Charlie Rose

MichaelAndrewThompson  12/25/2008 07:39 PM Report

ronh zhang- "Compass, compass !! when chinese students hooked up with zionists infedel cold blood heartless..." Are you completely insane?!?! What are you babbling about?

ronh zhang  10/30/2008 03:41 PM Report

I agree with Carol Ann Chambers'. Chinese sons and daughters from Mainland China do not know how to behave and think they can do whatever, whatever. America is never so good to them. my concern is the Jewish professors are somewhat bad influences because they're too liberal. At Stanford Medical Center, i met professors who looked and behaved like 'joe the plumbers' some 5 years ago. some did not even dress themselves properly or they don't believe in a white overcoat any more. the chinese students were cramped in the basement rooms entirely lost in their study or what. Compass, compass !! when chinese students hooked up with zionists infedel cold blood heartless, political zealots. the blind leading the deaf down in bottom of sun valley...i don't believe them at all. think again, everyone.

PeteW  10/29/2008 02:38 AM Report

Brilliant idea about this moral compass !!

Hear ye, admirers and supporters, that's for your gift idea comes Hannukah or Ramadan for new boss in town. want to hear more? it's not a nit-wit when we can hear more than ONE voice--ahem, to those who insist..i found one for you, please call him Professor Bob:

quote: "On 10/26/08 Bob wrote:

This has to make you think a little bit, if you do not care to seek the facts then keep your blinders on!

George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine.

A little over one year ago:

1. Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high

2. Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon

3. the unemployment rate was 4.5%

4. the DOW JONES hit a record high–14,000 +

5. American’s were buying new cars, taking cruises,

vacations o’seas, living large!

But American’s wanted ‘CHANGE’! So, in 2006 they voted in a Democratic Congress, and yep, we got ‘CHANGE’ all right. In the PAST YEAR:

1. Consumer confidence has plummeted

2. Gasoline is over $4 a gallon & climbing

3 Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase)

4. Americans have seen their home equity drop by

$12 TRILLION DOLLARS & prices still dropping

5. 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

6. As I write, THE DOW is probing another low 11,100;

$2.5 TRILLION DOLLARS HAS EVAPORATED FROM THEIR STOCKS, BONDS & MUTUAL FUNDS INV ESTMENT PORTFOLIOS!

YEP , IN 2006 AMERICA VOTED FOR CHANGE AND WE SURE AS HELL GOT IT!!! ...."

unquote

News bit: BONO the Rock star will write on Op-ed at NYT, a co-worker to Paul Krugman. what else? those transplants want one voice from Krugman..rant on.

Mike Mikeals  10/28/2008 04:11 PM Report

I find it extremely annoying how Rose keeps interjecting. I want to hear Krugman talk. This is an interview not a conversation.

Wow  10/28/2008 01:52 AM Report

This is a good interview. Charlie Rose is known as a tough tough tough interviewer but in this interview he actually is a little more personable.

Paul Krugman went over the main points of all this really well. Keep up the good work.

Very informative.

wunsacon  10/28/2008 01:48 AM Report

PeteW, housing peaked in mid-2005, well before Dems took over Congress in January 2007. The GOP-induced credit/derivative/housing/commodity bubble busted. Did you think it would go on forever?

You don't have to look far for information that undercuts your beliefs or attempts to "pass the buck". For instance, I followed the link provided by "Ricardo C. Amaral" to an article he wrote in 2005. In it, among other things, he says:

---------

Here is the detail of the additions to the US national debt by president:

Ronald Reagan (8 years in office) added to US debt $ 1.7 trillion dollars.

George Bush Senior (4 years in office) added to US debt $ 1.5 trillion dollars.

Bill Clinton (8 years in office) added to US debt $ 1.6 trillion dollars.

George Bush Junior (first term, 4 years in office) added to US debt $ 1.8 trillion dollars.

George Bush Junior (second term, 4 years in office) added to US debt $ 5 trillion dollars.

---------

Remember, PeteW: bubblicious profits and tax collections are fleeting; but, debt sticks with you -- until you repudiate it and destroy your credibility and all trade.

