I was sad when Soludo lost the Anambra Gubernatorial elections but well, we had to settle for a "distant 2nd best" in Peter Obi. The guy's capabilities have never been in doubt. He's indeed an erudite and highly cerebral.

i agree with beaf. i worked in a top global consultancy firm, similar to goldman sachs where agagu worked. it's almost unheard of in that type of environment to hear people talk in loud voices let alone behave in anything but a supremely gentlemanly & professional way. because this guy does not have the bravado of the typical nigerian, most people think he's clueless, which is laughable. he will certainly struggle in the maddening nigerian political space, cos of his background. all in all, i am glad sanusi came in when he did. his decisive actions saved this economy from a calamity- i  genuinely believe that. sorry, i cant edit on my phone.

I remember when when i bin small, e get this guy wey i dey also bully, i dey always beat am . Everybody dey always hail me say i dey beat the guy well and the guy too dey always fear me. Later the guy begin dey fear me, anytime wey i challenge am, e dey cry before i even start to fight am. One day, i no know say the guy don go learn kunfu secretly, the guy come challenge me to a fight, i come mumu go wan fight am. The first kick wey the guy gimme, i almost fainted, na so everybody dey laff me, na so the guy become champion.

Sanusi and Aganga should be very careful of Soludo, all this while they have been directly or indirectly attacking Soludo, they guy keep quiet, now that he is challenging Aganga to a TV debate on the state of the economy, mennn, that guy knows somethings we dont know. The guy knows something that they dont know he knows. It will be very disastrous when Soludo exposes them that they have been lying on the state of the economy. They will tell us where all the money they have been withdrawing from reserve dey go. Shey na only national assembly sanusi say e dey spend big money, he will now come and explain to us why he did not talk about the other arms eating our oil procceds and foreign reserve too.

Sanusi and Aganga say economy dey grow, and foreign reserve dey reduce. Oloshi gbogbo. They will come explain when soludo invite them for TV show. Barawo. Bunch of liars.

It wasn't that Aganga was quiet in the senate, but when asked whether the figures were correct, he shivered like a liverless chicken, then told the senators "my hand no dey o, abeg ask Sanusi."

Sanusi was then asked and he presented the figures, then promised to come back next day with the documents from the budget office.

@@@@@

i think what solodu done is commendable; we need more of its kind; we have at some point saw bush;obama etc in utube dealing with things; we can only afford fashole peeping in nl like we dnt know while the likes of Jonathan can only afford to take cover in the facebook!! yes what a leader!!

so i think credit should be given!!!!!

the man even called for a televised debate while some nl who obviously lack the comprehension of simple economics are here throwing empty pounces in the air

some even claimed that he can point out some grammatical errors on the write up; hahhahha u cnt be this desperate my friend; get real. an average naija mechanice can simply locate a crank shaft without spelling; that paper certificate na oyibo wayo bi that

until we as a people decease from dwelling in levity things might never change

we hear on the billions spent every now and then but cannot point a finger on a single thing money is spent on; oh yes like some say the administration only just took off few months ago; na billions money we dey talk ooo;

any body that have driven around naija will get a grip of what im saying; these people are evil and inhumane; what advice do they need to know what to do

people should get real !!!

mizzy
Re: Soludo Says Aganga Is Either Ignorant Or Lying
« #97 on: Today at 10:36:18 PM »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i agree with beaf. i worked in a top global consultancy firm, similar to goldman sachs where agagu worked. it's almost unheard of in that type of environment to hear people talk in loud voices let alone behave in anything but a supremely gentlemanly & professional way. because this guy does not have the bravado of the typical nigerian, most people think he's clueless, which is laughable. he will certainly struggle in the maddening nigerian political space, cos of his background. all in all, i am glad sanusi came in when he did. his decisive actions saved this economy from a calamity- i genuinely believe that. sorry, i cant edit on my phone.

garbage

Soludo should have also responded to Sanusi when he (Sanusi) called him up on Soludo's tenor as CBN governor, that is more of a challenge than anything else. This to me coming from an aspirant Atiku's presidential campaigner seems to me like a political shot at what everybody know that GEJ is doing business as usual. We knew that most of the economic reform Atiku was advocating for was that of Soludos

And I am not an Aganga fan because he is not strong enough to curb all those spending in an election year and the "wayo" being used to justified the debt

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I left office almost two years ago, and for Mr. Aganga, it was not until he suspected that I may be ‘advising’ Atiku on the economy that he quickly conjured that I should be in jail for what he believes I said or did not do about the banking system.

