Olá, Visitante. Por favor entre ou registe-se se ainda não for membro.

Entrar com nome de utilizador, password e duração da sessão
 

Autor Tópico: Krugman et al  (Lida 607316 vezes)

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #800 em: 2013-01-06 21:56:14 »
Lark, tenho tentado acompanhar, com interesse, o que tens postado...na medida das minhas capacidades...
Aceitando que não existe um precedente para afirmar que com impressão numa armadinha de liquidez não se dá a apregoada (hiper)inflação.
Sem precedente, como poderemos afirmar que o contrário é verdade?

não sei se percebi a pergunta mr K.

'sem precedente como poderemos afirmar que o contrário é verdade?'

a afirmação é:

num contexto de armadilha de liquidez, o aumento da massa monetária não provoca inflação.

o contrário seria:

no contexto de uma armadilha de liquidez o aumento da massa monetária provoca inflação.

precisamente este 'contrário', a negação do postulado antecedente, não se verifica. a inflação já teria surgido há muito tempo. desde 2008 que andamos a falar disto.
e a inflação teima em não aparecer.
algum dia havemos de sair da armadilha de liquidez. nessa altura será necessário reduzir a massa monetária de forma a que não se instale uma inflação maligna - considero benigno algo entre 2 e 6%.
sobre isso estamos fartos de sabr como fazer. há montes de precedentes. não me preocupa nada.


Por outro lado, na europa e na via da austeridade (sem impressão), também não parecem haver muitos sinais de deflação.
Outro aspecto que já referiste, o dólar não é uma moeda igual às outras. O dólar é a moeda do petroleo dos cereais, etc etc.
Será que a mesma impressão na europa não derreteria completamente o euro?

na europa há sinais de deflação. e agudíssima! nos países periféricos!
os credores experimentam um crescimento e uma inflação benignos, os devedores experimentam uma recessão e deflação malignas.
a mesma impressão na europa afectaria menos o euro do que afecta presentemente o USD. o euro é uma moeda que tende a apreciar-se, já que não está ligado a um banco central de uma estado-nação. também por isso a crise economica tem sido mais severa na europa. é mais difícil desvalorizar o euro que o USD. e sempre será.
logo, o aumento da massa monetária na europa é muito menos indutivo de inflação do que nos US. na minha opinião, claro.

L

PS: antes tarde do que nunca
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Kin2010

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 3989
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #801 em: 2013-01-06 22:30:22 »
Questiono que se diga que os países PIIGS como Portugal estejam em deflacção. Não se vê descida generalizada de preços. Nem mesmo de salários. O que se viu foi alguma deflacção de salários dos FPs e de pensões e tb alguma deflacção, moderada, dos preços dos imóveis e rendas e tb deflacção, essa sim, forte de serviços não transaccionáveis como massagens, cabeleireiros, etc.

Em contrapartida, os salários do sector privado não desceram nada, os preços dos combustíveis,  electricidade, gás, transportes públicos, portagens, e utilities em geral, continuam a subir, os preços dos produtos de 1ª necessidade estão estáveis ou a subir (o café subiu de novo na minha rua, 5 cêntimos em 1 de Janeiro).

E os impostos sempre a subir claro, e isso faz subir os preços.

Muitos artigos usam o termo "deflationary spiral" para descrever os PIIGS, mas acho uma expressão incorrecta.

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #802 em: 2013-01-06 22:41:44 »
bom, se é pelo cheiro que lá vais, tu é que sabes
abaixo fica um gráfico da inflação portuguesa dos últimos dez anos.

em 2010 vê-se um vale deflacionário bem evidente.
a subida subsequente tem a ver com as subidas de impostos.

quando a comparação YoY já não incluír as subidas de impostos o próximo vale vai ser muito mais cavado que o anterior.

L
« Última modificação: 2013-01-06 22:42:16 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Kin2010

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 3989
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #803 em: 2013-01-06 22:50:11 »
Houve deflacção de uns 1-2% ao ano só em 2009. Agora não se está a ver. Poderá aparecer este ano, mas aposto que será assim também pequena. Daí que me parece inadequado dizer que já está instalada uma "deflationary death spiral" como tantas vezes escrevem no Daily Telegraph, etc.

Ok, estas economias estão muito mal, mas é melhor descrever isso evitando essa expressão.

kitano

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 8677
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #804 em: 2013-01-06 22:58:51 »

PS: antes tarde do que nunca

Thank you Mr. L
"Como seria viver a vida que realmente quero?"

itg00022289

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 2332
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #805 em: 2013-01-07 10:54:34 »
Fica bem neste tópico.
Um artigo bastante citado, "Growth in a Time of Debt" de Kenneth Rogoff e Carmen Reinhart em que defendem que, quando a dívida pública supera os 90% do PIB, os países registam um crescimento económico mais lento.

http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/51_Growth_in_Time_Debt_aer.pdf

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #806 em: 2013-01-07 15:07:21 »
Why Paul Krugman should be President Obama's pick for US treasury secretary
Not only is he the world's best-known economist, Krugman has the intellect and integrity to resist Wall Street's calls for austerity


Paul Krugman: 'The rich are different from you and me: they have more influence.

President Obama hasn't picked a treasury secretary yet for his second term, so he has a chance to do something different.

He could ignore what Wall Street and conservative media interests want and pick somebody who would represent what the electorate voted for. And not even just the people who voted for him: there are a lot of Republican voters out there who are also unemployed.

I know what you are thinking: this is impossible. There is too much money and power on the other side of this idea. Well, maybe.

But Obama has surprised us before. Last June, he picked Jim Kim to run the World Bank. This was unprecedented and an historic change; Kim is practically the only World Bank president in 60 years who was not previously a banker or a war criminal. On the contrary, Kim had spent most of his entire adult life trying to help poor people get healthcare.

Now, of course, the World Bank is not a cabinet appointment, but there is a lot of money that flows from that supposedly multilateral institution to the coffers of US corporations. You can bet that Jim Kim was not their top choice.

Obama is currently coming under heavy fire for his reported choice of former Senator Chuck Hagel to be defense secretary. Hagel wants to get out of Afghanistan soon, does not want a war with Iran, favors negotiations with Hamas, and supports cuts in military spending.

Not only the neo-conservatives, but some of the most powerful interests in the country, including the right wing of the pro-Israel lobby, have launched a smear campaign. But so far, Obama has not backed down. This could have something to do with the fact that he no longer has to run for re-election.

So, for the post of treasury secretary, to replace the outgoing Tim Geithner, Obama could afford to make another bold choice: Paul Krugman.

Krugman would be tough to oppose on any substantive grounds. He has a Nobel Prize in economics (also the John Bates Clark award for best economist under 40). The New York Times columnist is probably the best-known living economist in the United States, and perhaps the world.

Krugman has been right about the major problems facing our economy, where many other economists and much of the business press have been wrong. A few examples: he wrote about the housing bubble before it collapsed and caused the Great Recession; he has forecast and explained that large budget deficits and trillions of dollars of "quantitative easing" (money creation) would not cause inflation or long-term interest rates to rise; and that the "confidence fairies" would not reward governments that pursued austerity in the face of recession.

Most importantly, Krugman is on the side of the majority of Americans. He has written extensively in favor of policies that favor job creation, explained the folly of budget cutting in the face of a weak economy, and opposes cuts to social security and Medicare benefits.

After all, why should the secretary of the treasury have to prioritize the interests of Wall Street and the "criminal enterprise" of big finance, as Charles Ferguson, academy award-winning film-maker and political scientist, describes it.

The US treasury secretary also has an important influence on the rest of the world, as the most powerful force within the IMF, G20, and G7 groupings. Krugman has written extensively about the stupidity of the last few years of economic policy in Europe, which has been a major drag on the whole world economy. The treasury secretary would have only limited influence on Europe through the IMF, but in developing countries the US treasury department pretty much is the IMF.

Imagine a treasury secretary who favored employment, poverty reduction and development, rather than unnecessary austerity, in developing countries.

The whole debate over economic policy in this country is taking place as though it exists in a fictional, upside-down world. With the federal government paying less than 1% of GDP in net interest on the debt, the lowest in more than 60 years, the loudest voices – backed by the biggest money – are daily trying to convince people and policy-makers that deficit reduction is our most important priority. This, despite the fact that most of them know that this will slow the economy and make it more difficult for the 22 million people who need work to find it.

It would be great to have a treasury secretary who can cut through all that crap. And since most of Wall Street's money went to Republican nominee Mitt Romney in the run-up to the November election, Obama doesn't owe anything to the people who crashed our economy and are now fighting to make senior citizens, working and poor people reduce their living standards.

The renowned actor and human rights activist Danny Glover has launched a petition to the president for him to nominate Paul Krugman for secretary of the treasury. It's worth signing.

fonte
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

hermes

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 2836
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #807 em: 2013-01-07 15:15:21 »
Tem o meu completo apoio!

Força, força companheiro Krugman!
"Everyone knows where we have been. Let's see where we are going." – Another

JAF

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 183
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #808 em: 2013-01-07 15:20:13 »

It’s true that printing money isn’t at all inflationary under current conditions — that is, with the economy depressed and interest rates up against the zero lower bound. But eventually these conditions will end. At that point, to prevent a sharp rise in inflation the Fed will want to pull back much of the monetary base it created in response to the crisis, which means selling off the Federal debt it bought. So even though right now that debt is just a claim by one more or less governmental agency on another governmental agency, it will eventually turn into debt held by the public.

We are living in weird economic times, where many of the usual rules don’t apply and there are big free lunches to be had. But not everything is a free lunch, even now. Sorry.

krugman


So me resta uma pequena duvida... e vão conseguir vende-la pelo preço que a compraram?

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #809 em: 2013-01-07 15:49:05 »
Be Ready To Mint That Coin

Should President Obama be willing to print a $1 trillion platinum coin if Republicans try to force America into default? Yes, absolutely. He will, after all, be faced with a choice between two alternatives: one that’s silly but benign, the other that’s equally silly but both vile and disastrous. The decision should be obvious.

For those new to this, here’s the story. First of all, we have the weird and destructive institution of the debt ceiling; this lets Congress approve tax and spending bills that imply a large budget deficit — tax and spending bills the president is legally required to implement — and then lets Congress refuse to grant the president authority to borrow, preventing him from carrying out his legal duties and provoking a possibly catastrophic default.

And Republicans are openly threatening to use that potential for catastrophe to blackmail the president into implementing policies they can’t pass through normal constitutional processes.

Enter the platinum coin. There’s a legal loophole allowing the Treasury to mint platinum coins in any denomination the secretary chooses. Yes, it was intended to allow commemorative collector’s items — but that’s not what the letter of the law says. And by minting a $1 trillion coin, then depositing it at the Fed, the Treasury could acquire enough cash to sidestep the debt ceiling — while doing no economic harm at all.

So why not?

It’s easy to make sententious remarks to the effect that we shouldn’t look for gimmicks, we should sit down like serious people and deal with our problems realistically. That may sound reasonable — if you’ve been living in a cave for the past four years.Given the realities of our political situation, and in particular the mixture of ruthlessness and craziness that now characterizes House Republicans, it’s just ridiculous — far more ridiculous than the notion of the coin.

So if the 14th amendment solution — simply declaring that the debt ceiling is unconstitutional — isn’t workable, go with the coin.

This still leaves the question of whose face goes on the coin — but that’s easy: John Boehner. Because without him and his colleagues, this wouldn’t be necessary.

krugman
« Última modificação: 2013-01-07 15:49:34 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt


Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #811 em: 2013-01-08 22:19:06 »
Well, the trillion-dollar-coin thing — deal with the debt ceiling by exploiting a legal loophole to have the Treasury mint one or more large-denomination coins, deposit them at the Fed, and use the cash in the new account to pay bills — has really taken off. Last month I spoke with a senior Fed official who had never heard of the idea; these days it’s all over.

There seem to be two kinds of objections. One is that it would be undignified. Here’s how to think about that: we have a situation in which a terrorist may be about to walk into a crowded room and threaten to blow up a bomb he’s holding. It turns out, however, that the Secret Service has figured out a way to disarm this maniac — a way that for some reason will require that the Secretary of the Treasury briefly wear a clown suit. (My fictional plotting skills have let me down, but there has to be some way to work this in). And the response of the nervous Nellies is, “My god, we can’t dress the secretary up as a clown!” Even when it will make him a hero who saves the day?

The other objection is the apparently primordial fear that mocking the monetary gods will bring terrible retribution.

Joe Weisenthal says that the coin debate is the most important fiscal policy debate of our lifetimes; I agree, with two slight quibbles — it’s arguably more of a monetary than a fiscal debate, and it’s really part of the broader debate that has been going on ever since we entered the liquidity trap.

What the hysterics see is a terrible, outrageous attempt to pay the government’s bills out of thin air. This is utterly wrong, and in fact is wrong on two levels.

The first level is that in practice minting the coin would be nothing but an accounting fiction, enabling the government to continue doing exactly what it would have done if the debt limit were raised.

Remember that the coin is supposed to be deposited at the Fed, which is effectively just a semi-autonomous government agency. As the federal government proper drew on its new Fed account, the Fed would probably respond by selling off some of its $3 trillion balance sheet. In effect, the consolidated federal government, including the Fed, would be financing its operations by selling debt instruments, just as always.

But what if the Fed decided not to shrink its outside balance sheet? Even so, under current conditions it would make no difference — because we’re in a liquidity trap, with market interest rates on short-term federal debt near zero. Under these conditions, issuing short-term debt and just “printing money” (actually, crediting banks with additional reserves that they can convert into paper cash if they choose) are completely equivalent in their effect, so even huge increases in the monetary base (reserves plus cash) aren’t inflationary at all.

And if you’re tempted to deny this diagnosis, I have to ask, what would it take to convince you? The other side of this debate has been predicting runaway inflation for more than four years, as the monetary base has tripled. The same people predicted soaring interest rates from government borrowing. Meanwhile, the liquidity-trap people like me predicted what would actually happen: low inflation and low rates. This has to be the most decisive real-world test of opposing theories ever.

So minting the coin would be undignified, but so what? At the same time, it would be economically harmless — and would both avoid catastrophic economic developments and help head off government by blackmail.

What we all hope, of course, is that the prospect of the coin or some equivalent strategy will simply take the debt ceiling off the table. But if not, mint the darn coin.
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Kin2010

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 3989
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #812 em: 2013-01-09 03:26:00 »
Esta proposta não tem nada de essencialmente diferente do QE. É criar $$ do nada, embora tecnicamente haja algumas diferenças. Se aceitarmos que a Fed é, apesar de se dizer independente, um braço do governo, não parece haver diferença entre esta proposta e a Fed colocar a "1" uma curta série de bits, de forma a perfazer USD 1 trilião.

Um trilião é 10^12. Segundo os meus cálculos, se for convertido para binário, exige uma sequência de 40 bits para ser escrito... Portanto basta a Fed arranjar espaço em disco para esses 40 bits e cria esse 1 trilião! E sai mais barato do que uma moeda de platina.


hermes

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 2836
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #813 em: 2013-01-09 10:52:36 »
É ainda melhor que o QE, pois com este ainda há uma possibilidade da dívida ser paga, seja com o aumento de impostos, seja com a diminuição dos gastos do tio Sam, seja pedindo mais dinheiro emprestado.

