The author has stated the situation in the USA precisely. The problem for the world is the acceptance of the $US as the reserve currency and the currency of international trade. We have the proverbial "tiger by the tail".

The Economics Department at UMKC has been promoting the author's main points at neweconomicperspectives.com for some time. A/P William K Black has been particularly critical of the unwillingness of regulators to prosecute senior bankers and other Wall Street operators for criminal behaviour. Bill Clinton is nearly as responsible as The Gipper who at least had the excuse that he was suffering from Alzheimer's and believed in astrology.

Now you are really telling it like it is. Unfortunately, from what I can see of the American psyche, it will take a few more crises to make them wake up to themselves. The same thing is starting to happen here with voters only electing candidates on the basis of "what is in it for me". Until we realise that we can no longer afford the current high standard of living, we are doomed to go down the same path of the once great US of A.

David

Any account of the GFC that does not understand or recognise the role of the supply of money and credit - and therefore the Federal Reserve - is simply incompetent.

To look on a system of monopoly government control of the supply of money and credit, not understand this fact, and just blithely assume this has nothing to do with the problem and, without any explanation, to assume the problem is more of the same, as the author has just done, makes an embarrassing exhibition of basic economic ignorance.

Those who claim that the problem is not enough "regulation" never deal with the premises or consequences of their own theory. Firstly it assumes that their theory of causation is correct but, as we've just seen, why should we join them in assuming it is when the most obvious and basic distinction between public and private eludes them?

Secondly , if their theory is right and the government is some kind of benevolent selfless general-purpose machine for economising scarce resources to their most important ends, they can never explain, why not just put all productive activity in the hands of government? They can never explain the rational principle distinguishing the interventions they favour, from those they oppose. All we get is a farrago of generalisations that assume what is to be proved, as the author has just given.

Greg, if you want to write a book on the topic without sounding like an ignoramus, you really should read this essay by Rothbard:http://mises.org/document/2668/Economic-Depressions-Their-Cause-and-Cure, so you at least understand the issues.

For a clear, more comprehensive explanation of the basics that you obviously don't understand, read "The Mystery of Banking" by Rothbard.

Foyle has no answer to these arguments because he is only endlessly regurgitating the long-refuted Keynesian nonsense that's causing the problem in the first place.

Jardine
It seems your own enthusiasm to be contrary is interfering with your ability to understand you own beliefs.

Is not warren questioning the role of the federal reserve and the unfettered expansion of debt? Is not this precisely the point?

And is not this something Mises a d Hayek themselves would approve? Ostensibly you understand Warrenis for regulation of the banking sector and being the neo-libertarian enthusiast,, your Reflex is to condemn eve. The mere mention of any regulatory intervention.

I suggest if you stop and think, and actually read and comprehend your own references, you will see quite clearly that atleast on this matter Hayek and warren are sitting at the same table.

Great article Greg
If the articles in our daily newspapers were remotely as interesting the dailies would not be suffering from dwindling readership numbers and terminal decline.

WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO SEE THE MEDIA IS A LIE
BANKING A CLEVER/TRICK..were baNKING A DOLLAR;with the fed
geTS ACCES TO CREDIT/TO LEND[CREDIT CREATED BY FRACTIONAL RESERVE MONEY CREATION

HERE A RARE TRUTH..SUPPREssed for 97 years
at least bother reading rEal news/of the daY;..AS IT HAPPEND
http://home.alphalink.com.au/~radnat/anstey%27s%20kingdom%20of%20shylock.html

ITS A SUPPRESSED BOOK FOR OVER A CENURAry..
[read it and see why]
[ITS STILL;A DAMMING EVIDENCE;Proof*]

IT LAys out the Base for todays problems/COMPOUNDED MANY FOLD
ignorance of histry is NO EXCUSE[WHAT THEY DID THEN..97 YEARS AGO;they do far more affective today,

http://home.alphalink.com.au/~radnat/anstey%27s%20kingdom%20of%20shylock.html

lest we forget/labour..began SEEING/these exreem measures..97 years ago.

the libs merely continued..it..[CHEST BEATING HOW THEY DIDNT DO it we did..just like the big guys like it

DIVIDE AND DIVIDE FURTHER
LIE TILL THEY DONT KNOW TRue from faulse
then print till you got the asset[they GOT A BROKEN PROMISE IN EMPTY VAults.]