So much for democracy and freedom of opinion and speech! I have mulled over the decision to respond or not. Some friends suggested I should ignore Aganga in consideration that I might be misconstrued as “attacking Government”. This has nothing to do with Government. Indeed, I am pained to be forced to join issues with the Minister.

Initially, I agreed that it was better to dismiss it, just as I had dismissed other commentaries and misrepresentations of my tenure in the past. As everyone holding public office knows, once you leave, there is often a tendency for your record to be rubbished and, if care is not taken, for you to be treated as a common criminal. After reading two nasty books on the globally revered former Chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve System, Alan Greenspan, I was sobered to temper my expectations of the judgment of history.

No matter what you do, and especially for those who have tried to undertake revolutions in history, there must be enough people who judge you harshly. But what really matters is that one does his utmost best for his people, and leaves the rest to God and the history books. Obviously, I am not God, and cannot claim to have been perfect in public service. Therefore, I welcome criticisms and comments on my stewardship. But when Mr. Aganga, out of desperation to save his job, throws decency to the ground, and decides that the only way to burnish his uneventful tenure is to use his high office to throw mud at Soludo, then a sense of duty beckons on us to respond.

political shot or not; let them bring it on on tv

folks forget it.
there will be no tv debate.
even amongst thieves there is some semblance of honour.
you and i are being taken for a ride.

In sane places, the kind of atrocities Cecelia and Erastus committed under Soludo would have been enough for the prof to commit suicide.
Meanwhile he is busy writing epistles and pontificating up and down.

As for Aganga, i used to trust him until i saw his performance at the senate during that Sanusi issue at the senate.

Aganga and Soludo are similar in style, delivery and purpose . Self-aggradizement is their watchword.



Sanusi is honest (just don't talk about Sharia sha )

Beaf:

No one is asking you to be impressed that Aganga has spent practically his entire professional life in the UK; in zeroing in on that, you missed the whole point, which is that he is in a different culture from the one he is accustomed to and is like a fish out of water.
The senate confrontation only served to illusterate that further where people like Aganga would be found exchanging words or raising their voices over their dead bodies.

I'm not taking Aganga's side in this, just pointing something that might make him react in ways that are strange to the rest of us and which we might percieve in negative ways.

Missy85:

i agree with beaf. i worked in a top global consultancy firm, similar to goldman sachs where agagu worked. it's almost unheard of in that type of environment to hear people talk in loud voices let alone behave in anything but a supremely gentlemanly & professional way. because this guy does not have the bravado of the typical nigerian, most people think he's clueless, which is laughable. he will certainly struggle in the maddening nigerian political space, cos of his background. all in all, i am glad sanusi came in when he did. his decisive actions saved this economy from a calamity- i  genuinely believe that. sorry, i cant edit on my phone.

Actually both of you are missing the point. If Aganga is from the UK he must have been accustomed to watching the PM Question time and there is nothing like what he is showing. The purpose of getting someone from the diaspora is to come home with experience and transfer them back to the society.

Being an MD of Investment bank in UK, he must have had far grueling face-off with investors.

This is what we were expecting to see from him
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAFumzu1eNo&feature=related

Soludo is partially responsible for d kidnappings in d East his prophesy of untold wealth to many Igbo traders who made their money from d hard craft of buying & selling suddenly jump on this bandwagon of making easy money in d stock Market after all d town cryer for this message of doom was one of theirs.

Another ignorant OHAKIM talking

safariman:

Soludo should have also responded to Sanusi when he (Sanusi) called him up on Soludo's tenor as CBN governor, that is more of a challenge than anything else. This to me coming from an aspirant Atiku's presidential campaigner seems to me like a political shot at what everybody know that GEJ is doing business as usual. We knew that most of the economic reform Atiku was advocating for was that of Soludos

And I am not an Aganga fan because he is not strong enough to curb all those spending in an election year and the "wayo" being used to justified the debt

I am sure you cannot present a single evidence of Sanusi taking on Soludo. NEVER. The worst Sanusi has said is that if Soludo had done what he is doing now, things would not have been this bad. That is simply laughable.

