right in betting against the market built on corrupt loans. you say, yes, when they are. then realize their win was your loss. it's the year's most roll licking bad time. so why just clean your baby, when you can give him so much more? morning ted! scott! ready to hit some balls? ooh! hey buddy, what's up? this is what it can be like to have shingles. oh, man. a painful, blistering rash. if you had chickenpox, the shingles virus is already inside you. 1 in 3 people will get

>> but when you think of moments of rows not taken, let's just say that henry kissinger and alan greenspan and ed meese and bill casey all negotiating that deal had managed to make that deal happen and make a reagan ford ticket running against carter mondale, reagan ford would have won, neither george bush would ever have been president of the united states. i asked them both this question. >> rose: and? what question did you ask? >> if, if -- i said to the president and then i said to 43, if gerald ford had become vice president and not george bush would you ever have been president? 41, no. 43, no way. so our modern political world took shape in detroit in the third week of july of 1980, and it remind you cash. >> rose: george bush was on the ticket as vice president and he was elected president and then defeated by bill clinton and you think that defeat, you know, marked the end of the 20th century politically in the and the beginning of the 21st century. >> last president of the world war ii generation and member of the boomer generation that viewed the world differently. >> rose: but

alan greenspan said it is hard to see a bubble when it is there.re talking possibilities of bubbles before they become a problem. lot inyou squeeze a there. well done. we are turning you into a european yet, yet. -- a european man, yet. france is the ecb president warned on low inflation. is not something we can be relaxed about. in the past, it has been a good forecaster for where inflation will stabilize. -- will receive support from the depreciation of the euro. manus: let's talk currency with our next guest, he is the head of global strategy. when you listen to mario draghi i listened to him. he talked about a tepid recovery. he is still concerned. when you hear mario draghi very dovish.ing these guys are throwing everything they can at the exchange rate. francine: a lot of it is priced in. in terms of pricing monetary has been our argument for quite a few months. that is the reason that mario isghi knows that and that why he is talking dovish. to make sure he does not see an upward spike. they are driving a bus through expectations, saying the

did a series for the 25th anniversary of his inauguration and we had john paul stevens and alan greenspan and he would fly from california to introduce those people. he felt so honored that he would make that effort. they had a running gag, they divided the country in half for fund-raising purposes. he had america east of the mississippi. she had the united states west of the mississippi. aj is in alexandria. >> i am curious if there is a specific reason why the first lady invited king hussein for the first dinner. >> she -- the president became president august 9. on august 10, she was informed, by the way, you do know that king hussein is coming in a week's time. this was something that had been arranged during the nixon administration and within her first 24 hours, she was thrown in sink or swim. >> 1976 campaign, a big challenge from ronald reagan. a lot of work during the primary when president ford had the nomination. by the time election night came and the fords lost, president ford lost his speech. betty ford: the president asked me to tell you that he telephoned president elect c

have what chairman greenspan would call a quiet essence. is our economics having a new volatility?hat we have not done because it is very moderate is the growth rate. we do need something volatile. we need output to be shooting up. i am concerned about this, very concerned about it. if you look at the amount of prodding that has been done by central banks and governments, it is striking how comparatively weak the economy zahra. when you look at europe -- comparatively weak the economies are. there is just simply no nominal gdp. francine: there is not, tom. you are absolutely right. there is the impact of spending, and then we are helped by low inflation. talkingx that dean was about -- my question is, when you look at volatility in different asset classes, we had a great bloomberg chart talking about volatility on currencies. if you play that compared to commodities, what is the most volatile asset class out there? dean: it is the junk part of the credit market, the different asset classes that reflect the most distress in that, and i would also say crude. you are looking at volati

that a speech at like that alan greenspan introduced evolutionary terms. betty: you know economist so well and there was a story that showed how wrong economic forecasters have gotten it when it comes to predicting what the central banks will do. 20 out of 28 have gotten it wrong. the have underestimated how low rates would go this year. why is that? mike: it is because nobody can forecast what has happened to the economy. there is always something else that can come up. nobody predicted the chinese reevaluation that set off all be charmers in china in august and push back the idea of a september tightening. the feds forecasting record has been just as bad. if you look at wall street, they have gotten it better in terms of where rates are going to be than the fed has. the fed has been consistently higher in terms of growth and where interest rates are going to be than wall street. while wall street has not been correct about that policy, they have been closer than the fed itself. betty: mike, thank you so much. mike mckee, our economics editor, ahead of ja

