Tape 201 - Rescue of British Pound; U.S. economic recovery slows; 1 1/2 cheers for Ford; Fed restrains money growth

Download
- Rights
- Limited Re-Use
  CC BY-NC 4.0
  More Rights Info
- Files (1)
- MP3
- Please be patient with media downloads. They are often large files.
Share

Embed Code
<iframe src='//idn.duke.edu/ark:/87924/r4dj58z8x?embed=true' height='125px' width='100%' frameborder='0' marginwidth='0' marginheight='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe>
Permalink

https://idn.duke.edu/ark:/87924/r4dj58z8x
Skip to Item Info

Loading the media player...

Files for this Item

Transcript

Transcripts may contain inaccuracies.

-	Good day.	0:02
	This is David Francis, financial editor	0:03
	of the Christian Science Monitor.	0:05
	Welcome once more on behalf	0:08
	of Instructional Dynamics Incorporated	0:09
	to a conversation with Dr. Paul Samuelson,	0:12
	MIT's Nobel Prize-winning economist.	0:15
	We are recording this chat in mid-June	0:18
	not long after the major industrial nations came	0:21
	to the rescue of Britain	0:25
	with a $5.3 billion emergency loan.	0:26
	Dr. Samuelson, what was the point of this operation?	0:31
	Was is a useful exercise?	0:33
-	Well, we won't know whether it was useful or not	0:36
	until the historians look back upon this period	0:38
	but if I had to make a defense	0:43
	of this operation	0:46
	and I think one should be required to make a defense	0:49
	since it's been so often the case	0:53
	that good money has been thrown after bad	0:55
	by central banks	0:58
	and by other nations in supporting the indefensible,	0:59
	namely in supporting an overvalued currency	1:05
	which in a fortnight is gonna go down anyway.	1:09
	But let's see whether this time a defense	1:12
	can be made for it.	1:14
	I think that you'd have to do it along the following lines.	1:16
	At $2 a pound,	1:19
	the pound still looked overvalued	1:24
	because prices in Britain had been rising	1:26
	at about 20/25% a year	1:28
	whereas the nations with whom she trades,	1:31
	with whom she has to compete, Germany	1:34
	and the United States had prices rising only	1:36
	in the order of magnitude of five, 7% per year.	1:39
	So, it was a good/bad I think	1:44
	to sell the pound short	1:47
	when the pound was above $2	1:49
	and at the time the Bank of England	1:52
	was supposed to have dropped several billions of dollars	1:53
	in defense of the indefensible in defense of the pound.	1:57
	Well, once the pound got moving,	2:01
	and there's some press commentary	2:04
	that it's been the mid-East oil money	2:07
	which has been most volatile	2:11
	which has been coolest or hottest	2:13
	depending upon which adjective you wanna use	2:15
	in causing the movement.	2:18
	Once it began to move,	2:20
	the pound slipped very rapidly	2:22
	from $2 down to $1.90	2:24
	down to $1.85 down to $1.80	2:26
	and I believe it momentarily dropped	2:30
	all the way to $1.70.	2:33
	At this point I must say it looked as if the odds	2:34
	perhaps were shifting,	2:38
	that the pound had gone as far	2:40
	as the differential price and wage movements	2:41
	entitled it to go	2:44
	and suddenly catching the short sellers	2:46
	in a very painful grip,	2:50
	there was a five to 7% increase in the pound	2:53
	and the pound has been more or less been defended	2:57
	at the rate of around $1.77, $1.78, $1.76	3:02
	with corresponding figures	3:09
	for the forward delivery of the pound next December	3:12
	into the New Year.	3:17
	I suspect that the British goods	3:19
	are still rather cheap	3:23
	at this rate and that this may be	3:25
	what economists call a purchasing power parity rate	3:28
	and when a government intervenes	3:32
	on a speculative basis	3:37
	or I should say a counter-speculative basis,	3:39
	it may make itself some money	3:42
	in supporting the pound	3:45
	and the short sellers may lose some money,	3:46
	so the test of the pudding will be	3:48
	whether it turns out that this is just another halfway house	3:52
	that couldn't be held	3:54
	in which case the money will be like cash thrown down	3:56
	a rat hole	4:01
	or the pound will be an equilibrium level	4:02
	at this rate.	4:09
	I don't know the answer.	4:11
	I wouldn't wanna bet that this level	4:12
	of the pound is going to give way	4:16
	in the next six months and 10 days,	4:19
	I think that's the frame of reference that speculators use.	4:22
	Below this level, I just assume bet on stability	4:28
	on the pound dropping	4:33
	which is to say I would expect it to go up a penny or two	4:35
	as much as go down a penny of two	4:40
	from this level.	4:42
	But only the future will tell.	4:45
-	What do the British have to do	4:48
	to stabilize their pound, that is to make, reduce inflation?	4:49
-	I think what is worrying the short sellers	4:53
	is the fact that for the moment,	4:57
	the new Labour Government or the new prime minister	5:00
	of the Labour Government	5:04
