Opinion

The Edgy Optimist

David Stockman and the cult of gloom

By Zachary Karabell
April 3, 2013

We think of spring as a time of cherry blossoms and renewed hope, as we slough off the depths of winter and ease into the warmer months. These bright days seem a strange time to encounter the by-now widely circulated warnings of impending doom by Ronald Reagan’s budget director, and current gadfly, David Stockman.

In a long essay in the New York Times drawn from his lengthy and just-published book The Great Deformation, Stockman this week made an impassioned plea for Americans to wake up to the looming crisis just ahead. This crisis, he predicts, will be triggered by a stock market collapse that will remove any lingering illusion that we are OK: “When it bursts, there will be no new round of bailouts like the ones the banks got in 2008. Instead, America will descend into an era of zero-sum austerity and virulent political conflict, extinguishing even today’s feeble remnants of economic growth.”

Stockman has many proposed solutions ‑ abolish Medicare, means-test Social Security ‑ but little hope of any change. The system is broken, the die is cast, sell, sell, sell, sit with cash in your mattress and hope we can make it through the reckoning.

Usually, such crib notes of an argument do it injustice. But the above is not a caricature of what Stockman predicts. It’s what he believes to be the imminent fate of America. He is an unusually erudite and eloquent voice, but his message is so stark that it’s almost impossible to violate by reducing it to its bare minimum.

It’s remarkable how much play these views get and how much traction they have. The tradition of jeremiads extends back to the dawn of recorded history; the biblical The prophet Jeremiah railed against the flaws and failings of the Israelites, and though he was ridiculed for delivering an unheeded message, in the fullness of time his words came back to haunt his people. American society is infused with that tradition. Just read the sermons of any number of 17th century New England pastors who decried the immorality and sloth of their congregations, or various Great Awakenings that called people to return to the right way or risk God’s wrath and misery.

Today’s jeremiads are decidedly more secular – though you can still hear religious ones in churches and temples scattered through the land. But the ones that grab the public’s imagination are now economic rather than religious, warning of collapse unless we all wake from our stupor of greed and debt-infused denial. Stockman is the voice du jour, but he joins a chorus. The financial world hears frequently from Marc Faber, known affectionately as “Dr. Doom” for his frequent prognostications of bad times ahead. On CNBC yesterday, he pronounced that soon every country will be Cyprus, with insolvent banks and governments raiding deposits. “It will happen everywhere in the world, in Western democracies,” Faber said. “You have more people that vote for a living than work for a living. I think you have to be prepared to lose 20 to 30 percent. I think you’re lucky if you don’t lose your life.”

And there are others, of course. Ever since the financial implosion of 2008, Nouriel Roubini has been traversing the lecture and consulting circuit with his dour analysis of the global financial system and its multiple flaws. Jim Rogers, who once worked with George Soros and famously rode his motorcycle across the globe, sits in Singapore and rails against the foolishness of central bankers and lemming-like investors while predicting China’s inevitable rise and global supremacy. Meanwhile, Stockman-like strains of end-of-days debt-laden pessimism infuse the Tea Party and work their way into the Washington mainstream.

All these voices follow the first law of doomsday predictions: Don’t give a date. Yes, Stockman has said his script will play out “in a few years,” but that is both sufficiently vague and sufficiently soon to sound simultaneously alarming and be effectively impossible to argue against. As long as you don’t give a specific time when the world will end, the system implode, the markets crash, you can always – and in today’s pessimistic culture, credibly – say it might not have happened yet but it will soon. At a time when fear is at a premium, those arguments stick. Stockman is getting reams of attention (including this column …). But someone who predicts that the future will witness a technology-infused solution to many of our current concerns? Not so much.

And that is the most salient issue. We are so immersed in our moment of anxiety that we take such extreme warnings very seriously. We listen to other, less dire perspectives more skeptically. That is almost exactly the obverse of the climate in the 1990s or the 1950s. Few now remember Fortune magazine issuing a book in 1956 called The Fabulous Future in which presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson spoke of “the most extraordinary growth any nation or civilization has ever experienced,” labor leader George Meany predicted “ever-rising” living standards and media executive David Sarnoff gushed, “There is no element of material progress we know today that will not seem from the vantage point of 1980 a fumbling prelude.”

In 1999 the chief executive officer of search engine AskJeeves declared to me in an interview that he wanted to give people “perfect information” in order to liberate and empower everyone to create a brave new world. You could throw a dart at a large pile of magazine, books and commentary in either decade and find effusive views about the limitless future, and those voices were seen as credible, compelling and newsworthy. Today, such views would gain little traction, let alone respect.

These oscillations themselves obscure the simple truth that our views about the future usually says less about what will happen then than about how we feel now. As the saying goes, predictions are tricky, especially about the future. None of us know what will unfold, and the human legacy of accurately gauging what will happen is poor at best.

Of course, Stockman might be right, and the jeremiads can be useful if they force us to focus on issues we are otherwise ignoring. Surely, political and economic policy can use constant improvement. But as for the odds of him being right, the past is suggestive if not predictive: The end of the world, the collapse of an old regime, the implosion of order ‑ those are rare, rare, rare. Even the crisis of 2008, as damaging as it was, did not fundamentally change the world as we know it, however much it raised the fear of the end. Current warnings of the end need to be placed in the context of a remarkably stable time, if not an easy one. Stockman and the rest of the doomsday chorus have not revealed any hidden truths; they simply loudly voice concerns widely shared. As such, they are a voice of collective angst, just as surely as the utopians of years past were beacons of collective hope. We should listen to the warnings, but given how paralyzing fear can be, let’s not invest them with crystal-ball clarity and so make them more real than they are.

PHOTO: Still from video of David Stockman at Thomson Reuters Newsmaker event, New York City, April 1, 2013.

Comments
32 comments so far | RSS Comments RSS

Why bother to give David Stockman any press? He is just trying to make some money selling books to folks who are desperately looking for something in writing to back up their nonsensical political extremist views.

Posted by QuietThinker | Report as abusive
 

David Stockman comes from a long tradition of serious, real-world economists, who really understand what the economic laws are and how the real world works. Obviously the author of this squib has no clue about it. I’d like to remind you all, including “QuietThinker” (who probably doesn’t think at all, that’s why he’s so quiet), that people like David Stockman, Peter Schiff, Marc Faber, Jim Rogers, Doug Casey and others, correctly predicted that low interest rates of Federal Reserve after 2001 will produce a bubble – a housing bubble which was evident as early as 2004 and they were alerting the world amidst the barrage of laughter and ridicule – they explained why (Austrian Theory of the Business Cycle of Mises and Hayek), and why the crisis is unavoidable as soon as the FED increases interest rates. What we have today is precisely the same thing all over again – interest rates at zero, no savings in USA, wanton money creation and a plague of malinvestments in American economy, as well as in Europe and China. This MUST necessarily end in a disaster – because economic laws are iron and rigid and you can’t bend them with government fiat.
Is that clear now? No? Well, you will suffer then.

Posted by KelThuz | Report as abusive
 

After examining the available data, David Stockman believes that the U.S. is caught in an unsustainable economic trap. Rather than examining the facts and figures himself, the Edgy Optimist decides to attack Stockman instead.

Since the author calls himself an optimist, he deems those who do not agree with him pessimists. In my opinion, optimists and pessimists are two sides of the same coin. The actual opposite of either is a realist. In order to be a realist, one must be objective, and this is exceedingly difficult for everybody. Humans tend towards splitting the world into us and them lending subjective bias to everything.

I began reading this article expecting an array of facts proving that Mr. Stockman was not analyzing the data correctly, but the author merely writes that Stockman is a jeremiad and leaves it at that. He could have written this same article about those who predicted the subprime crisis before 2007. Those people were labeled as nut-jobs until after the crisis struck.

Those who foretold of the subprime crisis or the coming debt crisis are not doomsayers but realists. We need to differentiate between doomsayers and realists because people often confuse these two groups. Doomsayers can be spotted by two distinct features. They predict the real end of the world, and they give a date for this event. Realists have the courage to tell the world that bad times are coming, but smart enough to understand that no person can predict the future.

A realist knows that there will be a major earthquake in California. While it is certain that this event will occur, no one can predict when. Everyone understands that California is riddled with active geological faults and is earthquake prone as a consequence. People understand plate tectonics enough so that this is not controversial.

The problem with understanding an economic system in the same way is that how people view the economy is closely tied to their political affiliations. When one’s party is in power, the economy is doing great. When it is not, the country is in the midst of another Great Depression.

Because of this dynamic, the author views Stockman’s forecast as a political attack rather than an analysis of the available data. Now, Stockman’s views are probably colored by his long-term affiliation with the GOP, but that does not mean that they are entirely without merit.

The country is spending much more money than it is earning. This is unsustainable, so it will stop. How it will end is subject to debate, but the fact that it will is not.

Posted by dareconomics | Report as abusive
 

“Faber said. “You have more people that vote for a living than work for a living. I think you have to be prepared to lose 20 to 30 percent.” And I think one has to be stupid to argue that this is not true and will not materially and adversely affect the future of America because it it already doing so.

Mr. Karabelle admits: “None of us know what will unfold, and the human legacy of accurately gauging what will happen is poor at best.” Very true.

But most of us do our best to prepare” for “the future”. Students with the intellect and the means or motivation go to college or start businesses…each an “act of faith” in the future. Some succeed, some fail.

In a society traditionally “exceptional” there must be “winners” and “losers”. The difference is less one of luck and more one of preparation and motivation.

The family who spends every raise and keeps having more and more children is literally gambling that “God will provide” as expenses inevitably increase from such choices. Sooner or later such families may suddenly lose their “place on the merry-go-round” and be thrown off.

The family that puts money back for college for fewer children, that buys insurance so that illness or death of the primary provider is not economically fatal, that establishes and maintains a “rainy day fund” before considering a new car or new phone is in an infinitely better position to survive economic downturns and most of life’s storms.

It is in this context that those who listen to Mr. Stockman are more likely to prevail, come what may, than those who listen to Mr. Karabelle. What will be, will be.

@dareconomics,

Very well said!

Posted by OneOfTheSheep | Report as abusive
 

One should always disregard those comments that attack a person’s credibility instead of the issue at hand.

Take a look at the supporting facts and then make up your own mind.

Posted by voiced | Report as abusive
 

The Federal Reserve started the ball rolling into debt hell via stimulative policies over the last couple decades. Alan Greenspan admitted during a congressional grilling that the financial panic revealed his understanding of economic reality was “flawed”.

Now Bernanke is given further opportunity to screw things up via his self-absorbed belief in his theories concerning deflation. He was bred for his horse with blinders approach by the same educational system whose minions created the financial innovations leading to crisis. Now to clean up the mess created by these genius innovators the Fed steals from poor and middle class savers (the bedrock of the financial system) to enrich the gamblers with the “hope” it will all somehow stimulate the economy to grow.

Bernanke is only one in a chorus of relativist thinkers who could care less about their impact longer term on productive stabilizing human interaction. They instead remain focused on hoped for short term results. Results instigated by political and “revolving door” considerations (even though they are supposedly an “independent” public service organization). They take too seriously their abilities as economic central planners (a political bestowment). If they are such great planners, regulators and economic policy pundits why are we at our current economic destination?

The Fed blessed their flawed approach to human interaction with the “rescue” of LTCM at the end of the last century. This reinforced the idiot financial system gamblers’ belief that they would be protected by the Fed and could gamble with abandon. I guess these gamblers are not complete idiots since they have been proved correct in regard to having their stupidity bailed out at the expense of others.

I wish there was less fantasy and childishness in the current thinking at the Fed but that would require adult supervision from a guy like Paul Volcker.

Posted by keebo | Report as abusive
 

“But someone who predicts that the future will witness a technology-infused solution to many of our current concerns? Not so much.”

Optimists don’t get any play in the press? is that what you’re complaining about?

That of course is nonsense. Remember a book called “Dow 36,000″ back in 2000? Remember expressions like “information wants to be free” and — a generation before that — the expectation of energy “too cheap to meter”?

Are you saying that we need more such technology-driven optimism as that? If so, you’re balmy. But here’s a song (actually two):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYpcFHtxm 60

Posted by Christofurio | Report as abusive
 

Mr Stockman’s personal history in selling Ronald Reagan’s economic policies – and later admitting that the whole rationale for those policies was wrongheaded – shouldn’t be forgotten. In plain language, he’s been wrong in a big way in the past but was convincing, at the time.

I’m sorry to say that almost all of the posts above look very similar in form and content to (1) each other, and (2) to other posts I’ve read about the economy; and were posted very quickly. I suspect the posters were paid posters, i.e., trolls.

Posted by PhilipWilliams | Report as abusive
 

@PhilipWilliams,

If you had the intellect you purport, you would know how to check all recent posts by those you “suspect” to be “paid posters, i.e., trolls.” The “posts above” are predominately introspective and individual to a degree not usual.

While the first five of your whole SIX total posts to Reuters to date seem otherwise intelligent, your silliness in this one is most offensive.

Posted by OneOfTheSheep | Report as abusive
 

The “gloom” will happen if the U.S. adopts an austerity budget which will drive the economy into a Second Great Recession. Which will dramatically increase the debt/deficit as revenues plummet.

Posted by Leftcoastrocky | Report as abusive
 

A valuable article, but the length could be cut in half and it would have the same, if not more impact.

Posted by Daniel_Dickens | Report as abusive
 

@OneOfTheSheep

And with one fell swoop, you proved yourself to be one of the trolls. Attacking a person’s intelligence for having a view that differs from your own? Total troll move. What makes me think that these people are paid is that they wrote such long responses. Most people have better things to do than write multiple paragraph responses to an op-ed.

Posted by sfgfan10 | Report as abusive
 

http://www.greatertalent.com/speaker-new s/zachary-karabell-government-upholds-tr adition-of-condemning-wall-street/

Hey Zachary, here’s something you wrote awhile back. Look familiar? Seems to me that your ad hominem attack on Stockman boils down to “It’s ok if I do it, but not Stockman.” And you focus on a small slice of his book while ignoring his compelling argument that we are being robbed blind.

And I’ll also point out about your jeremiads comment that you have effectively ceded Stockman’s central argument about the “crisis” of 2008: that it was made up to panic people into TARP and other $T bailouts.

You lose.

Posted by hokkoda | Report as abusive
 

Also, it seems like everyone is forgetting that there is actual economic improvement going on. The unemployment rate has been going down, even if it has been very slow. THis is similar to the Dot-com bubble, which resulted in a short recession followed by a long and slow recovery.

Posted by sfgfan10 | Report as abusive
 

There is no real economic recovery. It is all illusion due to rapacious money expansion by the FED. The house of cards will crumble perhaps even this year, after May.

Posted by KelThuz | Report as abusive
 

I really liked the article. I think the author just wanted to say that these dooms day people get way too much coverage without anyone really ask them if they are on any medication. The saying ” even a stopped watch is right twice a day” comes to mind.
And these dooms day guys are given credit for things they really did not predict if you look back and ask them to show it to you. I think the author was asking us to put it inot perspective and be hopeful not negative, Drama sells papers and in sites riots.
Hope brings people together and finds solutions.

Posted by msdds1 | Report as abusive
 

I really liked the article. I think the author just wanted to say that these dooms day people get way too much coverage without anyone really ask them if they are on any medication. The saying ” even a stopped watch is right twice a day” comes to mind.
And these dooms day guys are given credit for things they really did not predict if you look back and ask them to show it to you. I think the author was asking us to put it inot perspective and be hopeful not negative, Drama sells papers and in sites riots.
Hope brings people together and finds solutions.

Posted by msdds1 | Report as abusive
 

I really liked the article. I think the author just wanted to say that these dooms day people get way too much coverage without anyone really ask them if they are on any medication. The saying ” even a stopped watch is right twice a day” comes to mind.
And these dooms day guys are given credit for things they really did not predict if you look back and ask them to show it to you. I think the author was asking us to put it inot perspective and be hopeful not negative, Drama sells papers and in sites riots.
Hope brings people together and finds solutions.

Posted by msdds1 | Report as abusive
 

I really liked the article. I think the author just wanted to say that these dooms day people get way too much coverage without anyone really ask them if they are on any medication. The saying ” even a stopped watch is right twice a day” comes to mind.
And these dooms day guys are given credit for things they really did not predict if you look back and ask them to show it to you. I think the author was asking us to put it inot perspective and be hopeful not negative, Drama sells papers and in sites riots.
Hope brings people together and finds solutions.

Posted by msdds1 | Report as abusive
 

I really liked the article. I think the author just wanted to say that these dooms day people get way too much coverage without anyone really ask them if they are on any medication. The saying ” even a stopped watch is right twice a day” comes to mind.
And these dooms day guys are given credit for things they really did not predict if you look back and ask them to show it to you. I think the author was asking us to put it inot perspective and be hopeful not negative, Drama sells papers and in sites riots.
Hope brings people together and finds solutions.

Posted by msdds1 | Report as abusive
 

I really liked the article. I think the author just wanted to say that these dooms day people get way too much coverage without anyone really ask them if they are on any medication. The saying ” even a stopped watch is right twice a day” comes to mind.
And these dooms day guys are given credit for things they really did not predict if you look back and ask them to show it to you. I think the author was asking us to put it inot perspective and be hopeful not negative, Drama sells papers and in sites riots.
Hope brings people together and finds solutions.

Posted by msdds1 | Report as abusive
 

David Stockman pitched the silly notion that tax cuts increase government revenues, and he risked the health of his nation’s economy on that prediction. Either he believed it to be true, in which case he is reckless and incompetent, or he lied for his own personal gain, in which case he is maximally untrustworthy. Either way, his current views deserve no attention much less respect. Anyone with a similar track record should be soundly ignored. Alas, the press is still relentlessly peddling any word that comes out of the mouth of Greenspan, Perle, etc. With this cacophony constantly in the background, it’s no wonder we are in such a muddle of confusion on where things are going and what should be done.

Also, could you please look up the word obverse and learn to use it correctly?

Posted by Sanity-Monger | Report as abusive
 

Now THAT’s an argument.
“Stockman makes dire predictions (read: says things I don’t like); religious freaks over the centuries have made dire predictions; Stockman is stupid.”

Bravo!

Posted by WIthRemorse | Report as abusive
 

Mr. Karabell,

So I suppose the alarms sounded by David Walker, former Comptroller General and head of the GAO is also a cult member? Do you care to include the AICPA as well? Maybe if you have enough intellect you can read the GAO’s audit of the USA’s financial condition asserting we are on an unsustainable path and that material weaknesses exist in our nations accounting.

Our true total debt is more than $72 trillion. More than all the wealth of all citizens combined. How many generations do you think it will take to reverse this path? Frankly, this is some of the worst reporting I’ve read.

Posted by EdNewMexico | Report as abusive
 

A troll – is someone who posts inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages …with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. I truncated this definition from Wikipedia for expediency. I had to look it up because I was not sure what a troll was other than a cheap plastic doll. It seems that by this definition “sfgfan10″ and “PhillipWilliams” are the actual trolls and need to become more on topic and contributory per those “long” commenters they allude to in their derisive comments.

Posted by keebo | Report as abusive
 

Mr. Karabell –

I have read other reviews of David Stockman’s book, which have for the most part grudgingly given him the credit due to this book, even though they did not agree with its conclusions.

Yours, however, is little more than a knee-jerk, fear-driven screed designed to denigrate the credibility of anyone who says that all of this economic insanity is nearing an end.

While I don’t agree with everything Stockman says, I think he is correct that this economy is going to crash hard again, and quite soon.

The seeds of our destruction were indeed sown in the past 40 years — mainly with the loosening of banking regulations, free trade that is anything but, and the massive shifting of wealth to a minority due to tax provisions that are tailor-made for them — and they are now ripe and about to blossom.

We are at the end of a decades-long bubble that is about to crash. Actually, but for the efforts of Bernanke, we would have crashed in 2008. That is historical fact, whether you care to agree with it or not.

For example, since the 1970s the US economy has grown at a CAGR of 7.1%, which means we are in the midst of an unsustainable speculative bubble. In fact, the US economy has crashed 47 times since 1790, which means our economy is highly unstable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_recessio ns

We are also accumulating debt at the rate of over a trillion dollars per year, with no effective plans to counter the trend. The Bernanke policies are adding 85 billion per month to that debt, which is another trillion dollars per year.

Yet we have nothing to show for it, except stock markets keep going up, just like a hot air balloon and with about as little to support them.

———————————–

Beranke’s efforts are simply wealthy welfare. The real reason the US economy is not responding to his printing money is that we are in a “liquidity trap”.

Per Wikipedia (solely for ease of access).