betty: if this was the greenspan said we would be halfway to 3.5% normal rates right now." mike: maybe. he sat on his hands in the late 1990's and did not do anything because he thought we could get some sort of additional growth without inflation from technology. it's hard to say that is true. what is really interesting is we have gone into a world that maybe does not compare. everybody is trying to say is this like 1994 when the fed started and said it would be very gentle going up? 2004 when we were anticipating 17 straight months of 25 basis point moves? this could be the fed is insisting it will be a much slower or shallower path. they have some room to do it because inflation is so low. even if they overshoot a little, it will not be a disaster. we are not looking at a 17% inflation rate as were during 6%-7%lcker days or even a inflation rate as it were in 1994. they can afford to the a bit more patient. betty: what about the labor force participation rate? that dropped slightly in this last month. a job and say be you're looking for some sort of an argument about why

brendan: yeah, that got my attention, too, but she is not necessarily being alan greenspan, who famouslyt even know if we can see a bubble when it is coming. macro is an interesting place. all the bankers and central bankers are gathered at the opera house, all the imf and bundesbank wonks are looking at massive data sets. the problem is, how do you take that and turn it into policy. we talked about the european-wide credit register, basically every transaction over 25,000 euros gives you an amazing, complete picture of what is going on. i asked specifically, how do you know looking at this dashboard of information, what do the flashing lights tell you? she is not saying we cannot see bubbles coming. she is saying we should be better than that, we should figure out where the risk overload is before we get there to make sure there is adequate capital buffer. there is the tom cruise movie "minority report" where they're looking at pre-crime. she has enough date, they want to look pre-bubble. is in charge of macro credential stability. with quantitative easing from various central banks, ha

sitting in the room allowing this, we saw long term capital collapse, we saw the instability, i think greenspanforced the bank to come in and buy the bad assets because he could and trying to save a system. have you all sat around and had that discussion internally as a team that we need to do better? >> that's a set of discussions we have had over many years. lessons learned, exercises about how did this happen and what do we need to do differently so that it doesn't happen again. i have tried to describe in some detail in the testimony how we have changed the process of supervision as well as more broadly our monitoring of financial stability risks in the system outside just the portion that we regulate in order to avoid the problems. >> right. if i could then follow that with you are saying the things in the system that provide a risk. so, i understand that, i mean i'm getting mixed signals whether or not you release the standard on the evaluate firms. my question is, do you really look at the systems themselves? your comments say that we aim to regulate and supervise financial firms and pro

i think greenspan actually forced the banks to come in and buy the bad assets just because he could and because of trying to save the system. have you all sat around and kind of had that discussion internally as a team that we need to do better? it's a set of discussions we've had over many years. and lessons learned, exercises of bad habit this happened and what do we need to do differently so that it doesn't happen again. and i've tried to describe in some detail in the testimony how we have changed the process of supervision. as well as more broadly our mont >>ing of financial financial stability riskses in the system just the portion that we regulates in order to avoid the problems. >> if i can follow that with you're saying the things in the ystem that provide a risk. i'm kind of getting mixed signals whether or not you release the standard on which you evaluate firms. i'm not quite sure. but my question is, do you really look at the systems themselves? your comments say that we aim to regulate and supervise financial firms in a manner that promotes the stability of the financial s

room, we were allowing this, we saw long-term capital collapse, we saw the instability, i think greenspan actually forced the banks to come in and buy the bad assets because he could and because of trying to save a system. have you-all sat around and kind of had that discussion internally as a team that we need to do better? that set of discussions we've had over many years. and lessons learned, exercises of bad habits that happened, and what do we need to do differently so that it doesn't happen again. i have tried to describe in some detail in the testimony how we have changed the process of supervision as well as more broadly our monitoring of financial stability risks in the system outside of just the portion that we regulate in order to avoid the problems. mr. pearce: follow that with the -- you're saying the things in the system that provide a risk. so my under-- i understand that -- i'm getting mixed signals whether or not you release the standards on which you evaluate firms. i'm not quite sure. my question is do you really look at the systems themselves? your comments say that we

were a regime if the greenspan, bernanke, -- en input is gone, [inaudible] matt: look what happened toissy fit in august, that was not about china and the slowdown, that was about people thinking yellen might actually raise rates. when the figured out that they would not, and wall street had a hissy fit and said yellen is not going to do it, -- what will happen with the markets? david: this market is going to collapse and if it does not, i will shave my beard. becauseing to collapse when you give traders and speculators free money overnight, they rolet. they take every kind of position. the dealer. has a pretty good view on what's going on, and he is saying there is immense amount of speculation in the market. nobody owns a government bond, it's all on recall, on the margin the people who bought in cell and sold -- set the price are leveraged 95 25. stephanie: we have to go to commercial, we are getting -- we are continuing this conversation. tom keene, i will let you get back to surveillance radio. my bloomberg terminal is also -- is already flooded with questions. i will take those o

i think the markets want to be spoon fed information and we had the greenspan put which created financial market dislocations. then we had the bernake promise which created more financial market dislocations and i think what janet yellen is trying to do is inject back uncertainty into the decision process so when people make investment decisions they have to begin taking risks on board and the markets are starting to do that despite the amount of qe that's been done if you look at what's happened to corporate spreads, corporate spreads are widening because companies are releveraging their balance sheets. companies are beginning to price in risk which is a good thing. that's where the fed is different than the street. they have to look and say if i move, what's the difference in reality if i moved in september or if i moved in december or if i moved in march? and they're basically saying i have no inflation considerations to really worry about. i have global deflation risk. i have a dollar that's getting strong. let me get some time away. >> what do you think happens to the stock market if

photograph of former , noe ceo john scully relation, with hillary clinton and the fed chair alan greenspanitting next to tiverton -- tipper gore. explain this connection. guest: one of the things that we found is that the clintons -- and bill clinton in particular, this is in the 1980's and 1990's -- recognizing the terrific growth of silicon valley, they reach out to key executives and personalities and potential donors, and the clintons started relationships and maintain them. helly was an important -- was then at the ceo of apple and he was an important donor to the 'earlier campaigns. today we find another silicon valley resident, eric schmidt, ceo of alphabet, the parent company of google, is close to hillary clinton. he has invested in a company that is helping the clinton campaign develop its digital infrastructure. host: this is what you write about with regard to eric schmidt. his next company is called ground works, which has developed cutting edge technology to help engage hillary clinton supporters. can you elaborate? guest: one of the things that the clintons learned a couple

. >> greenspan would have got a grade in 2006?i would not have given him a good grade. >> why not? >> too loose. he was, you know, he was the gidy markets. >> too loose? loose monetary? >> the guy who said whatever markets do is right. i mean, he was the guy who said we don't need derivatives regulation because if two private parties make a deal, it has to be sound. >> right. who -- when you look at what's beginning on now, the debate about raising interest rates, is there a good historical parallel with the exception of what happened after the great depression? >> well, yes. the -- the parallel is during the great depression, the fed -- was afraid to take a stand. washington board did not really control it. the banks -- individual reserve banks around the country all going their different ways. the big change now is the much more unity in the feds so there's one strong body in washington. >> looking back now, having studied this. >> yeah ? >> if someone wanted to create a fed today, would it happen? >> they'd have a hard time, th

greenspan had an empirical study on government activism and effect on long term investment, remember? it's obamacare or regulation or the fed, whatever government activism you're talking about, something is holding back long term investment right now. >> here's a initiative story about why i'm not in stocks. all of the money managers that i know, friends of mine, right, all said to me, mel, you're crazy. you know, let me handle your money, invest with me. i asked them, what should i expect that i should be able to get? you know, what's a reasonable, conservative rate of return? we should be able to get 6, 7% for you. i said, i have a deal for you. i will give you a bunch of money, bunch of moneyoneyment. i only want 3%, anything more than 3%, keep. you just guarantee me 3%, but let me have the flexibility to take the money out whenever i want to. . here's the money, you do with it what you want, dimon, put it where you want it, giving me 3%. nobody would do the deal. >> nobodiments a guarantee. >> you can't be gauaranteed. >> can't let you out. >> if you can't be, why do i want to wit