	seems to be getting the cooperation	5:06
	of the Labour movement	5:08
	so that nominally a 4.5% wage increase	5:13
	which really means a real decrease in wages	5:17
	is holding up	5:22
	and I do not anticipate that that can be held up	5:24
	for more than a year	5:29
	but if it holds even for six months,	5:31
	gives you breathing space,	5:33
	then the British can get back in the orbit	5:35
	of Germany, United States, Japan,	5:38
	and France with one digit of price inflation.	5:41
	Now, if you ask me where will the pound be	5:47
	five years from now,	5:49
	I guess I have to record the suspicion	5:51
	that the way the British run their public household	5:53
	is a way that is going to give them a differential rate	5:59
	of inflation higher than the rest of the world	6:02
	so the natural thing for the pound to do	6:04
	is to slip down	6:06
	and if I prepare an 11th edition of my textbook	6:08
	and have to make a desperate guess	6:12
	as I did just this last year, a year ago	6:14
	in preparing the 10th edition	6:18
	which came out in February,	6:19
	I made the desperate guess	6:20
	which seemed so problematic and daring at the time	6:22
	of a $2, all my arithmetic examples are $2 to the pound	6:27
	instead of 2.50	6:31
	instead of in earlier editions, $3, $4	6:34
	in still earlier editions.	6:37
	Well, I think the 11th edition will show	6:39
	something like $1.50	6:45
	but you can't make money	6:47
	on the certain knowledge that the pound	6:50
	will be $1.50 in three or four years.	6:53
	It's already properly priced in the forward markets	6:56
	based upon a continuing depreciation.	6:59
	That would be an equilibrium,	7:03
	not a disequilibrium development	7:05
	if there is in fact a higher rate	7:08
	of wage and price inflation prevailing	7:12
	over the good years and the bad years in Britain compared	7:15
	to the rest of the world	7:18
	and that's one of the advantages of flexible exchange rates.	7:19
	However, David, as you've noticed,	7:22
	it's been causing quite a lot of headaches	7:24
	to business corporations who have international operations	7:27
	because they require now to bringing	7:30
	into their profit and loss statement	7:32
	their gains and losses on currency account	7:35
	and with the flexible exchange rates,	7:38
	they show gains and losses.	7:41
	It was great while those were gains	7:42
	but now that they're tending to be losses,	7:45
	they're not so happy	7:47
	about the Counting Committee's requirement	7:48
	that they be current in their reporting.	7:51
	So, I think you'll see more and more recourse to hedging	7:56
	to try to hold down the ups and downs	7:59
	of these casino currency fluctuations.	8:01
-	Turning to the US economy,	8:06
	there has been one report from Washington	8:08
	that the nation's output has slowed down decidedly	8:11
	in the current quarter.	8:16
	Do you regard this as a favorably development?	8:17
-	Well, first, let's describe	8:21
	the hard news in greater detail.	8:24
	We finally have the third pass	8:29
	at the first quarter's real growth rate	8:31
	and that's written up again.	8:34
	It's now 8.7% annual rate	8:36
	instead of 8.5% which was how it was written up	8:39
	the second pass	8:42
	and it was 7.5% at the first pass.	8:43
	Well, 7.5 seemed surprisingly high,	8:45
	8.5 seemed surprisingly high,	8:47
	by 8.7 we were really numbed	8:49
	that nothing surprises us anymore	8:52
	and on the occasion release of those numbers	8:56
	and a release of some nice profit numbers	8:59
	for the first quarter.	9:03
	Some unknown government spokesman,	9:05
	not named, I don't think it's Mr. Kissinger,	9:09
	usually a political figure,	9:12
	a high official in the State Department	9:14
	is quoted we know that that's Henry Kissinger off the record	9:17
	but I don't honestly know	9:21
	who this unnamed person is.	9:23
	What he said is that there's gonna be a rather ominous drop	9:25
	from 8.7% real growth in the first quarter	9:31
	to perhaps as little as 5% annual rate	9:34
	in the second quarter, perhaps even lower	9:37
	and that's caused a few tremblings in Wall Street	9:40
	and perhaps in the groves of academe.	9:45
	I think that I would tend to go with Arthur Burns	9:51
	who was asked in San Francisco what about this ominous drop?	9:55
	And he said I don't know anything about that	9:59
	but I think that we will have slower growth	10:03
	than in the first quarter, Burns speaking,	10:08
	Samuelson agreeing, almost everybody agreeing with that	10:12
	but he said I don't think it'll be as low	10:15
	as the number you're quoting, 5% annual rate.	10:17
	That isn't what our staff at the Federal Reserve thinks	10:20
	and that's not what I Arthur burns think.	10:24
	Well, I would be	10:27
	inclined to bet that anyone who thinks less than 5%	10:35
	is probably gonna lose his bet on the revisions.	10:38
	The reasons given are the following.	10:42
	Housing has not continued its sub-swing.	10:44
