Greenspan's legacy is called into question with the bursting of the housing bubble which he had not expected and the growth of subprime which he did little to slowdown. His libertarian spirits took a dogmatic view of free markets that said that the best approach was an handsoff one. This conflicted with the proper monitoring and supervision of rapid growth of subprime and the abuses that went on in the market for mortages and mortgage securities. He was also slow to raise rates after the rate cuts were down to as low as 1% which fueled the housing boom. Greenspan actually felt the borrowing on home equity loans for consumption was a good thing but failed to see the excesses in consumption spending and dangers of a negative savings rate. He felt that it was necessary to keep rates low to keep deflation from happening at that point in time. He was too complacent and in the position for too long to do the job well for so long. He was appointed by Reagan in 1987 and retired in 2005 three years ago in this role for 18 years. Could the Clinton or Bush administrations have chosen a fresh face who could have performed quite well and had to prove himself and not become complacent in a wave of adulation during good times? He argues that is decision making process was sound. This showed in the LTCM crisis and during the 9/11 crisis. But what went wrong were that his assumption about the goodness of human nature inherent in an innocent view of free market innovation where only the best happens ignores the possibilities of bad things happening when this innocent innovation is converted into a negative kind of innovation by human greed as happened in the mortgage securities market. And the lack of transparency that can creep in when a watchful eye is taken off the financial machinery and it is left all to its own devices as when these mortgage securities were made complex and dispersed in protfolios all over the global financial in places like Nordic towns in Arctic Norway as well as in far off places in Asia. So the basics: careful watchdog role, continually reassessing things like the patchwork of regulation that Secretary Paulson criticized recently fit for 10-20 years ago, getting interest rates right etc requires a good mind, some grace and a fresh face and energies that a man close to 80 years in 2005 after 18 years in the position got too complacent, overstayed and in the end made crucial errors of judgement and wisdom that his libertarian logic may have made all too easy. ...