Look in the mirror, PeteW. As a member of the self-proclaimed party of self-responsibility, look in the mirror.

wunsacon  10/28/2008 01:48 AM Report

Mr. Rose, I normally watch on TV/DVR and don't come to your website. But, since I'm here (via some other link), I would like to say "thank you IMMENSELY for the education and entertainment you regularly provide me via your program".

ana  10/27/2008 09:06 PM Report

yo, Darren and other rude people here. Rudeness and intelligence have nothing in common. Mr. Rose is being stupid and unproductive by being rude. Good behavior and courtesy always produce results. Rude ones make audience wonder what Rose's motive is. It is definitely not his priority to inform thoughtful audience. Disgusting. Don't you know better?

Darren  10/27/2008 07:34 PM Report

Regarding ^Navillus^ and their remarks. I have to entirely disagree with you about Charlie Rose. Rose is the best on any TV, network/cable/Pbs/etc.. Mr. Rose does his homework, he studies the guest and their works (books, etc.). He has a right to ask the questions and at times keep the guest on track. He is never uncivil as many talk hosts are, and he shows his guests courtesy. Rose has far more class and the show persona is why I will stay up late to watch it. You always have the choice to tune out his channel if you are annoyed by his style and questions.

Navillus  10/27/2008 01:40 PM Report

Charlie Rose is so annoying! Seems he is in love with his voice and is hell bent to demonstrate he knows as much or more than his guest. Well Charlie, you don't so give it up and do your job.

MARY Z.  10/27/2008 07:23 AM Report

Whoa, do ya think Paul Krugman is a 10 year old ? where are all these side-kicks or mother hens making stupid comments about Charlie Rose interrupting Paul's conversation? Or was his a lecture on Charlie's Show?

yo, Robert A: listen son, Henry Paulson did not get away on Charlie Rose show. his act is bigger than life nationally and globally, we all bear witness to that during the past month. The whole world want to hear something from him, the mastermind policies are beyond Charlie's scope of Q&A.

You boys in the university can ask questions and state yr point of views. Your Prof Krugman can give you lectures there.

Robert A  10/27/2008 07:08 AM Report

It's rather amazing that Krugman could keep any train of thought with Charlie Rose's constant interruptions. Was Rose trying to make us think he knows more than his guest? Hard to know, but although one might not always agree with Paul Krugman, he certainly has important things to tell us. And he is not hamstrung by also being a politician and Wall Street insider with multiple conflicts of interest like Rose's "friend" Henry Paulson. One could not help but notice that Paulson during his interview with Rose was able to get away with very few challenges or interruptions, yet a lot of his claims and self-justifications were highly suspect.

2big2fail  10/27/2008 12:51 AM Report

Here's why the DES market is so large. Nobody takes the time to

tell you how this works.

Suppose A has a 10$M bond from GM and wants insurance against default. B sells insurance for say 100K$ per year, to A. (5 year contract)

Sometime later perhaps GM looks like a better risk. B then buys insurance from C for say 90K$ per year. If GM defaults C will pay B, and B will pay A. A and C may not know of each other. In any case B is making 10K$ per year free and clear --- the difference in the premiums.

Now suppose a little later C gets a little nervous about GM and wants to get out of the exposure. So C might buy insurance from D for 95K$ per year. C is losing 5K$ per year, but they did collect that 90K$ premium for one year, so thats not so bad. D may eventually feel they just have too many CDS's and buy insurance from E from 95K.

No profit, but D rebalanced their portfolio.

Now some remarks.

1. We have 4 CDS's out there for a total of 40M$. No reason to stop at 4 however, you get the idea.

2. We see all along the way everyone was doing something that sort of made sense, achieving some objective for both the buyer and seller.

3. We see the CDS's are an interesting way to trade off some cash flow (the premiums) vs risk.

4. You can bet there are lawyer fees, commissions, etc., along the way.

5. We see that (on paper) they pretty much cancel out, except for the original buyer and the final seller of the insurance. For them, if GM defaults, money changes hands.

6. I am leaving out more complexities like trying to match maturity dates (or contract durations).

Now let's look at the problems:

1. Everyone knew there was a risk, but no one really expected the bond issurer (GM) to default.

There isn't 40M$ at risk, but 10M$ minus the recovery value. It's not just paper, though it is mostly paper.

2. But a lot of these CDS's weren't written for real, if troubled, companies like GM. They were written for bundles of sub-prime mortgages. Even if there's a lot of canceling-out, there is still a lot of defaulting going on. And so there are a lot of CDS's that are brought into play.

3. We forgot to talk about what happens if B, C, D themselves go bankrupt, default, are not able to make their payments -- all those intermediate contracts must be honored for the system to work. But they guys who wrote the CDS contracts put in terms requiring the counterparties to maintain a certain level of creditworthiness or the contract might become void. Makes sense in a way, but backfires when there is a credit crunch.

This much explains why it is a house of cards. These CDS's are suppose to manage risk, but the participants forgot that a chain is only as strong as the weakest link. The actual damage should not be anywhere near 60T$, but certainly it could be 1 % of that. Here is the real risk: Suppose the whole thing nets to 1% imbalance, loss. There will be winners and losers. A clever investment banker could probably arrange that somebody took a 2% loss, while someone else came out 1% ahead. Because of the smoke and mirrors, this bailout could cost 2, 3, 4 times what it should.

BONO  10/26/2008 07:51 PM Report

Charlie, you're prepared and eloquent. From your experiences with academics and wise men of the world, i could understand why you tried to help Paul Krugman with his thoughts or there lack of. He was engaging in common talks more than 20 years and writing to local newspapers to lash out his political views. His formative years was filled with Sci-fi fictions, like Issac Assimov. Notwithstanding his Nobel prize win and academic position in university, he behaves like an immature bigot. He is no Issac Assimov, dude. He was egomaniac but talks like a very ordinary man. He is a side-kick, not a master. 'A phony professor!!' some commentator was so insightful. Well, thank goodness Prof. Krugman got a prize, hope he really lays back in his armchair with his pipe. His eye-popping look is nothing like a mellow, well educated man, and his news columns are in line with his characteristics, a move to politics, another nauseating politician.

tee   10/26/2008 04:16 PM Report

An over-wrought hitman in politics!! what economist?

Orygun Jim  10/26/2008 03:23 PM Report

Mr. Rose, Please stop interrupting your guest. If you ask a question you and we will learn more if you let him answer. Can't learn much when you are talking.

helpful hardware man  10/26/2008 09:20 AM Report

"I keep a moral compass in my back pocket, I stole it from a blind guy." - ACE

Carrol Ann Chambers  10/26/2008 08:51 AM Report

All economic/political systems (capitalism, socialism, communism) need a moral compass.

Without a moral compass the world ends up in the quagmire of today and those of all our yesterdays.

Are we teaching ethics in our homes, schools and colleges?

Abigail  10/26/2008 04:10 AM Report

Mr. Rose's constant and excessive interruption is very very very annoying, enough to keep me away from the show in spite of the top notch guest. I wish Mr. Rose would just shut up occasionally and behave a little better. He really really makes me sick, and ruins the show for me!!!

Ron Paul  10/26/2008 03:12 AM Report

Lyndon LaRoosh, stand back! He belongs to us NOW!

chris  10/26/2008 02:40 AM Report

Art Smith, you should have received the Nobel. On second thought, why didn't you?

SEDAT ULKATAN  10/25/2008 11:24 PM Report

The real deal about this crisis is putting back financial system in responsibility. Like Lehman Brothers type finacial gaming shouldn't be allowed for the sake of uncomprimesable profit. It is clear any more profit is not the single goal in financial system.

I hope Obama put in charge Paul Krugman type scientist for repairing our economy.

Financial system needs confidence and trust what ever you call the sytem european type or american type or asian type.

Supervising the system is essential by Government or independent instutions.

Jessie Ruth  10/25/2008 10:33 PM Report

Paul Krugman is absolutely the most arrogant individual I have ever seen... Yes, EVER!

Carol J  10/25/2008 10:33 PM Report

I agree with Betty, Charlie. You are one-sided you even went so far as to say President Obama. You never mentioned McCain. Charlie how much is Obama paying you to bring his name into every conversation you have with everyone of your guests? A couple months ago i left a comment that stated I was going to write in your name when I voted, well guess what I voted a couple weeks ago (absentee) and forgot to write in the name of Charles P. Rose, now I am glad I forgot, because you would resign and make you know who President.

art smith  10/25/2008 04:20 PM Report

i had to chuckle at his comment about going back to the capitalism he grew up with. by that he means the higher tax rates. what he doesn't say is that a lot of the deductions that went with the high tax rates - consumer interest, tax shelters, no amt - will be gone so that the government will take an historically high share of gdp. he also doesn't say that to reinstate glass steagal will be impossible without undoing all these mergers. on balance, i found his comments both uninformed and disingenuous but what's surprising about that?

Shaft  10/25/2008 03:17 PM Report

Dr. Krugman is the best example of America's leadership in creative ingenuity, be it technological, scientific or conceptual. Just like Dr.Friedman, Krugman will eventually have a stage of his own to translate some of the hypothesis he postulated. I enjoyed listening to this conversation, the first time I was exposed to Dr. Krugman was on one of the Sunday morning shows few years ago. I thought he was bright man ever since and the Nobel Prize Committee has confirmed my opinion of the economist. He was a strong critic of the current administration economic policy of cuting tax to the rich, totally ignoring the middle class. The "irrational exuberance is already turning into an irregular appathy almost every American major states. As far as Obama's economic policy is concerned, I am not sure Krugman wanted to say much about; it could be for fear of having to spoil the fan of waiting or he is being honest. Sen Obama will incorporate green energy source as his core economic policy to transform this nation and continue to lead the world economy. Getting off hydrocarbon addiction is an essentiall part of his economic policy and its a scary thought when imagining how many people are going to lose their livelihood, but if you break it down to the level of state by state, not only its possible to translate the greening program, but its also profitable and may even be the main reason for America's resurrection from the tip of the 21st century death cliff. Mr. Rose, after one day dissapointment (conversation with Mr. Greenberg) you have compensated us with a nice program, Thank You.

Lyndon LaRoush  10/25/2008 07:26 AM Report

Bill Berggren, the family misses you.

ron  10/25/2008 06:20 AM Report

Good conversation:

One point re why the Bush tax cut didn't stimulate the economy in early 2000's was because the cut was for the upper 10% only - they don't need to buy stuff, they already have stuff. There extra money went to a 2nd retirement beach home.

Jan Bone  10/25/2008 05:54 AM Report

Kudos to Charlie Rose nd Dr. Krugman for an excellent interview! I've been reading Hot, Flat, and Crowded, and have just decided it will be my text for the research-paper-writing English comp course I'll teach Spring 2009 at Roosevelt University (Chicago suburban campus).

I felt Q&A on this particular show were focused, targeted, low-key but significant, and brought out important points on the intersection of globalization and finite resources. Friedman may highlight problems more than potential solutions, and the world economy at the moment may not favor investment in alternative-energy R&D, but Dr. Krugman's points were well-taken about the urgency and need to tackle the challenges Friedman raises.

A meaningful, thoughtful interview on a topic that couldn't be more timely! I'll be ordering the book Monday for my spring 2009 students and seeing if I can buy a transcript of Dr. Krugman's interview.

Bill Berggren  10/25/2008 03:38 AM Report

How can any economists advocate giving public money to not only private companies but the worst choice private banks. The banking problem was caused by the Bush admin creating a massive deficit and telling puppet Greenspan to keep long-term rates low. No work was done to eliminate vulture or adjustable rate loans. As result credit was given away below market at the expense of savers and depositors. Confidence does not matter, confidence will eventually be lost with supply-side economics. I suggest everyone take their money out and put it currencies that respect the value of work swiss franc or hard assets including stocks. I would not care if all banks closed up shop, as credit is really not needed, look at MSFT. The best thing you can do for homeowners is allow them to go into foreclosure and rasie interest rates and eliminate interest rate deduction. What that will do is make homes cheap great for consumers. Stimulus is horrible. They should make everyone on unemployment work 4 hours a day picking trash along the road to earn their unemployment. Many people worked long and hard to provide taxes.

Bob Tourville  10/25/2008 12:44 AM Report

Charlie, I thought this was a great interview and so was the one with David Smick. Both of these guys should advise the next President. I contrast the knowledge that these two displayed with what shown by Hank Paulson. Pity he is a friend of yours. Just think, if the democrats had not done so well in Congress, Paulson would have just bought all that toxic waste paper at face value.

sam  10/24/2008 10:48 PM Report

Comment by RICH BIER .....

