mr. greenspan have taken steps to say they would modify their proposal. unfortunately, that came out to late for those of us who have serious concerns to really see it, so i would strongly urge that you issue a continuance so that the school and the neighbors who have concerns can understand what the changes are that are being proposed. i'm not sure that simply changing the window treatment is really sufficient to get the planning department to change its previous recommendation 180 degrees, so i assume there are more things in the changes that were made, but with the very little amount of time we had to see the documentation, it's hard to know that, so with open government and transparency, i urge that you consider that, a continuance i think would be the way to go. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, my name is claudia person, i live in 1857, 27u, i've been living there since 1970, i'm 86 now, and it's very difficult for me to go to walgreens 7 blocks down, 7 blocks up, that's 14 blocks. i will appreciate very much if cvs

mr. greenspan spoke eloquently about the elderly in the neighborhood and they didn't even -- there weren't enough chairs for themfinger nrfs a young man would was in the middle of chemo treatment because he stood because he was well trained for the elderly and he had to leave early, this whole notion thae ear bringing some vitality to lovely quiet little neighborhood that doesn't need it and is happy as it is, i just find absurd, plus the numbers are completely off on the pros and cons that we have secured and i know one of my colleagues will present that. >> thank you, next speaker. >> hello, everyone. my name is lily shoul dice, the feeling among those paying attention in our neighborhood is that this project will be conveniently railroaded through the process at a time with some of the most vocal opponents of this project may not be available. such as the concerned parent and is faculty of the french school directly across the street, more cynical minds might conclude the time of this appeal was contrived. at the very least, a continuance of this hearing is warranted and deserved especi

mr. greenspan, that's a discussion we've been having for a long time. >> thank you, sue, better than i would have. >>> rapid update. hey, steve. >> hey, steve -- sue. the story is that there's no change in the forecast, and that's news. we have an update to 3.2%. the range is 2.5 to 3.6%. barclays with the bottom of the range. maybe we would call it to back off on the third quarter, that's not the conveys, at least not the early read. 2 1/2 up from, business investment turning around, residential investment turning around so, sue, one of those in the sense that they are not at the moment reducing their forecast. back to tyler on gdp growth. >> it's steve, right? >> yeah, i had in my brain all this stuff i wanted to say. it happens, man. >> he just tossed to himself. >> that's a beautiful thing hang around, we're going to britain in our contributor, ron insana. there anything you would nitpick here? >> not really. everything is talking about artificially skewing the data, but when you netted against the first quarter, it's kind of where we've been. it's not that big of a deviation. it does un

mr. greenspan made that comment, the market ripped some three more years. made the comment, nasdaq at 1300 and it quadrupled after that before the big crash happened. how do we read that acompared to yellen and greenspan? >> went the other way. equivalent of fisher's permanently high plateau speech. i disagree with everyone in new jersey. i like a fed aware of the market. i don't think she needs to be so specific as to say small cap biotech or large cap. but to nitpick on that front is missing the point. the point is, the federal reserve was roundly mocked and criticized for not understanding the intersection between the real economy and the way wall street blows bubbles. one bloomberg terminal in the entire building in washington, d.c. seven years ago and were a joke. now they're demonstrating an awareness of what the 1% are doing with their assets and where some of the more speculative pockets of the market are's she didn't come out say, sell your stocks. all she's doing, demonstrating the fact the fed has their eye on things and i love we can have this j

mr. greenspan yesterday telling us we may be looking at a false dawn. prefer to listen to the professor of the friend of fermentation. we're pricing prosperity. >> okay. >> employment cost index means there's pricing pressure. there's inflationary pressure. 4% gdp means the economy is recovering. now that may cause panic into the bond market where money's been parked, but you're going to get those volatile moves. i believe what we're seeing coming out of europe and what started with green sbst span yesterday was a currency play. the dollar is strengthening because of the movement that is expected in our own rates is going to drive the dollar higher. not necessarily europe. it's correcting the race to the bottom that we used to have in currencies is what we're witnessing today in today's market. you buy them when they're on sale. warren buffett had a nice trade in goldman sachs in you remember. >> yes, absolutely. i could never forget that, kenny, what do you think? >> you're right. i think part of what we're feeling is the building nervousness that had

mr. greenspan, let me first ask you about the gdp numbers that came out half an hour ago. the economy is recovering a little bit better had expected, including you. what do you make of that? >> i think it is right. what the data that come out this morning do is close the .iscrepancy we have seen an industrial discrepancy index rising recently and the real gdp. is a factoryhe gdp value of the elements that make up industrial production. theren see the gap was and it was not clear which direction it was going to close. this morning, we got the answer. industrial production was the right numbers and the gdp was not. , so for you it is the closing of the gap on what are two very disparate sets of numbers. do you see that momentum continuing? in the near-term, yes, i do. and the reason i do is we are getting clear indications from lots of different areas where new, positive things are happening. the key question down the road, of course, is the issue is whether, in fact, we are looking , or somer false dawn set of numbers that are going to run into problems. remember, the real

mr. greenspan has that they have found a flaw in free market ideology. mr. chairman, the four-year anniversary of the dodd/frank act is an important milestone. we should look back and assess how far we've come and where we need to go, and today i for one look forward to correcting the record and getting some facts straight about this historic law and its contributions to the renewed vibrancy of our nation. i welcome the witnesses' testimony and i yield back the balance of my time. >> chair recognizes the gentle lady from west virginia for a minute and a half. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and welcome back, former mr. chairman. this past monday marked the fourth year anniversary of the passage of dodd/frank. . 400 new rules of which 298 have been finalized and still 24% are yet proposed. i think we see now this legislation is having a real detrimental impact on our main street businesses. as many of you know for the past three years i have had numer owe us hearings in the financial institutions and consumer credit subcommittee highlighting the challenges facing

mr. greenspan wouldn't use it. a number of states, including georgia, passed laws to restrict subprime lending abuses and the bush administration preempted it and said no such laws. and i was working with spencer bachus. sheila baird notes we were trying to put legislation through to regulate subprime loans. and the republican leadership said shut it down. on the day this committee wants the democrats were in control began to regulate subprime loans it was over the objection of several of the members here who said subprime loans were good. and "the wall street journal" objected and said, look. these are good loans. 80% of them are paying on time, which didn't seem to me to be a great statistic. and, in fact, what happened was this. people on the conservative side were generally pushing these loans until the crisis hit. then they needed an alternative victim, villain to blame for the crisis. so they retroactively became opposed to these kinds of loans. now they've reverted. there was a period they were blaming us. i

greenspan. but the report clearly puts most of the blame on george w. bush, and his aids. mr. paulson and bernanke, this really became a problem with bear stearns. while i recognize that's a bipartisan thing for a republican committee to do, to put major blame on those two presidents. i think you've been a little unfair to them. and i think there need to respond there shows there was a problem that had to be dealt with. i was struck by your bipartisan effort to replace tim gater in, i think you got it wrong. you misunderstood mr. indicter in in that report. we have a too big to fail problem. the problem he sees is exactly the opposite of what most republicans think. there was this argument that we're going to have bailouts. tim gater in's explicit point is, we did too good a job in preventing bailouts. i urge people to read his book. he objects that we shut down too many of these ways to do it, indi geithner understands -- too big to fail. what geithner has said is given the size of banks. and everybody understands that, from ronald reagan to continental, illinois, how do you