Why Economists Are Sexy and the Euro Won’t Be Worth a Dollar
From newser:
by Michael Wolff
At the Festival Economia in Trento, Italy, yesterday, Nouriel Roubini, the New York-based globe-trotting economist, who has been a mighty and consistent voice of financial apocalypse, said that the only way Europe could save itself from certain catastrophe (which would, in turn, double dip the rest of the world) was to let the euro fall to below parity with the dollar. Roubini noted, not disapprovingly, the euro’s historic low of 82 cents—compared to its recent high of $1.50.
It should be said that economists have perhaps never felt the way they feel now. Never before have they felt so central, so needed, so powerful. They say “crisis” with a religious and perhaps even sexual fervor. To be an economist, in these last few years and in the next few to come, is to be…a kind of rock star.
Read MORE
All rights reserved, RoubiniGlobalEconomics, LLC
4 Responses to “Why Economists Are Sexy and the Euro Won’t Be Worth a Dollar”
Guest b • June 8th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
worth or worthlessness, ie value, is always relative.and sexiness is founded in mystery and the unknown ornearly imaginable, also relative, but hopefully notdirect or immediate relative..keyword: out of reach, (nearly)
saver • June 9th, 2010 at 11:24 am
Bernanke: The impact of the crisis on U.S. growth is “likely to be modest” if financial markets “continue to stabilize,” he said. He reiterated that the U.S. recovery is being restrained by the housing and commercial real-estate markets and repeated his call for lawmakers to come up with a long-term deficit- reduction plan.http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a7d0lc6fed1Y&pos=1Hear, hear. By stabilizing financial markets, he probably means zero interests for savers and pumping trillions in banks and/or their assets.By long-term deficit- reduction plan, he probably means cutting citizen wages.Wait and see…How can we, citizens vote against these one way transfers?
Guest • June 10th, 2010 at 8:22 am
as level must exist for a balance to weight, hence, fairness must prevail for a system to stay. as immorality at the giving side has long caused injustice in relative to the receiving side, and also vice versa; hence, the system is adjusting to a fairer level for all sides…as we may have forgotten or unaware, intelligence is the interpreter of fairness, greed and selfishness will never come close to the truth; and any deviation from fairness for self serving purpose is to be be proven counter-productive. in this case, i think we have enough history to learn from…
Guest • June 13th, 2010 at 10:45 pm
Professor, in your book you mention staying at George Soros summer home. Was there a gold conversation?Old but still refreshing.Keynesian Economics vs. Austrian Economicshttp://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=9393http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/01/fear-the-boom-and-bust-a-hayek-vs-keynes-rap-anthem/