"I find Krugman to be incredibly intellectual dishonest. He couldn't come up with one downside to Obama's Economic Plan!" .... RICH, I find you (and most McCain supporters) to be "incredibly intellectual dishonest" as you do not "come up with one downside to Obama's Economic Plan." .... RICH, why don't you enlighten us, on the other side of the aisle, with three (1,2,3) reasons of your opposition to Obama's plan. Here's your big chance to show off your economic savy.

Ted Spread  10/24/2008 09:26 PM Report

"Slightly Hopeful" is better than no hope at all.

Preston   10/24/2008 09:13 PM Report

more regulation, less regulation. Hey, whatever floats your bond. If Mr. Krudman is good enough for the Nobel Prize Rating Agency he's should be good enough to have been John McCain's running mate. He sees very complex and abstract concepts very well and can shift gears up and down as good as Mario whoever. Also he said "gas is cheap again", which is another thing I didn't know.----------- TABS, "ergo where did the line come from?" ??? Did you get into sock puppet's cool aid again?.

TABS  10/24/2008 08:16 PM Report

Mr Krugman says the same thing over and over again. If one keeps it up long enough sooner or later it is going to be thought of as being good!...............let us really see how good you folks out there really are? Ergo where did the line come from?

Preston   10/24/2008 08:10 PM Report

Still!?... Well that's certainly encouraging. I hope you'll still be able to say that a year from now... Oh by the way, TABS, did I ever mention, you remind me of a favorite uncle type of guy. Like a John Madden or a Tip O'Neil. You're definitely one of the cool ones on this site. You and Roy Fassel.

TABS  10/24/2008 08:00 PM Report

Preston...Please allow me to introduce myself... I am a man of wealth and taste.

Preston  10/24/2008 07:55 PM Report

As I was saying... I'm a man of means, by no means king of the road.

David Smith  10/24/2008 07:54 PM Report

They came to the right decision (i.e., the injection of capital into the banks) only when forced into it by the Europeans.

TABS  10/24/2008 07:51 PM Report

Dear Preston:...There was a part deleted as it was not thought to be Germain. That part is:

..................................................................................................... ............................................................

It was WW2 and the Post war period that made America the RICHEST nation is the world. That wealth has been dissipated by 40 years of governmental deficit spending. The tax codes have promoted spending over savings. Hanky Paulson has said of the Chinese that their high saving rates is due to the fact that they hav NO SOCIAL SAFETY NETS as America does. The Chinese save their money becaue there is no health care system other than the one, one pays for themselves. The USA to has to promote the saving of money over conspicious consumption for two reasons. First to remain the wealthiest nation and second because it is becoming environmentaly unsustainable to continue with conspicious consumption.

Preston  10/24/2008 07:39 PM Report

Yes things got moving again, but at a snails pace and never really got back up to speed until the war. I was taught to believe that the war pull us out of the Depression, but dare I say it, I think I've seen comments on this site, saying actually we were pretty much about to shift into overdrive just as the war was starting. I don't know. I understand Bernanke's expertise is on the great depression, he probably knows. Yeah he knows. At least I hope he knows. And I'm not talking about hoe dee doez and ho-hose.----------- And hopefully I'm wrong, but my understanding is that, because of everything that has been happening, economic growth will be against the law, except for the bankers. Well actually they won't grow anything, because that would be work. They'll just keep nice and warm surrounded with THEIR money as they look down on all the uncoof people.-------------- Well if history is any indicator we got about 10 or 12 years to take it "easy" before WWIII, I hope I can find a box car that don't stink. Well I gotta find a stick and bandana. Adios for now.

Free Rad. It was also said that if one is young and not a liberal, one has no heart. However, if one is old and is still a liberal, one has no brains. Free Rad. You sound quite young.   10/24/2008 07:29 PM Report

Free Rad. It was also said that if one is young and not a liberal, that person has no heart. However, if one is old and is still a liberal, that person has no brains. Free Rad, you sound quite young. Bless you.

TABS  10/24/2008 07:28 PM Report

Further........What FDR had control of was the government. The US government was at FDR's disposal to use, so that was the means that he used. That is not to say that the government is the only panacea for all events and problems. One uses any means at ones disposal to right a situation gone bad.So what has been confused is that it was FDR's ACTION to get things moving again and not the government programs themselves which helped America recover.

TABS  10/24/2008 06:50 PM Report

Here is the central truth to the Great Depression and FDR. Before FDR was elected there was NOTHING being done to alleviate the Depression. The financial system was becoming ever more moribund to the point that if it had continued there would have been a communist (Working Mans)revolution in the USA. WHAT FDR OFFERED WAS THE HOPE THAT ACTION BRINGS.That something, anything is being done, thus a proactive stance. FDR basically through a lot of stuff against the wall hoping that some of it would stick. Not all of it worked, but it was the action more than anything else that helped get things moving again.

sock puppet  10/24/2008 05:48 PM Report

Irwin - come back! You were a voice in the CDS wilderness. Please apply your knowledge in this area to discerning the total liability of these things outstanding. Following is an outdated Business Week 2007 article: --------------------------------------------------> "The CDS market exploded over the past decade to more than $45 trillion in mid-2007, according to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association. This is roughly twice the size of the U.S. stock market (which is valued at about $22 trillion and falling) and far exceeds the $7.1 trillion mortgage market and $4.4 trillion U.S. treasuries market, notes Harvey Miller, senior partner at Weil, Gotshal & Manges. "It could be another — I hate to use the expression — nail in the coffin," said Miller, when referring to how this troubled CDS market could impact the country's credit crisis." -----------------------------------------------------------> The $45 trillion has since been cited at $60 trillion. Either is unmanageable if that represents the NET liability. We're and our currency is in the toilet if this liability has to be met. On the surface they have to be dishonored by reason of their size alone.

Phil Islas  10/24/2008 05:34 PM Report

Mr. Ross; Thank you for Mr. Krugman, he gave a plain and simple explanation of the "subprime loan" crisis, and for telling us that his ideas do not include moving Labor Day from September to May 1st.

It was a good interview that I always expect from PBS and your program.

Donald Macdonald  10/24/2008 05:08 PM Report

Listening to the above arrogant commentators jump on Krugman requires tretment for nausea. A fine mind circulating among the little people! Too bad you cannot control your jealousy. D. Macdonakd

Michelle Priddy  10/24/2008 04:57 PM Report

Sounds to me like the 1-30 is the breaking point for leverage. I'm just a stay at home wife, but even I know a 7% credit card paid off at 2% makes me a candidate for bankruptcy, and then, if I've only got 1 dollar in the bank for every 30 (or 100) dollars I've borrowed, the rest of my community depending on my income base are going to hurt. And why would anyone ever want to lend me $30 when I only have $1 to pay back, with a job that won't support the interest payment? How can any lender stay in business lending money this way? And gambling on groups of 'me' through the stock market? It's very basic to me. 1) Don't borrow what you can't pay back. 2) There is no free lunch. Somewhere, somebody pays. 3) Shake hands on a business deal, then do what you agree to. Why is common sense so uncommon? And to the speculators, the gamblers rolling dice on our futures, get some balls and some back bone and figure out how to bring health back to the horse you've been riding; Or is the philosophy still to 'ride that pony 'til it drops' ?

charlize courriers  10/24/2008 04:57 PM Report

In response to a laughing charlie rose saying,"you can say anything you want, you are a nobel ...," a genuine interlocutor might say "does a person who can cook meat know anything about butchering?" What to call the Plan? Bailout, Rescue, TARP... How about... No Bank Left Behind? Like all good liberals, Krugman doesn't want anyone or anything to fail. This seems to be a syndrome all tenured professors and politicans share. Of course the failure is a function of the tenure. The best and most important 'failure' of this era was the failure of Lehman. And more are to come.

not an ecowonk  10/24/2008 04:04 PM Report

I hope the era of greed is over. As Krugman has shown, a bankrupt economy does not compare with the bankrupt moral and ethical center that we have experienced in the last decade.

And, Who are these weird people commenting on this blog? Charlie Rose is the only interview show that presents intelligent conversation. NO other shows compare to the high level of discussion on any topic!