	Plant and equipment expenditure	10:47
	from which so much was hoped	10:49
	still is disappointingly slow in growing.	10:51
	The official SEC Department of Commerce survey	10:58
	did not confirm the write up	11:02
	by the McGraw-Hill survey.	11:04
	It showed really more of the same	11:06
	namely an increase in money terms so small	11:09
	that when you factor in the increase in prices,	11:15
	there is increase in real terms	11:17
	in plant and equipment.	11:20
	Now, if we add to that that the great hero	11:21
	of the recovery, the consumer,	11:24
	has begun to show a little moderation	11:27
	in the first two months	11:30
	for which we have reports	11:31
	on retail sales of the second quarter	11:33
	and the suspicion from the developing inventory news	11:38
	that you certainly will not get another surprising jump	11:44
	in the rate of accumulation	11:48
	and if you only hold your own	11:49
	on the rate of inventory accumulation	11:52
	even if that's the rather high number reported	11:54
	in the first quarter, you don't get any extra gain	11:58
	from that, so the result is that a case could be made	12:00
	for the 5% rate of real growth,	12:05
	however, just to keep things in perspective,	12:08
	let me quote one of the consensus forecasters,	12:12
	I have before me the recent DRI forecast	12:16
	of late June 1976	12:23
	by Dr. Otto Eckstein of Harvard University and DRI	12:27
	and the numbers which Dr. Eckstein gives	12:32
	for the second quarter is a 6.3% annual rate of growth,	12:37
	that's his preferred scenario, 6.2% annual rate of growth	12:42
	in the third quarter,	12:46
	a 5.9% annual rate of growth in the fourth quarter,	12:48
	finally, 5.6% annual rate of growth	12:52
	in the second quarter,	12:58
	so looking ahead for the next four quarters,	12:59
	the economy is still growing faster	13:05
	than the potential	13:10
	and so, the unemployment numbers according to Eckstein	13:13
	will still be falling.	13:18
	Now, David, you probably noticed	13:20
	that Alan Greenspan has been giving some interviews.	13:22
	He talked to U.S. News and World Report	13:26
	in a published interview	13:29
	but he also has had press conferences	13:31
	and he has said	13:34
	that the annual rate of growth	13:36
	for the real GNP of 76 over 75	13:40
	is being written up by him	13:45
	from something like 6% to something like 7%.	13:47
-	Yeah, 6.2 to 7%.	13:50
-	Yes and that agrees with Dr. Eckstein's numbers	13:51
	which shows a 7.1% real growth for '76.	13:56
	Doctor, I shouldn't say doctor,	14:02
	I mean Mr. Greenspan also said	14:04
	that later in the year	14:07
	the unemployment would go below 7%.	14:09
	It looked as if he was becoming a bit more optimistic	14:13
	because earlier he said by the end of the year	14:16
	it would seven, below 7%.	14:19
	I think that's probably consistent	14:21
	with the Eckstein forecast, yes, indeed it is	14:23
	because Dr. Eckstein has 6.9% in the fourth quarter	14:27
	of the year.	14:31
	I guess the Eckstein forecast which I've just quoted to you	14:36
	is a little bit higher than the flavor	14:40
	of what that unnamed Department of Commerce spokesman	14:45
	has in mind but I think that on the whole,	14:49
	it will be easier from the standpoint	14:54
	of the administration handlers of the recovery.	14:57
	It'll be easier for the federal Reserve	15:00
	if we don't show real GNP growth rates	15:02
	in the second, third and fourth quarter	15:08
	of 7% and above.	15:10
	My own target is about 7% still.	15:13
	I don't think that the good Lord	15:17
	put people in administration jobs	15:19
	and Federal Reserve jobs	15:23
	in order to have an easy life,	15:24
	he put them there to do the best	15:27
	that can be done over the long pull for the economy	15:29
	and for all the people as a whole.	15:33
	Properly weighted in a way	15:36
	that actually only the good Lord completely	15:39
	and perfectly understands	15:41
	and that means that you have to borrow	15:43
	a little bit of trouble	15:48
	in the running of the economy	15:49
	and I don't see any danger	15:53
	as I thought I did see a month ago	15:56
	that the real economy	16:00
	is likely to run	16:03
	but there's a danger that the real economy	16:06
	will run more than the 7%.	16:07
	Now, it could be that this is just the summer	16:09
	of our discontent	16:11
	and that the real figures will all pick up	16:13
	and the problem will be how to hold down the pace	16:17
	of the recovery	16:21
	but I think it'd be premature	16:22
	to conclude that this will be our major problem.	16:24
-	Do you think Mr. Carter will be helped much	16:29
	by the status of the economy in the fall	16:31
	in the presidential campaign?	16:35
-	I think that Mr. Ford	16:39
	has had all the help that anyone could have really expected	16:44
	or wished for him,	16:50
	a partisan supporter of President Ford	16:52
	could hardly have asked for a better scenario	16:56
	of development than what has been developing up until now.	16:59
	Now, admittedly, if we go down below 5%,	17:03
	and it's the unemployment the rest of the year,	17:07
	fails to make any substantial	17:09
	or any progress below the 7.3%	17:13
	which was the last number for May,	17:16
	then the political factor will not be quite as favorable	17:19
	for President Ford	17:24
	but I would say that it's been quite favorable for him.	17:27
	Now, given that it's very favorable for President Ford,	17:29
	I think one has to conclude logically	17:33
	that events have not developed quite as favorably	17:37
	on the economic front	17:42
	to the opposition democrats	17:44
	as a zealous partisan democrat	17:46
	might have hoped if he had no compassion for the country	17:51
	and said if things get bad,	17:55
	then that's tough doughnuts for the country	17:56
	but that's good for my party.	17:59
	Nevertheless, David, we are left	18:03
	with the one big conundrum	18:05
	that all the politicos have had to worry about,	18:09
	although the recovery is proceeding	18:14
	and it's very hard to imagine	18:17
	it could stub its toe seriously before the election	18:19
	and this favors the incumbent	18:22
	and this favors the Republicans,	18:24
	there remains the fact	18:28
	that the last recession was the most serious recession	18:29
	in the post-World War II period.	18:33
	It brought unemployment	18:36
	to the highest level in that whole epoch.	18:39
	It's been part of a worldwide recession	18:42
	and there are still are a lot of people	18:46
	without job opportunity	18:50
	who had job opportunity as recently as 1973	18:52
	and a lot of those people	18:56
	are likely to be Democrats	18:58
	and Candidate Carter seems to have quite a lot of pull	18:59
	on ambivalent people.	19:05
	I won't say that you're a hermaphrodite	19:09
	if you're an independent,	19:11
	neither a fish nor fowl, neither one sex nor the other	19:13
	but if you wanna use that terminology,	19:18
	an awful lot of the American voting public today	19:20
	are hermaphrodites and the question	19:23
	that each of the parties is asking itself	19:28
	is what kind of bate do hermaphrodites go for?	19:30
	And whatever it is that Mr. Carter has on his line,	19:35
	it seems to be rather tempting and tasty	19:41
	to hermaphrodites, you've seen the polls	19:44
	which show that quote a number of renegade Democrats	19:46
	who voted Republican feel a pull back towards Mr. Carter	19:52
	and quite a number of Republicans,	19:56
	about half I guess	19:59
	are gonna find that their preferred candidate	20:01
	does not get nominated.	20:04
	I'm assuming that you can't nominate two people	20:05
	for the presidency in the same year	20:07
	and of that disgruntled half,	20:09
	it looks as if Carter might pick up a few	20:12
	of the votes.	20:16
	So, I guess it's a Mexican stand off	20:18
	as far the economy is concerned.	20:21
	You can make an argument	20:23
	that the economy still favors the Democrats	20:25
	or you can make the argument	20:28
	that it favors the incumbent Republican.	20:29
-	Would you take a scientific look	20:32
	at this question as you can.	20:35
	President Ford and members of his administration	20:36
	are claiming credit for the current healthy recovery	20:39
	and declining inflation rates.	20:42
	Do they deserve this credit?	20:44
-	Oh, I think we can give 'em 1.5 cheers for them.	20:47
	They deserve credit in that they have been pushing	20:54
	for a moderate expansionary policy	20:58
	and a moderate expansionary policy	21:03
	as we look back over the economy this last year,	21:05
	seems to have had a pretty good pay-off	21:08
	but let's not forget that it was the White House	21:11
	that was resisting fiscal expansion	21:17
	in the last part of 1974.	21:21
	It was the opposition party in Congress	21:24
	which has been pushing over presidential vetoes	21:26
	and against presidential manifestos,	21:29
	the amount of expansion that we have here.	21:32
	I give the White House a little more credit	21:35
	'cause I don't believe they wanted all those vetoes to hold.	21:36
	A lot of them were for the record	21:40
	were for the election purpose	21:42
	and they knew that they were gonna be overridden	21:43
	and so, if you want to be very friendly	21:47
	towards the White House economist,	21:50
	you would say that they were trying	21:52
	to keep the over expansion down	21:54
	and it looks to me as if we have had	21:57
	about the right amount of fiscal stimulus	22:01
	since my preferred goal from the bottom	22:04
	of the recovery, bottom of the recession	22:08
	in the spring of 1975	22:12
	to the present time	22:15
	which was for something like a seven to 8% rate	22:16
	of real growth, that was in fact achieved.	22:23
	Since I've been speaking in teleological terms,	22:27
	I guess I wanna give providence some credit too	22:30
	because I don't think that it was preordained	22:33
	that the velocity of circulation of money	22:37
	should have increased even beyond	22:40
	its normal cyclical increase	22:43
	but that is what did happen	22:45
	and perhaps that saved the Federal Reserve's bacon	22:48
	against some recrimination	22:54
	in a increasingly populous democracy,	22:56
	you know that Candidate Carter	23:01
	has come out formally,	23:05
	he hasn't come out for many things formally	23:07
	but he's come out unambiguously	23:09
	for greater control over the Federal Reserve.	23:11
-	Do you think this is a good idea?	23:14
-	I do.	23:15
	I think he wants greater control	23:16
	of the Federal Reserve by Congress	23:19
	that they must be more responsible to Congress.	23:22
	That's increasingly happening.	23:28
	He wants to have an annual report	23:30
	by the Federal Reserve in the President's Annual Report	23:32
	of what they did,	23:37
	what sins they committed	23:40
	and wish to atone for,	23:42
	what triumphs of good judgment they had.	23:44
	He doesn't ask, I think because the political climate	23:48
	won't bear it that the Federal Reserve	23:53
	be put under the Executive Branch	23:55
	which is what is the case in most countries	23:56
	and the last analyst, the Cental Banks were responsible	23:59
	to the Executive	24:01
	but he does want to have his own chairman	24:03
	and that means instead of having the Nixon	24:09
	and Ford, Arthur Burns,	24:12
	he wants to have his own Arthur Burns.	24:16
	That will require a change in legislation.	24:19
	Now, it's possible that Arthur Burns	24:22
	could voluntarily step down,	24:24
	resign as chairman on the occasion	24:27
	of the new man taking office.	24:30
	I believe that Reagan has said he wants	24:34
	to have Alan Greenspan	24:37
	if he is elected.	24:38
	He hasn't said anything about Arthur Burns	24:40
	whether he wants him	24:41
	but my guess is that Arthur Burns	24:42
	is a pretty good diplomat	24:46
	and that he will find himself not in the bad graces	24:47
	of the Democratic economists.	24:52
-	Speaking of the Fed,	24:55
	our monetary managers seem	24:57
	to have stopped the overly rapid growth	24:59
	of the money supply in the last week or so.	25:03
	What do you think of this development?	25:05
-	I'd like to put the matter more coolly.	25:07
	The rate of growth of money supply	25:13
	which has shown some tendency to leap forward	25:15
	at a very rapid rate	25:18
	has shown some tendency just in the last couple weeks	25:19
	to moderate and I think the Federal Reserve's	25:22
	raising interest rates has had a little bit to do with that	25:27
	but there's an awful lot of luck	25:31
	given they way they run the open market	25:32
	that this has happened.	25:34
	It's the kind of luck that Wall Street likes	25:35
	because as you've noticed,	25:37
	the stock market has taken heart	25:39
	now that the ambiguity about whether Carter	25:43
	would be the nominee or not is removed that,	25:47
	was taken constructive sign by the stock market	25:49
	and this market for several years now	25:52
	seems to find it extremely difficult	25:57
	ever to cope with rising interest rates.	26:00
	So, any sign that interest rates are stabilizing,	26:02
	or even falling have been interpreted	26:04
	by the bulls in Wall Street	26:07
	as something very much in their side	26:09
	and I dare say that there are short-terms traders	26:11
	who have been making money	26:15
	on that formula, when interest rates level off, buy,	26:16
	when they go up, sell.	26:21
-	Is not the stock market almost monitorist	26:23
	in its economics these days?	26:27
	I have the feeling that they follow the money figures	26:28
	with the great fascination.	26:31
-	In order to predict what's going to happen	26:33
	to interest rates which is so important	26:37
	to know what's gonna happen for stocks,	26:40
	they say to themselves,	26:43
	now what if I were a jackass	26:45
	and were lost and see that the money supply	26:50
	has increased by this much	26:56
	and I believe that you must have a stable money supply.	26:58
	What would I do from this?	27:01
	I would conclude that the money supply	27:02
	is gonna go down willy nilly	27:03
	'cause they're gonna do everything possible.	27:05
	So, when people on Wall Street say I'm not a monitorist	27:08
	but there are other people out there	27:10
	who are monitorist	27:11
	and the Federal Reserve is very sensitive	27:12
	to criticisms of monitorists,	27:13
	so that's where the betting odds should go	27:15
	and it's not been a bad formula	27:19
	for predicting what subsequently will happen	27:22
	to interest rates and the rate of growth of money supply.	27:24
-	Thank you very much.	27:28
	We're keen to hear from subscribers	27:31
	who have questions for Professor Paul Samuelson	27:33
	or would like to suggest subjects	27:36
	for him to discuss.	27:38
	If so, please write to Instructional Dynamics Incorporated,	27:40
	415 East Ohio Street, Chicago, Illinois, 60611.	27:44

Item Info

Title:

Tape 201 - Rescue of British Pound; U.S. economic recovery slows; 1 1/2 cheers for Ford; Fed restrains money growth

Date:

June 1976

Contributor:

Samuelson, Paul A. (Paul Anthony), 1915-2009

Subject:

Format:

audiocassettes

Language:

English

Digital Collection:

Paul A. Samuelson papers, 1933-2010 and undated

Source Collection:

Paul A. Samuelson papers, 1933-2010

Series:

Economics Cassette Series: Paul Samuelson

Rights:

Limited Re-Use

CC BY-NC 4.0

Rights Note:

This material is made available for research, scholarship, and private study. Copyright in this material has not been transferred to Duke University. For reuses of this material beyond those permitted by fair use or otherwise allowed under the Copyright Act, please see our page on copyright and citations: https://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/research/citations-and-permissions.

Identifier:

RL10082-CS-0181
ref2503_1ry
samuelsonpaul
duke:325205
pstau001182
ark:/87924/r4dj58z8x
63d62809-e72b-40db-80d1-627edd474538

Permalink:

https://idn.duke.edu/ark:/87924/r4dj58z8x

Sponsor:

Sponsor this Digital Collection

Tape 201 - Rescue of British Pound; U.S. economic recovery slows; 1 1/2 cheers for Ford; Fed restrains money growth

Transcript

Item Info

Economists' Papers Archive

More Info & Options