be true that you have a president of the united states with a socialist agenda to take over the american economy and still have substantial fraction of the american people believe mistakenly that this president has been too generous to to business and the financial sector. it's impossible for those two things to represent reality and it's not fair to the president and it is a deeply damaging part of the american political debate today and it's a sad sign about the state of politics in the country that it's so easy for people to get away with a perception which has so little basis in reality. again, what we're trying to do, charlie, is just explain what did we do and what did that do for the country and it's understandable why it's hard because americans have no... no american living today has really had real experience with a crisis like this. could not imagine it would be this bad. >> rose: and nobody in power had experience to deal with this situation before. >> exactly. exactly. and the people who were part of this from the beginning and were brave and courageous at that time ran away as quic

spot in the play the wall street used to invest in the american economy in the knees that used its money to produce goods and services but then wall street became the american economy our financial system was a reengineered through what's been called financialization with banks credit cards real estate and insurance companies as the new power players. capitalism is sort of gone off the rails it's ceased to be capital it's financial i say should the fact that it's now all about speculation the fact that it's about ponzi schemes and the facts about selling and buying paper from an economy of real goods real commodities and real services to a system where people were buying and selling money buying and selling assets buying and selling other firms were no new value was created most sense should be says the whole system has gone predatory i think we had a transition from what was a free market system to something now that is out of control and probably what i would define as a predatory system frequently in markets that are manipulated or the. maybe a few out there who are investors mega inv

position but he is allowing readers to draw the inference that or would be a good thing for the american economy he has never said so but the way he frames his policy prescriptions in the various places that he writes in both the new york times and his blog the conclusion is inescapable that he says that he is effectively saying although not actually or explicitly said that a war would be a good thing for the american economy now i personally find this despicable and i have said sir i go to pieces about him one right took apart the labor day weekend op ed piece in the new york times where i showed how he manipulates data and information in a very slippery and very clever way that to the uninitiated with knowledgeable you know it's hard to swallow and he uses data about debt levels during world war two in the depression that are obviously untrue and i write about them specifically and specific debt levels both federal state and local levels which you can find my blog but the point is the reason i'm saying this is i'm not trying to sell anything as anybody knows i don't advertise on my blog. i'm n

he is effectively saying actually or explicitly said that a war would be a good thing for the american economy and i personally find this despicable and i have said so i go to pieces about him one right took apart his labor day weekend op ed piece in the new york times where i showed how he manipulates data and information in a very slippery and very clever way that to the uninitiated or the knowledgeable you know it's hard to swallow and he uses data about debt levels during world war two in the depression that are obviously untrue and i write about them specifically in specific debt levels both federal state and local levels which you can find my blog but the point is the reason i'm saying this is i'm not trying to sell anything as anybody knows i don't advertise on my blog. i'm not trying to convince anything i'm simply pointing out you know when the emperor has new no clothes well i can't use saying through inference you can. glean from his writing that he is making a conclusion through the back door of some ill constructed argument that war with some out be of benefit to the us economy bu

everyone is looking for a solution to kickstart the american economy. they are not looking at the long-term picture. they are pointing their fingers at china to say that their currency is evaluated. this is 40% lower than it should be so the chinese it should do something. i don't expect the u.s. to take any initiatives. there will be a lot of talk there were probably not be any tangible results. >> thank you for that update. the imf says the global growth will slow next year after expanding at a rate of 4.8% this year. they are forecasting 2% growth worldwide next year. they expect a margin economies to grow three times as fast as industrialized nations. they have raised their forecasts for germany to 3.3% this year and 2% next year. stock prices continued to advance on european exchanges on better than expected german factory orders in the hopes that further economic stimulus package is in richer countries. -- packages in richer countries. we're joined from the frankfurt stock exchange. >> normally this would weigh on currency and shares when a rating

the u.s. government needs to inject more money into the economy. that's what joseph stiglitz, the nobel prize-winning economist, believes will fix the american economy and prevent it from sliding back into recession. when i talked with stiglitz earlier today, he explained his case for more stimulus. >> the reason you need government to provide the stimulus is the private sector can't do it. the private sector on its own is not going to increase demand, consumption, investment, exports, none of the other sources are there to increase demand that will create the jobs. there is no alternative. >> susie: but congress has no interest to approve another stimulus plan what happens to the economy without it? >> unless we have another stimulus we will continue to have unemployment at 9, 9 and a half percent, maybe it will go down to 8.5%, but that's not acceptable. and if that happens, we are going to be losing the skills of our people, people who are unemployed for a long periods of time, lose valuable skills. when they finally get a job it will be at lower wages and the difficulty of getting the unemployment rate down becomes greater and greater. >> susie:

the third year of ronald reagan's administration, mixed with cold war tensions and a bad economy, gallup found that american optimism was at its highest point in 25 years, since 1959. bill clinton was able to generate optimism and happiness. i think the president really is , at the white house in particular, sets the tone for the city and indirectly >> i am telling you, wisconsin, we are bringing about change and progress is going to come. you guys stick with me, you cannot lose heart. >> how bad will it be for democrats? >> there is a hurricane coming. we don't know if it will be class 1, class 3, or class 5. but batten down the hatches, it is going to be a long night. >> democratic pollster peter hart. the latest numbers tell us that 71% of republicans are thinking happy thoughts about the tea party, which means they will run, not walk to the polls. president obama tells "rolling stone," "it is inexcusable for any democrat to sit on the sidelines. that people are sitting on their hands and complaining is irresponsible." who is he talking to, mark? >> what was once referred to as the professional left. vic

traders are betting the american authorities will have to take measures to give the the economy a boost, which could involve flooding the market with dollars. over the weekend in washington by men -- imf did little to relieve the pressure and now there is concern worldwide the country's army laminating -- countries are manipulating their currencies for an unfair advantage. >> the fact that the markets are anticipating a fed flooding the market with dollars is obviously pushing the currency down. i think the question we really need to have answered is just how much liquidity is the fed going to pump into the market. i think until we have some idea of that particular figure, the dollar will continue to slide. admittedly, the pace of appreciation seems to have tailed off, which is a positive. but it does not appear to be an immediate turnaround inside. >> if you like technology gadgets, listen to this on because later on in new york microsoft is expected to unveil a range of handsets that uses the windows 7 operating system. it marks their first full care -- full-scale response to the touc

the other main factor is south american exports to emerging economies. chile's exports huge amounts of copper to china. commodity prices are relatively high and predicted to remain so. meaning the south american economies are less dependent on the united states. the same cannot be said for the economies of countries in the caribbean, which are highly dependent on tourism from the united states in europe. their growth is slow. in central america of the growth is faster. once again, central america is struggling because of its strong link to write about -- relatively sluggish u.s. economy. >> do you still have time for an afternoon nap? in spain it has long been a part of daily life, now at risk in an increasingly healthy -- hectic world. >> in the middle of a madrid shopping mall, something strange is going on. it is the first ever contest to find the best siesta sleeper. every hopeful gets one of these to measure their heart rate. despite the game, the aim is to map for as close to 20 minutes, if you can. judge eduardo has two clear favorites in this roun

weaken monday a week before the federal reserve's expected decision to pump more cash into the american economythe drop wasn't prevented by the g twenty finance ministers pledge not to devalue their currency to avoid trade wars but artie's laura mr reports now that many believe the u.s. isn't ready to give up using the greenback as a war machine. the united states has waged well known wars in afghanistan. and in iraq. but some argue it's also waging a lesser known battle with the united states leading financial world war two prey in foreign reserves. especially to make other economies pay tribute to a war being fought not with force but with credit in this war us dollars are the bullets and they are cheap ammunition because the us federal reserve has been printing and pumping billions upon billions of them into the economy federal reserve out of balance sheet of about eight hundred fifty billion dollars and have shot up to two point one trillion dollars more than one point five trillion dollars spent buying bonds and home mortgages from banks in the last two years to try to prop up the u.s. eco

entrepreneurs; on the drive of american small business owners; on the skills and talents of american workers. these are the people who will help us grow our economy and create jobs. but government still has an important responsibility. and that's to create an environment in which someone can raise capital to start a new company; where a business can get a loan to expand; where ingenuity is prized and folks are rewarded for their hard work. that's why i fought so hard to pass a jobs bill to cut taxes and make more loans available for entrepreneurs. it eliminated the capital gains taxes for key investments in small businesses. it increased the deduction to defray the costs of starting a company. and it's freeing up credit for folks who need it. in fact, in just the first two weeks since i signed the bill, thousands of business owners have been able to get new loans through the sba. but we need to do more. so i've proposed additional steps to grow the economy and spur hiring by businesses across america. now, one of the keys to job creation is to encourage companies to invest more in the united states. but for years, our tax code has actually given

. >> professor diamond when you look at the american economy today and you see this enormous unemployment rate, 9.6%, what do you think is at the heart of it? is there a structural problem, a mismatch between the kinds of skills that american workers have and the kinds of jobs they need for the new world they're going into? why is it that it's so hard for people to get jobs, other than the obvious problem that there's not demand in the system, that people aren't buying a lot of stuff so there isn't enough demand for products and therefore, for workers? >> when you said other than the obvious thing that demand is limited, you took away the way i wanted to start, which is the central focus of the problems in the economy right now, is not that the labor market is working badly, but the demand for labor is weighed down. and there a number of things the government has done to enhance labor demand, and i'd pick out the two big ones, the original stimulus bill, not only increased demand generally but particularly by providing money to states and local governments, greatly reduced the number of l

there has been very little consequence for tremendous damage to the american economy across the country. >> that sounds like a criticism of the sec for not taking a harder tack with both him and citigroup and the executives. it sounds like you are concerned regulators are not going after these people strongly enough. >> i think regulators have an obligation to do their jobs in a tough way. i was observing the fact that i think a lot of americans see a lot went wrong. the train ran off the rails and there has been little real consequence. almost every settlement that occurs is almost accompanied by no ignition of responsibility. if we're going to move by this crisis, one of the rules are commission templates to lay the facts out there. to spur a d for self examination. but -- to spur a deeper self examination. there needs to be more reflection about what went wrong. my concern is if we do not make changes, we're doomed to bailout history again. >> on a point of the regulators, not just the specifics of a financial overhaul legislation, but the decision of how to pursue it rests in their