at least with alan greenspan bailing out everybody in sight. and there's a limit to that but the limit is much higher than that originally seemed like it was you know because in part because an unlimited central bank printing press is a great tool for what would people in the beginning the world is basically ok and in part because it's global everybody has a fee a currency printed press so all the different countries can watch each other's backs and the fact that they were able to cooperate in this you know essentially of a global long term inflation. has meant a big they will get away with marketing the should have but the cost of massive increases in debt. and there there is a limit somewhere there's a number of weeks yet. but we won't know until after the fact what that number is you know i suspect it's pretty close to where we are now but chances are that for sure. but yeah from here on out we get more and more experimental we take bigger and bigger risks and i do think the. well bailing out all the industries that are going to blow up beca

and the so-called greenspan put and then the bernanke he put and then the janet yellen put and now the jay powell put it seems like the fed has not really been doing on it supposed to be doing and that is taking away the punchbowl when things get too frothy it seems like they've actually been exacerbating this problem for several decades and now here we are in 2020 what the worst crisis and oh you know depending on how you look at it 506100 years and they they have no real ammunition left dan dan what do you think i think unlimited is plenty of ammunition and i think if. you know if they were overly easy we would have seen that as they said in the dollar the dollar has been super strong against all currencies and that tells you. that policy in fact in fact has be. tighter than it should have been and i think. in terms of taking away the punchbowl they tried to do that in 2018 it led in december to a complete wipe out again. largely because the underlying pressures in the world economy are still deflationary and there are a lot of reasons for that and you can talk about that for hours a

speech made by ben bernanke who was then running the federal reserve he was a successor to alan greenspan and he was doing this great lecture about how they cure the crisis of 2008 because they have something that they didn't have back in 1929 they have the printing press and this began a continuation of what alan greenspan did in the 1987 crash was to print their way out of all problems and the idea was that oh we can stop printing at any time and this is all been proven to be false you can't taper a ponzi scheme furthermore they claim to be fighting deflation by all this printing and yet what they created was deflation and deflation in the sense that what we're seeing now markets are collapsing and the dollar.

after the crash of $87.00 the introduced what became known as the greenspan put that was replaced by the bernanke he put replaced by the janet yellen put and now we have a juror omh powell play it this is the idea that no craft is too great that the central bank can't bail everybody out by cheapening money however jerome powell the current fed chairman cut rates by a full point $100.00 basis points a shockingly big. cut in rates and the response this time was a resolving fudge markets crashing down that is this may van the site began at the central bank can make all problems go away are we just finished now the era of the central bank put reminds me of 20089 you recall how coming out of the financial crisis all of the cash that the central banks and credit all the extraordinary measures they took didn't seem to have an immediate impact during the crisis middle man once there was those purse proverbial green shoots that were shooting up in 2009 and i mean there was no looking back after that especially even in the precious metals same thing may happen here we get this virus under cont

i trace it back to 1998, with allen greenspan when he went and cut rates in the midst of the russiany issue and long-term capital management and some of those things. when the economy was growing over 5% real gdp at the time, and yet the stock market had dropped 20% and it immediately recovered. so it's been going on for well over 20 years and the markets believe the fed's going to be there. today, they came in with a cut before their next meeting but now everyone is wondering what's going to be the next cut and that's the problem. it's never good enough. charles: of course, when greenspan got on the job, he was there for a couple months, took some swift action from the worst one-day drubbing the stock market ever endured and it gave him the moniker, they made him feel like hey, this guy is the ultimate genius and he's run with it ever since. outside of that, though, one thing that hasn't been discussed enough, perhaps, is the fiscal side of this. do you think that there's a role for the federal government and congress to do anything to step in here? because maybe they could actually

ponzi of course goes back to 1987 crash and the beginning of the federal reserve put under alan greenspan the idea that the central bank as an act of a central bank was always going to come to the rescue because ultimately this was one big enormous ponzi scheme now this past week or so we've had the death of mach's on the sea though a famous actor and his famous scene was playing chess with death in the movie the 7th seal i would like to possibly suggest that right now the policy of bailing everybody out from the central bank is similar it's like playing. chess from the movie the deer hunter where it's russian roulette essentially and eventually of course the end is the same complete obliteration mitch is this russian roulette basically gone wrong with the constant bailing out of central banks around the world as part of this planet ponzi that you've been documenting for so many years mitch you can never see her on the back you know and all that happen is enormous amount. of increased exponentially so now the federal reserve it's a panic desperation move coming in and they cut interest ra

not the banks, not alan greenspan, not the federal regulators, not congress. when that crisis hit in 2008, working families lost it all while the big banks that broke taxpayermy got a fat bailout. it was wrong. [crowd brewing] -- [crowd booing] senator warren: when the crisis came, congress asked me to had a find out how that happened. i saw my chance. we could end this corrupt system that worked great for the banks and kicked dirt on the families, so i pushed hard to get my idea for a consumer protection bureau passed into law [cheers and applause] senator warren: people told me, don't even try. the idea is to big. it would be too hard, but we built a coalition and mobilized people all across this country to push the politicians to stand with the consumers instead of the banks. the banks fought back. they were spending more than $1 million a day of lobbyist money to plug the hole in congress, but we fought harder and we won. [cheers and applause] and thenarren: president obama asked me to come to washington and set it up, so i built the agency from about two

and this is what the strategy has been now for 15 years it's actually goes all the way back down greenspan that there was a black hole of debt inside the economy because there's no accountability in the banking sector because of all the rules that were gotten rid of during the clinton administration than during the bush administration and during the trump administration all the all the checks and balances for banking industry types of been removed so the debt has been growing and the solution is to kill the black hole of debt not to feed the black hole of that so 6 trillion dollar bailout money is feeding the black hole of debt that's just more debt the national debt in america is going to become more than 100 percent of g.d.p. it'll be 200 percent of g.d.p. it'll be 300 percent of g.d.p. and so the dislocation and the mispricing and the economic stress will only continue as long as the solution is to continue to do the same thing that created the problem and that is to create more debt part of why we are so vulnerable why you're seeing the global economy have to shut down is we financial

would say that there is one thing that the last 3 generations of fed chairs have done we're talking greenspan bernanke and yellen it is that they have allowed themselves to be bullied pushed into a corner and do they have a fiscal lifting when it really is not their place to do so this is the time for jay powell to say the federal reserve is happy to coordinate with any entity in washington to help facilitate and you've got any type of policies that are going to provide relief but our direct toolbox is not efficacious it does not work in a domain what is going to be harming the u.s. economy very quickly will have about 30 seconds left but to that point how dangerous is this dependency on the food as you mentioned a lot of things that christine mentioned or outside the purview of the fed but the fit is been operating somewhat outside of its purview for some time now it seems like at some point we either have to cut some dependency on them or we have to allow them to take on more of a role i mean i would never want to see them take on more of a role but it seems like we have to go one way or th

voice, reached out to the business community folks like warren buffett, bob ruben and others, alan greenspan went on "60 minutes" during one crisis and started talking about where we are, what the resilience of the u.s. economy is the fed came out, did its piece and did it in size and in all cases of these prior crisis, whether it was '87, '97, 2008, you saw unified responses from the federal government, local government in orderto turn the ship around we have not seen either the leadership nor the strategy that's required to at least stem the slide. >> there are people who are going to agree with you. some may not but you have to believe, my god, we hope, that that's going to happen at some point. >> and the example is there. when i talk about 2008, i think about sunday night, i think it was march 15th -- >> hold your thought real quick. steve liesman is on the line about this move from the new york fed steve, what can you tell us? the market is trying to balance a little bit, at least a little bit on these headlines >> scott, this is a massive move by the fed coming into the markets in a v

. >> i tell you, scott i what's up this morning and a long way from alan greenspan. what he was saying but his message was at the fed we have the back of everyone in the country. that has a really strong message. but he also said, we may well be in a recession as of right now so go ahead with your analysis. >> yes, and it is a different message, bill then frankly we saw in 2007-2008 when everybody thought the banks were okay as well but also said, hey, there is no problems here. we only need to stimulate a little bit. really stimulate prime mortgage market when in reality and much bigger problem even in the prime mortgages that originally. so to me, the fact that the administration, the federal reserve, other executives on wall street have come out and said, we realize this is a big problem. we are shutting down the entire economy. this will be massive effect on business and the consumers. so we will do whatever it takes, whatever amount it takes to backstop some of these problems occurring. this shows you this time it is different in the sense of the rescue packages

i remember a time when allen greenspan, people used to analyze how he held his briefcase, right hand,eft hand, it's fwoeg to going to be points. give us a little mystery. coming out and cutting rates, you have crushed the middle class, savings rates, you are pushing people into more risk assets and you see what happens. what are they going to do if this thing gets a little worse or something else to go to min on rates or something? i don't understand why they had to cut and again, another thing, there's never been an administration who hasn't said interest rates are too high. ever. so the fed has to be independent and do what their mandate is which is get people employed and be fair in how they treat capital and it hasn't been fair. it's been eight years of wealth transfer. it's bad for the middle class and the lower class and overall it's been bad for the country. ashley: we live in an artificial world, as they say. luke, thank you so much. sorry it was so brief. teddy, as always, great to see you. appreciate your input. thank you. >>> let's move on here. fox business alert. congress

greenspan said maybe we can take the recession out of the equation and they were able to do that for a period of time i happen to think recessions are a natural part of the cycle. it's like the forest old trees burn down, it's devastating but it's essential it's the same thing with our economy. what does that mean? i'll tell you what it means. they put in place these things and people get lazy. how do they get lazy in many instances corporate america got lazy give me an example, guy. i'll give you two. i think general e lek trlectric really lazy and ibm got lazy now everything is l coming home to a roost it's making people focus on their businesses when they saw the market goes up every single day, they said why bother it's a cost i don't need they stopped then they said, wait a second. maybe we can sell options instead of buying these things, instead of not doing anything, we can sell options. the market is having to go down again. we'll create this synthetic dividend and everything will be fine whether they realized it or not, the federal reserve and other central banks dampedened

i apologize if i am overemphasizing the importance of the treasury market alan greenspan back in the fall talked about negative rates. in one week we could be facing negative rates where we ready for negative rates? do we want negative rates. >> not according to jeff lee doesn't black. >> i think negative rates is incredibly problematic. >> forget the fact they break the balance sheet of the banks and they grind any kind of interest in lending to a halt. put that aside we know that's bod obviously. look at europe but the psychological sentiment, to joe's point, are we ready for that to announce that look there is really no economic opportunity here that's why rates are now yielding negatively. >> we are not ready, either, it seems to me for rates to be where they were even this morning. you can't break out of this funk in stocks if you have a ten-year falling this morning to 66 basis points why do you think the market recovered off of its lows? because the ten-year note yield recovered off of its lows. and that correlation doesn't appear to me to be recovering any time soon. >> that'

hand whether 1987, '97, '98, 2001, 2008, we had those unifying moments where in the case of alan greenspan in 1987 came out and said we'll provide the liquidity you need and had an immediate response from the federal government. that's been the playbook since 1987 from that matter. you have two separate crises happening simultaneously and so you need a health care policy response and you need -- well three really, fiscal and monetary responses so to the extent that you don't have a cohesive, coherent and bipartisan strategy you create a little bit more uncertainty in the marketplace and it would suggest that maybe, you know, wall street could stumble through some of this until they get, as eamon said, all those is dotted and ts crossed. >> by the same token, michael, i don't want to harp too much on local responses going on, but those are critical at this point as well. are we relying or looking too much to a national overall umbrella response from the federal government when, in fact, they aren't the only place we need to look to get this thing solved >> well, i think your point is well t

bush administration when alan greenspan with held easing to try to get to austerity back then we ended up in a recession we had a hard time getting out of they have to respond to the economic fundamentals. >> i'm saying if they got up, even know, if the government is going to spearhead this massive effort then it wouldn't have made a difference. >> i agree >> it wouldn't have mattered how much the fed cut >> it would be the lesser of the problem and we wouldn't be looking at the fed to shoulder a burden we know they just can understand shoulder. i think that's what you're seeing you're seeing markets scream out and say help us with fiscal stimulus we need something here to get through this period of time. how can low energy prices help consumers who are no longer going out to supporting events no longer driving as much or staying at home or not able to work it just didn't have the same positive impact that it once did either given the other changes and the knock off effects into credit markets are quite significant. >> thanks. >>> let's go back to what's been happening in the oil patch

the old adage that greenspan offered years ago, that the u.s.rdly an oasis of prosperity, is appropriate in a weakening economy like this. what is our strategy >> people are assembling lists of the last emergency fed cut, lehman, the 2008 crash, subprime in '07, 9/11, tech-related bubble stuff in '01, russia in '98. how much guilt by association are people going to read into that >> well, with the exception of 9/11, david, you know, all these were financial events that certain certainly it was appropriate to use financial tools to address in my memory, we've never used monetary policy so address a public health matter so, again, go back to what is going on in china with quarantines, travel restrictions, inferior assembly. i don't think interest rates being cut today are going to address any of those issues if, in fact, they play out in any comparable way in america. >> steven rush, good to have you here today >> thank you, sara >> let's get to the cme group and check in with rick santelli. hi, rick >> hi, carl. i have a tank. brad tank, newburge

i flashback to adam greenspan. very to the point.do what has to be done. that statement worked. it was backed up, and i expect we will see that again, not because they are important to the economy, and the macroeconomy is not a question, but the overall statistics are quite a good, even though financial conditions have tightened. the important thing is to protect the bank sinful sentiment. it is thecarl, consumer you have to try to protect because he or she could be fearful. unless you give them cash, how does particular financial system actually help them? >> i have been listening to bloomberg radio all week last week, and all the analysts say the problem is not demand. the concern is all about supply. the supply chain interruptions and so forth. consumers are not traveling as much, specifically with mass transportation and air lines we will see glitches there. but you know, i could put on my hat and say, we will learn how to work from home, to do more from home than we thought we could do before because of this. you put aside the t

. >> chairman greenspan gave one line, there will be liquidity available. do not worry about liquidity are you giving us that line now? that gave people tremendous confidence to buy stocks in what we now know was one of the greatest historic buying opportunities ever >> let me tell you, i was a young trader in 1987, that was a much scarier time than it is today. yes. let me give you that one line. there will be liquidity available. whatever we need to do, whatever the fed needs to do, whatever congress needs to do, we will provide liquidity and this will be an entire whole of government approach led by the president. >> jim, does that answer all the concerns you started to raise yesterday? >> yes, it does. that does not mean all stocks are buys we have a lot of companies he was trying to talk about what companies will be saved. let's talk about, if you look at the stocks royal caribbean, carnival. you have to decide are these companies that need to be saved? we know we need a strong airline industry those are quite different from buying alphabet because it'