Commentary on the economy, the markets, and business

Greenspan on 60 Minutes and on the Bush deficit

So it turns out that the quotes that CBS released on Friday were actually the only things approaching news in the big Greenspan 60 Minutes interview Sunday night. Other than getting to see him at RFK with a Nats cap on his head, and learning that he wooed Andrea Mitchell by asking her to read a paper he had written on the Sherman Antitrust Act, there was nothing else to be learned from watching the show.

I am very curious as to what else he actually said to Leslie Stahl, though, given that the TV interview was so obviously spliced from a much, much longer conversation. I know is true of all interviews we media people publish or broadcast, but it seemed especially true of this one. Clearly the producers at 60 Minutes thought there was only so much on financial matters that their viewers could take (maybe 45 seconds?), so they just crammed together a bunch of newsmaking quotes with no real context or explanation, then cut to him walking hand in hand with Andrea.

But even the unbroadcast portions of the Stahl interview must not have addressed what is turning into the big news from Greenspan's book--that he sorta feels bad about having given his endorsement to George Bush's tax cuts and that he thought Bill Clinton was swell. They would have aired that if they had it, no?

I'll go into more depth about this when I get my hands on the book Monday, but having talked to Greenspan a couple of times in the early 2000s, I can report this: He simply didn't think the Bush deficits were big enough to matter all that much. (In fact, as a share of GDP, they've been smaller than the deficits of the 1980s and early 1990s.)

The deficit that Greenspan thought mattered was the far larger looming shortfall in Social Security and Medicare (here's a recent rundown from my new pal Alan Sloan). While he never said this outright, I suspect that Greenspan thought Bush might actually address these long-run deficit problems, and therefore deserved to be cut some slack on the short-run shortfall.

But Bush didn't, beyond jabbering fruitlessly and disingenuously about Social Security reform for a couple of years there. (Yes, he gave up on it because of Democratic opposition, but I don't think he ever made a serious attempt to address that opposition.) And that was Greenspan's big miscalculation.

  • Print
  • Comment
Comments (2)
Post a Comment »
  • 1

    Dear Sir: (to 60 Minutes)

    Congratulations on not having the guts to ask about Alan Greenspan's comments on the war in Iraq ! Did you bow to the pressure of your oil companies that advertise on your network ?

    Why are you so gutless ? Wait a minute (or 60), I know , you actually believe in a policy that causes massive death so people in this country can drive their fuel guzzling SUVs etc. and not care who has to die for the fuel to fuel them !

    Why should I expect objectivity from part of the problem !

    You had a perfect platform to tell the American people what is wrong with our policies, but you didn't.

    Shame on you !

  • 2

    "You had a perfect platform to tell the American people what is wrong with our policies, but you didn't."

    I do not want to hear what is wrong with American policies. All I want to know is how the government is going to keep the economy stable. Kinder policies for others will result in less money for me. Even if the flaws in our policies were revealed, most Americans know that they would have to suffer and change is not worth suffering.

Add Your Comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.
The Curious Capitalist Daily E-mail

Get e-mail updates from TIME's The Curious Capitalist in your inbox and never miss a day.

Quotes of the Day »

Get & Share
LORI HAAS, whose daughter was wounded in the 2007 Virginia Tech shootings, on a new report finding that officials warned their families more than an hour and a half before the rest of the campus and released locked-down students who were later killed