“The morning after we learned of the news,” Greenspan said of the Dow Jones plunging 6.98 percent that day in September 2008, “I was able to look myself in the mirror and say, ‘Hey, not bad.’” Sure, if he’d tried just a little harder he could’ve done better– 10 percent would’ve been a dream– but really, all things considering, not bad! Solid B+ work. [NYU via BI]
Comments (14)
Leave a comment
You can log in with your account or comment as a guest below.
crazy things come into your head when you look in the mirror and see a turtle without its shell
crazy things come into your head when you look in the mirror and see a turtle without its shell
I’m not the only thing he’s been fucking for the last decade.
I saw him naked once, whereupon I leaned over and quietly told him, “With all due respect Mr. Greenspan, I used to think you were crazy, but now I can see your nuts.”
I saw him naked once, whereupon I leaned over and quietly told him, “With all due respect Mr. Greenspan, I used to think you were crazy, but now I can see your nuts.”
Alan, I appreciate what you are doing here, but we all know it was my fault.
Yours truly,
Lloyd
he was talking about black monday in 1987, not sept 2008
No. He wasn’t.
Greenspan brought up the fateful day in September 2008 when the Dow Jones industrial average plunged 6.98 percent. However, life picked up for him after the initial shock.
“The morning after we learned of the news,” he said, “I was able to look myself in the mirror and say, ‘Hey, not bad.’”
Greenspan responded: “Whenever I get gloomy, I think of Winston Churchill: ‘America always does the right things … after it has tried every other viable alternative.”
Whatever Mr. Greenspan
I’ve been to a few of these speeches where former national level figures speak. I find them unenlightening because the ones that I’ve seen the figure still uses the same language, metaphors, slogans, etc they used while in the spotlight.
I go always expecting to peek behind the curtain and see how things really work, but no.
yeah, i’m saying the article is wrong. editor completely took that quote out of context
The problem is treating economics as a subset of science when it is at best a subset of history and at worst a subset of creative writing.
MBA > CFA > economics
in a subset sense…
But then again, the economists are often assholes, and therefore have non-trivial topology, whereas CFAs and MBAs are plain idiots, so pretty simple indeed.
– An algebraic geometry PhD who has since gotten into CDOs, and still hopes to find some use for his wasted college years.
If the only solution is the non-trivial solution, then it is a zero sum game.
there is a light and it never goes out…