The only different thing he brought on board is the strategy of harassment. . .which may have worked in its stead. . .yea i give him the credit. And of course the fact that he told the lawmakers to their face that their consumption rate is driving inflation crazy and making his job more difficult. period

The only different thing he brought on board is the strategy of harassment. . .which may have worked in its stead. . .yea i give him the credit. And of course the fact that he told the lawmakers to their face that their consumption rate is driving inflation crazy and making his job more difficult. period

Gbam

I think Aganga should be the one to go to jail for deceiving Nigerians.In the face of depleting foreign reserve,high unemployment,high inflation rate,high recurrent expenditure,decaying naira value etc he was still claiming that the economy was growing at 7.5%.Haba.The problem with Nigerians is that we find it difficult accepting the truth,Soludo has given us the true picture of the economy and yet some people are supporting a lying finance minister.

I think its high time we started engaging these clueless govt officials in public debate.

If profs. of electrical engineer can't build a power plant in Nigerian then from which angle 9ja's prof. of econs will fix the banking industry, consider the fact that most of our profs lack real life work experience. mostly, dey copy from book to book to make publication.

If profs. of electrical engineer can't build a power plant in Nigerian then from which angle 9ja's prof. of econs will fix the banking industry, consider the fact that most of our profs lack real life work experience. mostly, dey copy from book to book to make publication.

Stop saying rubbish and go to bed.

With all this fact out in a civilized country ,aganga and lamido would have put in there resignaction letters and face disciplinary committee which will sentence them ten years each for putting a progressive country into a mess ,NONSENSE !!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote from: naijaking1 on January 31, 2011, 05:30 PM
Are you for real?
For a[b] fire-spitting-reactionary-reply-ready personality[/b], you know better than to say Soludo shouldn't have replied when lies are been heaped upon him and his record Cool



Chairmo, I doff my hat for the bolded,  you sure have your way with words, and its impressive.

Mai Suya

Both men are obviously very brilliant in their own ways. This is a debate I'll love to see.

@Mai Suya

Well, you'll wait forever for a debate that will never happen. One is a serving Minister of Finance of the Federal Rep. of Nigeria and the other is an ex- Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, presently, perhaps, unemployed . It's most inappropriate for a minister to engage in 'phoney' debates no matter how tempting/provocative etc. It's technically beneath his office do so publicly with any tom, Di-ck and harry, whether the ex- governor of the central bank or not. The protocol of office does not allow/tolerate such frivolous behaviour. He may do so after he's left the office/position of Minister of Finance if he chooses to engage in tittle-tattle .
The current Central bank governor but for his volubility, cannot/ should not engage in such tittle-tattle but focus on his task. Politics is best left to his masters/ministers and not part of his brief no matter how 'seductive' it is to give the Nigerian media audience quotable 'quips' for headlines.

Gbawe

It was many ordinary Britons and Americans who benefitted from readily available , if poorly scrutinised loans not (as in Nigeria's case) bank CEO's who 'lent' billions to themselves , through cronies,they deliberately intended to write-off thus completing the scam cycle. Considering that what our Banking CEO did in Nigeria was daylight robbery assisted by a lax , perhaps probably even complicit, CBN under Soludo I really don't see the merit of comparing Soludo's situation to that of Bernanke or King. let not forget that;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_bank

Quote
The primary function of a central bank is to provide the nation's money supply, but more active duties include controlling interest rates, and acting as a lender of last resort to the banking sector during times of financial crisis. It may also have supervisory powers, to ensure that banks and other financial institutions do not behave recklessly or fraudulently.

@Gbawe

On Point and Gbam!!!!!

cheikh:

Mai Suya


@Mai Suya

Well, you'll wait forever for a debate that will never happen. One is a serving Minister of Finance of the Federal Rep. of Nigeria and the other is an ex- Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, presently, perhaps, unemployed . It's most inappropriate for a minister to engage in 'phoney' debates no matter how tempting/provocative etc. It's technically beneath his office do so publicly with any tom, Di-ck and harry, whether the ex- governor of the central bank or not. The protocol of office does not allow/tolerate such frivolous behaviour. He may do so after he's left the office/position of Minister of Finance if he chooses to engage in tittle-tattle .
The current Central bank governor but for his volubility, cannot/ should not engage in such tittle-tattle but focus on his task. Politics is best left to his masters/ministers and not part of his brief no matter how 'seductive' it is to give the Nigerian media audience quotable 'quips' for headlines.