Com esta moeda tudo é diferente, pois magicamente o tesouro cria um activo que vale 1012 dólares ficando desta forma 6.25% da dívida saldada. Tal é realmente de se comemorar e nada melhor que uma moeda comemorativa para comemorá-lo. Melhor ainda, com essencialmente o mesmo investimento, o tio Sam pode cunhar mais 15 moedas e assim saldar todas as suas dívidas tornando-se assim o governo mais creditworthy do planeta. Será digno de se ver a corrida desenfreada de todos os aforradores do mundo para imediatamente emprestarem o seu dinheiro ao então tão credityworthy tio Sam.
"Everyone knows where we have been. Let's see where we are going." – Another

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #814 em: 2013-01-09 10:59:42 »
até agora os aforradores têm-se atropelado para comprar a dívida do tio sam.
não obstante todas as profecias catastróficas feitas nos últimos 5/6 anos. bom, se contarmos com os libertários bota-lhe lá 30/40 anos.
os factos às vezes têm uma forma de ser pouco cooperantes com a nossa Weltanschauung

L
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

hermes

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 2836
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #815 em: 2013-01-09 11:13:32 »
Os chineses e japoneses parece que se estão a fazer caros:


Com um então tão creditworthy tio Sam, acho que ainda não viste nada.
"Everyone knows where we have been. Let's see where we are going." – Another

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #816 em: 2013-01-09 11:21:23 »
Os chineses e japoneses parece que se estão a fazer caros:


Com um então tão creditworthy tio Sam, acho que ainda não viste nada.


se fosse verdade as taxas sobre as obrigações americanas estariam a subir. o mercado exigiria maior yield para tão grande risco.
quais são os factos? as yields continuam em mínimos históricos. se não são os chineses nem os japoneses, alguém anda a comprar.
talvez os marcianos.

L
« Última modificação: 2013-01-09 11:21:41 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Incognitus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30961
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #817 em: 2013-01-09 11:23:35 »
Os chineses e japoneses parece que se estão a fazer caros:

 
Com um então tão creditworthy tio Sam, acho que ainda não viste nada.


se fosse verdade as taxas sobre as obrigações americanas estariam a subir. o mercado exigiria maior yield para tão grande risco.
quais são os factos? as yields continuam em mínimos históricos. se não são os chineses nem os japoneses, alguém anda a comprar.
talvez os marcianos.

L

 
A Fed é a maior compradora e vai a caminho de comprar todo o déficit.
"Nem tudo o que pode ser contado conta, e nem tudo o que conta pode ser contado.", Albert Einstein

Incognitus, www.thinkfn.com

hermes

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 2836
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #818 em: 2013-01-09 11:28:46 »
Os chineses e japoneses parece que se estão a fazer caros:


Com um então tão creditworthy tio Sam, acho que ainda não viste nada.


se fosse verdade as taxas sobre as obrigações americanas estariam a subir. o mercado exigiria maior yield para tão grande risco.
quais são os factos? as yields continuam em mínimos históricos. se não são os chineses nem os japoneses, alguém anda a comprar.
talvez os marcianos.

L


Para o tipo de informação supramencionada ainda dou alguma credebilidade à Businessweek e à Bloomberg. Não dou assim grande credebilidade é à hipótese dos marcianos.
"Everyone knows where we have been. Let's see where we are going." – Another

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Krugman et al
« Responder #819 em: 2013-01-09 11:32:48 »
Os chineses e japoneses parece que se estão a fazer caros:


Com um então tão creditworthy tio Sam, acho que ainda não viste nada.


se fosse verdade as taxas sobre as obrigações americanas estariam a subir. o mercado exigiria maior yield para tão grande risco.
quais são os factos? as yields continuam em mínimos históricos. se não são os chineses nem os japoneses, alguém anda a comprar.
talvez os marcianos.

L


Para o tipo de informação supramencionada ainda dou alguma credebilidade à Businessweek e à Bloomberg. Não dou assim grande credebilidade é à hipótese dos marcianos.


não disse que era falso. disse que se não são os chineses nem os japoneses, alguém a continua a comprar uma vez que as yields continuam em mínimos históricos.

liquidity trap anyone?
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt