PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: Tomas Palley on China
- To: PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Tomas Palley on China
- From: Julio Huato <juliohuato@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 16:43:41 -0500
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=Zz7O6bFZDvZF1dh/DnKXnIrYLzh00Dza0tLPr71LJrEfIGskSEMTR0eA5EsRVSpXhaaXLQtLwGnMVQOHjzyoBtTaLsjRgEU59zDuz9paaQOBb8LyqwFW3++OsICCwZjdtN8HZPw954HJK3Ann0Z72lBslIQkiS4/X8yv4IRSxVU=
Doug,
> Palley quotes Steve Roach of Morgan Stanley, of course. There ought
> to be a moratorium on this. Roach is a smart & thoughtful fellow, but
> he's a minority view on Wall Street, and his forecasting record isn't
> particularly outstanding. I understand the appeal of citing a Morgan
> Stanley guy, but if you think there's a 40% risk of a hard landing,
> make the argument yourself. An appeal to authority of this sort
> won't cut it.
A question regarding your views on this. You seem to acknowledge that
that there'll be *a major adjustment* in the U.S. as a result of the
twin deficits and the real estate/consumer credit boom, but you're
skeptical about the form the adjustment will take. (Am I right?) My
question is: Besides the healthy skepticism about always expecting
hard landings, what specific reasons do you have to doubt that a hard
landing will *very likely* be the form the adjustment will take? (I
understand that the onus falls on those who predict a dramatic change,
but -- for the sake of an interesting discussion -- turn that around.)
Julio
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]