True words you’ve spoken.  A serving minister cannot engage every Tom, Dic-k, and Harrry who calls him out to a debate
no matter the level of provocation.

It is only in an insane society like Nigeria that you’ll find any inept ex-governor who failed to deliver the simplest of his tasks, and still
wants to make himself the object of adulation.

Agaga, on the other hand should just focus on the job he’s appointed to do. Nigeria has serious economic issues. This is not the time to BS around. We need J-O-Bs, wealth creation etc!!!

God save your people

nakedall:

If profs. of electrical engineer can't build a power plant in Nigerian then from which angle 9ja's prof. of econs will fix the banking industry, consider the fact that most of our profs lack real life work experience. mostly, dey copy from book to book to make publication.

Let me assume u where under the influence of "Benylin with Codeine" when u posted this; if not, say sorry to yourself.

And Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set thee free,

It is only in an insane society like Nigeria that you’ll find any

inept ex-governor who failed to deliver the simplest of his tasks

, and still
wants to make himself the object of adulation.

Agaga, on the other hand should just focus on the job he’s appointed to do. Nigeria has serious economic issues. This is not the time to BS around. We need J-O-Bs, wealth creation etc!!!


You couldn't even produce an original thinking,you rephrased another person's words and yet you made bold to use those words above against the person of Charles Soludo.Can anyone in your Village stand his intelligence?

It is either most of you lack the technical skills to understand the level of decay in our economy or you are simply ignorant like Aganga.

Let them debate till tomorrow. Nigeria isn't moving forward without terminating these dull brains holding us captive with their theories

It was many ordinary Britons and Americans who benefitted from  readily available , if poorly scrutinised loans not (as in Nigeria's case) bank CEO's who 'lent' billions to themselves , through cronies,they deliberately intended to write-off thus completing the scam cycle. Considering that what our Banking CEO did in Nigeria was daylight robbery assisted by a lax , perhaps probably even complicit, CBN under Soludo I really don't see the merit of comparing Soludo's situation to that of Bernanke or King. let not forget that;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_bank

Quote
The primary function of a central bank is to provide the nation's money supply, but more active duties include controlling interest rates, and acting as a lender of last resort to the banking sector during times of financial crisis. It may also have supervisory powers, to ensure that banks and other financial institutions do not behave recklessly or fraudulently.

The chairman of th US Federal Reserve bank spends more than 8yrs in office,therefore having ample time to reposition the economy in the event of any crises.Soludo had little or no time after the consolidation exercise to properly assess the degree of risk exposure of our banks.I think the cbn gov should be given adequate time to function,5yrs to me is not enough to work miracles as expected by Nigerians.

If you read soludo's account properly you will understand that he actually had plans to do exactly what sanusi has done in the system but time could not permit him.

Aganga will destroy us all. In all honesty though, Soludo did make some mistakes a CBN governor. Back then, I used to challenge his policies, but every said I had no right to question the prof. Aganga however is 100 times worse.

Alan Greenspan,the former Fed Reserve Chairman faced more criticisms and yet he did not go to jail.For Aganga,who probably studied and worked in the UK to say that Soludo should go to jail makes him an ignorant man.

Read if you have the energy.



Criticism
[edit] Market bubbles

John Robbins has argued that "Greenspan may be more responsible than any other single human being for the disastrous developments in our nation's economy," and that "when it comes to wreaking financial havoc, Madoff was a piker compared to the man who was dubbed history's greatest Federal Reserve chairman upon his retirement in 2006."[43] For this reason, Matt Taibbi has called Greenspan "the biggest asshole in the universe."[43] Critics point to the collapse of several recent market bubbles as evidence against Greenspan:

"As a paid consultant for Lincoln Savings and Loan, Greenspan was an ardent advocate of Savings and Loan deregulation. When Lincoln's parent corporation went bankrupt in 1989, more than 21,000 mostly elderly investors lost their life savings. This was, however, peanuts compared to what was to follow. With Greenspan as the head of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006, and with his policies running the show, the tech bubble was inflated only to burst in 2000, closely followed by the real estate bubble that began to burst in 2007, and the credit bubble that burst in 2008. Greenspan's policies contributed massively to each of these bubbles, and thus to their inevitable collapse. Like Madoff's Ponzi scheme, they provided illusory returns, not based on any real goods, services or value provided, but rather on the attraction soaring returns have for new entrants into the game."[43]

Congressman Ron Paul has made similar arguments against Greenspan[44] and against the Federal Reserve in general.[45][46]
[edit] Social Security

Prior to running the Federal Reserve, Greenspan headed the National Commission on Social Security Reform. In this capacity, according to Robbins, Greenspan's "policies triggered a staggering transfer of wealth from the lower and middle classes into the hands of the richest members of society.":

It is not an exaggeration to say that the resulting concentration of money and power in the hands of the few is undermining the economy, corrupting democracy, deepening the racial wealth divide, and tearing communities and families apart. It was primarily due to Greenspan's proposals that the Social Security tax rate went from 9.35 percent in 1981 to 15.3 percent in 1990. . . . The policies that were implemented following the recommendations of Greenspan's commission have produced, in the last 20 years, $1.7 trillion in new taxes borne almost entirely by the lower and middle class."[43]

[edit] Housing bubble

In the wake of the subprime mortgage and credit crisis in 2007, Greenspan stated that there was a bubble in the US housing market, warning in 2007 of "large double digit declines" in home values "larger than most people expect".[47] However, Greenspan also noted, "I really didn't get it until very late in 2005 and 2006."[48] On a list of 25 people to blame for the financial crisis, Time Magazine placed him at # 3.[49]

Greenspan stated that the housing bubble was “fundamentally engendered by the decline in real long-term interest rates”,[50] though he also claims that long-term interest rates are beyond the control of central banks because "the market value of global long-term securities is approaching $100 trillion" and thus these and other asset markets are large enough that they "now swamp the resources of central banks".[51]

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Federal Open Market Committee voted to reduce the federal funds rate from 3.5% to 3.0%.[52] Then, after the accounting scandals of 2002, the Fed dropped the federal funds rate from then current 1.25% to 1.00%.[53] Greenspan stated that this drop in rates would have the effect of leading to a surge in home sales and refinancing.

Besides sustaining the demand for new construction, mortgage markets have also been a powerful stabilizing force over the past two years of economic distress by facilitating the extraction of some of the equity that homeowners have built up over the years.[53]

However, according to some, Greenspan's policies of adjusting interest rates to historic lows contributed to a housing bubble in the US.[54] The Federal Reserve acknowledges the connection between lower interest rates, higher home values, and the increased liquidity the higher home values bring to the overall economy.

Like other asset prices, house prices are influenced by interest rates, and in some countries, the housing market is a key channel of monetary policy transmission. — Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 2005.[55]

In a speech in February 2004,[56] Greenspan suggested that more homeowners should consider taking out Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARMs) where the interest rate adjusts itself to the current interest in the market.[57] The fed own funds rate was at a then all-time-low of 1%. A few months after his recommendation, Greenspan began raising interest rates, in a series of rate hikes that would bring the funds rate to 5.25% about two years later.[58] A triggering factor in the 2007 subprime mortgage financial crisis is believed to be the many subprime ARMs that reset at much higher interest rates than what the borrower paid during the first few years of the mortgage.

In 2008, Greenspan expressed great frustration that the speech he made on February 23, 2004 was used to criticize him on ARMs and the subprime mortgage crisis, and stated that he had made countervailing comments eight days after it that praised traditional fixed-rate mortgages.[59]

In that speech, Greenspan had suggested that lenders should offer to home purchasers a greater variety of "mortgage product alternatives" other than traditional fixed-rate mortgages.[56] Greenspan also praised the rise of the subprime mortgage industry and the tools which it uses to assess credit-worthiness in an April 2005 speech:

Innovation has brought about a multitude of new products, such as subprime loans and niche credit programs for immigrants. Such developments are representative of the market responses that have driven the financial services industry throughout the history of our country … With these advances in technology, lenders have taken advantage of credit-scoring models and other techniques for efficiently extending credit to a broader spectrum of consumers. … Where once more-marginal applicants would simply have been denied credit, lenders are now able to quite efficiently judge the risk posed by individual applicants and to price that risk appropriately. These improvements have led to rapid growth in subprime mortgage lending; indeed, today subprime mortgages account for roughly 10 percent of the number of all mortgages outstanding, up from just 1 or 2 percent in the early 1990s.[60]

The subprime mortgage industry collapsed in March 2007, with many of the largest lenders filing for bankruptcy protection in the face of spiraling foreclosure rates. For these reasons, Greenspan has been criticized for his role in the rise of the housing bubble and the subsequent problems in the mortgage industry,[61][62] as well as "engineering" the housing bubble itself:

It was the Federal Reserve-engineered decline in rates that inflated the housing bubble , the most troublesome aspect of the price runup is that many recent buyers are squeezing into houses that they can barely afford by taking advantage of the lower rates available from adjustable-rate mortgages. That leaves them fully exposed to rising rates.[63]

Stiglitz stated that Greenspan “didn't really believe in regulation; when the excesses of the financial system were noted, (he and others) called for self-regulation — an oxymoron.”[64] Greenspan, according to The New York Times, says he himself is blameless.[65] On April 6, 2005 Greenspan called for a substantial increase in the regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: “Appearing before the Senate Banking Committee, the Fed chairman, Alan Greenspan, said the enormous portfolios of the companies — nearly a quarter of the home-mortgage market — posed significant risks to the nation's financial system should either company face significant problems.”[66] Despite this, Greenspan still claims to be a firm believer in free markets, although in the 2007 publication of his biography, he writes, "History has not dealt kindly with the aftermath of protracted periods of low risk premiums" as seen before the credit crisis of 2008.

In Congressional testimony on October 23, 2008, Greenspan finally conceded error on regulation. The New York Times wrote, "a humbled Mr. Greenspan admitted that he had put too much faith in the self-correcting power of free markets and had failed to anticipate the self-destructive power of wanton mortgage lending. , Mr. Greenspan refused to accept blame for the crisis but acknowledged that his belief in deregulation had been shaken." Although many Republican lawmakers tried to blame the housing bubble on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Greenspan placed far more blame on Wall Street for bundling subprime mortgages into securities.[67]
[edit] Late 2000s recession

In March 2008, Greenspan wrote an article for the Financial Times' Economists’ Forum in which he said that the 2008-financial crisis in the United States is likely to be judged as the most wrenching since the end of World War II. In it he argued: "We will never be able to anticipate all discontinuities in financial markets." He concluded: “It is important, indeed crucial, that any reforms in, and adjustments to, the structure of markets and regulation not inhibit our most reliable and effective safeguards against cumulative economic failure: market flexibility and open competition.” The article attracted a number of critical responses from forum contributors, who, finding causation between Greenspan's policies and the discontinuities in financial markets that followed, criticized Greenspan mainly for what many believed to be his unbalanced and immovable ideological suppositions about global capitalism and free competitive markets. Notable critics included J. Bradford DeLong, Paul Krugman, Alice Rivlin, Michael Hudson, and Willem Buiter.[68]

Greenspan responded to his critics in a follow-up article in which he defended his ideology as applied to his conceptual and policy framework, which, among other things, prohibited him from exerting real pressure against the burgeoning housing bubble or, in his words, "leaning against the wind". Greenspan argued, "My view of the range of dispersion of outcomes has been shaken, but not my judgment that free competitive markets are by far the unrivaled way to organize economies." He concluded: "We have tried regulation ranging from heavy to central planning. None meaningfully worked. Do we wish to retest the evidence?"[69] The Financial Times associate editor and chief economics commentator, Martin Wolf, responded to the discussion with an article defending Greenspan primarily as a scapegoat for the market turmoil. Several notable contributors in defense of Greenspan included Stephen Roach, Allan Meltzer, and Robert Brusca.[70]

An October 15, 2008 article in the Washington Post analyzing the origins of the economic crisis claims that Greenspan vehemently opposed any regulation of derivatives, and that Greenspan actively sought to undermine the office of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission when the Commission sought to initiate regulation of derivatives. Meanwhile, Greenspan recommended improving mark-to-market regulations to avoid having derivatives or other complex assets marked to a distressed or illiquid market during times of material adverse conditions as seen during the late 2000s credit crisis.[71]

Greenspan was not alone is his opposition to derivatives regulation. In a 1999 government report that was a key driver in the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000--legislation that clarified that most over-the-counter derivatives were outside the regulatory authority of any government agency—Greenspan was joined by Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Arthur Levitt, and Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman William Ranier in concluding "that under many circumstances, the trading of financial derivatives by eligible swap participants should be excluded from the CEA" (Commodity Exchange Act). Other government agencies also supported that view.[72]

In Congressional testimony on October 23, 2008, Greenspan acknowledged that he was "partially" wrong in opposing regulation and stated "Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder's equity — myself especially — are in a state of shocked disbelief."[40] Referring to his free-market ideology, Greenspan said: “I have found a flaw. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I have been very distressed by that fact.” Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) then pressed him to clarify his words. “In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working,” Waxman said. “Absolutely, precisely,” Greenspan replied. “You know, that’s precisely the reason I was shocked, because I have been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.”[73] Greenspan admitted fault[74] in opposing regulation of derivatives and acknowledged that financial institutions didn't protect shareholders and investments as well as he expected.
[edit] Political views and alleged politicization of office

Greenspan describes himself as a "lifelong libertarian Republican".[32]

In March 2005, in reaction to Greenspan's support of President Bush's plan to partially privatize Social Security, Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid attacked Greenspan as “one of the biggest political hacks we have in Washington”[75] and criticized him for supporting Bush's 2001 tax cut plan.[76] Then-Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi added that there were serious questions about the Fed's independence as a result of Greenspan's public statements.[77] Greenspan also received criticism from Democratic Congressman Barney Frank and others for supporting Bush's Social Security plans favoring private accounts.[78][79][80] Greenspan had said Bush's model has "the seeds of developing full funding by its very nature. As I've said before, I've always supported moves to full funding in the context of a private account."[81]

Others, like Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, disagreed that Greenspan was too deferential to Bush, stating that Greenspan “has been an independent player at the Fed for a long time under both parties and made an enormous positive contribution”.[82]

Economist Paul Krugman wrote that Greenspan was a “three-card maestro” with a “lack of sincerity” who, “by repeatedly shilling for whatever the Bush administration wants, has betrayed the trust placed in the Fed chairman”.[83]

Republican Senator Jim Bunning, who opposed Greenspan's fifth reconfirmation, charged that Greenspan should comment only on monetary policy, not fiscal policy.[84] However, Greenspan had used his position as Fed Chairman to comment upon fiscal policy as early as 1993, when he supported President Clinton's deficit reduction plan, which included tax hikes and budget cuts.[85]

In 2009, author Frederick Sheehan released "Panderer to Power: The Untold Story of How Alan Greenspan Enriched Wall Street and Left a Legacy of Recession" exposing Greenspan's alleged politicization of his office. From the Amazon.com description of the book:

"Alan Greenspan’s 18-year stint as head of the Federal Reserve Bank witnessed some of the most massive upward redistributions of wealth in our nation’s history. It’s now clear that his policies contributed greatly to the transformation of Wall Street from an engine that financed American business to a business-destroying machine—and that Greenspan abetted the hollowing out of the U.S. economy by giving Wall Street and Washington everything they could possibly want." [1]

[quote][/quote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chairman_of_the_Federal_Reserve

Mehn that response from Soludo was straight on point. With regards to the economy, I think the minister is selling us a barbie doll and not the real chick! They claim the economy is growing at %7.5 yet we see contradictions in the skyrocketing depletion of our external reserve and nothing concrete to corroborate it except the artificial explanation from the minister. It is even more annoying when he tries to defend the huge percentage alloted to just recurrent spendings in the budget. If there is one thing Aganga does not have, it is guts! The man lacks it, it was so obvious when he and Sanusi were called upon to defend the figures Sanusi alleged was the percentarage being spent by the NA alone.
Soludo may have made some mistakes during his tenure as a result of his actions or in-actions but one thing all will ve to agree is that he had a clear understanding of what he was doing, he inspired confidence and was a performer. Agangu to me is giving me the jitters everytime he makes a move, he is too evasive and vague in his plans.

Aganga is not fit to be Soludo's houseboy.

Whaoooow that is interesting!!!!!! And that was why Soludo cripple our banking system isinit?