“A liquidity trap is a situation described in Keynesian economics in which injections of cash into the private banking system by a central bank fail to lower interest rates and hence fail to stimulate economic growth. A liquidity trap is caused when people hoard cash because they expect an adverse event such as deflation, insufficient aggregate demand, or war. Signature characteristics of a liquidity trap are short-term interest rates that are near zero and fluctuations in the monetary base that fail to translate into fluctuations in general price levels.”

————————————

Government figures on inflation are a joke (more like a practical joke that isn’t funny), since it not only fails to include food and energy, but also the massive $16+ trillion of “accrued inflation” (i.e. the national debt) that must be paid if we are to avoid another market crash and Great Depression.

Stockman’s book, however much you may disagree with it, is a canary in the coal mine reality check.

Denial WILL bring disaster.

But then the wealthy class never did like to accept bad news, especially about profits.

Posted by PseudoTurtle | Report as abusive
 

I need to make a correction to my comment above:

“For example, since the 1970s the US economy has grown at a CAGR of 7.1%, which means we are in the midst of an unsustainable speculative bubble.”

Should read the “US stock markets (the DOW specifically) has grown by 7.1% CAGR (Compound Annual Grow Rate), which is hardly sustainable and means we are in the midst of a massive speculative bubble.

To illustrate my point, take a look at this link to the DOW. Select “zoom all” and look at the data presented.

If we assumed a “normal” rate of GDP growth of around 2.5% per year over the past 40 years, the DOW should be around 2,500.

The rest is a speculative bubble.

The ONLY reason we do not see the inflation is that (1) the government is “accruing” the debt and not allowing it to pass through to the nation — which is the same method used by the Chinese government to grow their GDP by double digits for decades without inflation, but are now having problems controlling the their inflation because it is passing through to the Chinese consumers, and (2) the “flip side” of (1), which is the massive downwards pressure on consumer prices by cheap Chinese goods.

When Bernanke is forced to stop, which is likely to be quite soon, this nation will go over a cliff into financial disaster never seen or imagined before.

THAT, in my opinion, won’t take years, but only months.

Posted by PseudoTurtle | Report as abusive
 

Sorry, I left out the link to the DOW site I am using.

http://www.google.com/finance?q=INDEXDJX  :.DJI

Posted by PseudoTurtle | Report as abusive
 

It is interesting that the two sides viewing America’s economic prognosis, at least as most of the media have it, are the level-headed and the gloomy. So many bloggers here want shout down Mr. Stockman. Methinks their protestations are too loud. And Mr. Karabell, Jeremiah did not “deliver…an unheeded message” but instead indicated what was to come based on what had been done– “weeping” because of the unavoidability of consequences brought on by forsaking values. Have American business and political leaders done that? Is there an inverse relationship between the savings rate and the stock market, for example. We have forsaken much.

Posted by BookMaven | Report as abusive
 

Reasoned discussion usually follows the path of critiqing the various points. When one doesn’t have a reasoned argument, then just attack your opponent as a conspiracy theorist or doomsayer. Sadly, this article takes the latter strategy.

Stockman, a very reasoned economist with a Republican bent, is trying to present a realistic analysis of the state of our economy. Labeling him a doomsayer is more than insulting.

Most economists are well aware that the media under the influence of the plutocracy has been trying to downplay the true state of our economy for years. In the meantime, we have noted economists like Paul Krugman who claim we’re in the midst of a Third Depression, not past the Great Recession, and the causes have not been addressed. Just call this Nobel Laureate in Economics a crackpot and ignore him. Just another doomsayer.

Shame on you.

Posted by ptiffany | Report as abusive
 

BTW, another crackpot, Benjamin Bernanke, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, has repeatedly made statements that agree with Stockman with respect to the inflated stock market.

Posted by ptiffany | Report as abusive
 

Stockman hit it big after his years with Reagan; he made bundles with Blackstone and then on his own. He then managed to destroy an already weakened LBO and ran a bit too close to the law for safety sake.

He’s now surfaced with a book that attacks the past 80 years of American history with one exception – he “Likes Ike”.

Memo to Stockman – in the 80 years since Roosevelt upped the price of gold and did a half-suspension of its convertibility, the economy has really done well overall. Could your hard currency have done as well?

Posted by CharlesHoffman | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •