PrisonPlanet Forum

***THE MAIN BOARDS - Welcome to the Prison Planet Educational Forum and Library*** => PhD Investigative Reports (only for the hardcore) => Topic started by: Dig on November 30, 2007, 07:29:24 am

Title: The Bernanke Brief
Post by: Dig on November 30, 2007, 07:29:24 am
Erin Burnett, the young new fresh "money honey" that spends weekends in Dubai has already been dropping the info.

This is the same Dubai that has just bailed out Citibank.

Rockefeller/Rothschild is going directly for the dollar - full steam ahead.

They have lost all sanity.

They are forcing the lower class into the gutters and the middle class into the streets.

This is a theft, there is nothing else about it.

Theft, raping and pilaging from the American Citizens.
Title: Re: Bernanke has been given orders to drop the discount by 50 points!
Post by: websuspect on November 30, 2007, 07:56:41 am
He will have to quadruple printing money.

It will be hard to force me out on the streets as I own my house, and the Ammo stockpile in it.
Title: Re: Bernanke has been given orders to drop the discount by 50 points!
Post by: Dig on November 30, 2007, 08:00:47 am
He will have to quadruple printing money.

It will be hard to force me out on the streets as I own my house, and the Ammo stockpile in it.

say it loud, say it proud brother!
Title: Re: Bernanke has been given orders to drop the discount by 50 points!
Post by: NOT A TERRORIST on November 30, 2007, 01:33:27 pm
Americans have un-evolved to such a stupid sence of reality, theyre wayy to fearful of everything  and  way to dumbed down to survive without the convinence of their high standard of living
Title: Re: Bernanke has been given orders to drop the discount by 50 points!
Post by: Biggs on November 30, 2007, 03:43:00 pm
they were saying too that traders expect a 162% chance of a 25bps cut in the headline rate at the December meeting of the FOMC, which means a chance of a 50bp cut (0.5%)

that would really tank the dollar.
Title: Re: Bernanke has been given orders to drop the discount by 50 points!
Post by: sid on November 30, 2007, 06:19:10 pm
Oh, don't concern yourself with it.

They're just bailing out the rich.

And enslaving the rest of us.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjnvSQuv-H4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjnvSQuv-H4)
Title: Re: Bernanke has been given orders to drop the discount by 50 points!
Post by: New Whirled Order on November 30, 2007, 10:05:59 pm
Bernanke was on the new Fox Business channel yesterday evening giving a speech from Charlotte, NC.  I didn't catch all of it, but while he was speaking the caption on the screen said:

Greater Than Unusual Uncertainty For U.S. Economy

Gang, there's just no way to spin a phrase like that.  I believe we are in a whole LOT of trouble during the coming months/years.     

 
Title: F**k you Bernanke!
Post by: Dig on December 15, 2007, 01:36:16 am
Ron Paul v. Bernanke Re-re-remix!
(http://img.youtube.com/vi/9rtzRCthF_8/2.jpg)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rtzRCthF_8
Title: Re: F**k you Bernanke!
Post by: Dig on December 15, 2007, 01:42:31 am
Chicago Traders Cheer Ron Paul On As He Tears Into Bernanke
(http://img.youtube.com/vi/R1eMwmriO2E/default.jpg)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8GtXKP6bmQ
Title: Re: F**k you Bernanke!
Post by: NEPB on December 15, 2007, 06:11:41 am
Ahh, sh!i!t yeah. TYTE POST.
Title: Bernanke says 2008 outlook worse.
Post by: Sub-X on January 10, 2008, 02:25:52 pm
Bernanke says 2008 outlook worse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7181922.stm
Thursday, 10 January 2008, 18:56 GMT

Federal Reserve chief Ben Bernanke has said that the outlook for the US economy in 2008 has worsened.
His comments in Washington come after leading investment banks warned that the US was heading for a recession.

However, Mr Bernanke said the central bank was willing to act in a decisive and timely manner to ensure the economy remained on an even keel.

The Fed has recently cut interest rates to counter slowing economic growth and problems in the housing market.

Substantive action

The bank has cut rates three times since last summer, most recently in December to 4.25% - the lowest level in two years.

During his speech on Thursday, Mr Bernanke said the Fed was prepared to "take substantive additional action as needed to support growth and to provide adequate insurance against downside risks".

Some analysts say this is tantamount to saying the bank is prepared to cut interest rates again when it next meets at the end of this month.

David Resler, chief economist at Nomura Securities International said Mr Bernanke's remarks came as little surprise.

"It is probably likely to solidify expectations...that the Fed will (cut rates by) 50 basis points...now more people will think that way."

US stocks rose on the news as investors were buoyed by the prospect of future interest rate cuts. The Dow Jones Industrial Average added 89 points, or 0.7%, at 12, 824.3 in afternoon trade in New York reversing its earlier fall at the start of the day.

Housing

The US is facing the twin threat of how to tackle a slowing housing market and lower consumer spending while at the same time addressing inflation as the rising oil price pushes energy prices up.

Mr Bernanke highlighted the effect the sub-prime mortgage crisis is having on the wider economy.

With banks having had to write off billions of dollars of investments linked to sub-prime debt - that taken out by people on low wages or with bad credit histories - so this has made them reluctant to lend, limiting the availability of credit, Mr Bernanke explained.

He added that the financial situation "remains fragile, and many markets remain impaired," adding that much uncertainty remained about the exposure of major banks to the credit crisis.

He also cited high oil prices as a problem and one that could further dent consumer spending.

Earlier this week, Merrill Lynch controversially said the US had already entered a recession, while Goldman Sachs has also suggested it is heading in that direction.

The problems began when the booming housing market began to cool about two years ago as a result of a rapid increase in interest rates to a six-year high of 5.25% last year, which made home loan repayments more expensive.

This hit sub-prime borrowers particularly hard and sparked a record number of late payments and mortgage defaults.
Title: Re: Bernanke says 2008 outlook worse.
Post by: larsonstdoc on January 10, 2008, 02:39:31 pm
   

        Bob Chapman on the Alex Jones Show today (1-10-08) (hrs 2 and 3) said that the financial people have lost control of the economy.

                        http://theinternationalforecaster.com/
Title: LIVE: Bernanke, Cox, Paulson on C-SPAN 3
Post by: Dig on February 14, 2008, 09:50:38 am
Here it is, the three lying traitors burning your dollars by the second...

http://c-span.org

C-SPAN3
Title: Bernanke Says Economic Outlook Is Worse
Post by: hellcatjr on February 14, 2008, 10:39:01 am
Bernanke Says Economic Outlook Is Worse
Thursday February 14, 11:25 am ET
By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer
Fed Chairman Bernanke Says Nation's Business Prospects Have Deteriorated

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told Congress Thursday that the country's economic outlook has deteriorated and signaled that the central bank is ready to keep on lowering a key interest rate -- as needed -- to shore things up.

ADVERTISEMENT
In remarks to the Senate Banking Committee, Bernanke said the one-two punch of the housing and credit crises has greatly strained the economy. Hiring has slowed and people are likely to tighten their belts further, as they are pinched by high energy prices and watch the value of their single biggest asset -- their homes -- weaken, he warned.

"The outlook for the economy has worsened in recent months, and the downside risks to growth have increased," Bernanke said. "To date, the largest economic effects of the financial turmoil appear to have been on the housing market, which, as you know, has deteriorated significantly over the past two years or so." Bernanke also said that the "virtual shutdown" of the market for subprime mortgages -- given to people with blemished credit histories or low incomes -- and a reluctance by skittish lenders to make "jumbo" home loans exceeding $417,000 have aggravated problems in the housing market.

Unsold homes have piled up and foreclosures have climbed to record highs.

"Further cuts in homebuilding and in related activities are likely," Bernanke cautioned.

Given all the dangers facing the economy, the Fed "will act in a timely manner as needed to support growth and to provide adequate insurance against downside risks," he said, indicating additional rate cuts were likely.

Bernanke appeared with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Christopher Cox, chairman of the Security and Exchange Commission, amid increasing concerns that the economy may be drifting into recession.

The troubles in the housing and credit markets threaten to push the economy into its first recession since 2001 -- if it hasn't fallen into one already.

Bernanke and Paulson didn't speak of a recession, noting that their forecasts still call for growth, albeit slow growth. However, the Fed and the Bush administration are expected to downgrade their economic forecasts for this year, given all the troubles, Bernanke and Paulson said.

"It would be less, but I do believe we'll keep growing," Paulson told the panel. Bernanke said the Fed's new forecast out next week will "show lower projections of growth ....growth looks to be weak, but still positive."

On Wall Street, Bernanke's bearish assessment of the economy pulled stocks lower. The Dow Jones industrials lost nearly 100 points in morning trading.

The Federal Reserve, which started lowering a key interest rate in September, recently turned much more aggressive. Over the span of just eight days in January, it slashed rates by 1.25 percentage points -- the biggest one-month rate reduction in a quarter-century. Economists and Wall Street investors believe the Fed will cut rates even more at its next meeting in March and probably again in April.

"Our economy is clearly in trouble," said the committee's chairman, Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn. Restoring investor and consumer confidence, he said, is critical "if we are going to get back on our feet again."

Bernanke said his forecast is for the economy to continue to endure a "period of sluggish growth." That would be "followed by a somewhat stronger pace of growth starting later this year" as the effects of the Fed's rate cuts and a newly enacted stimulus package begin to be felt. The $168 billion package, which includes rebates for people and tax breaks for businesses, was speedily passed by Congress last week and signed into law on Wednesday by President Bush.

Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., though, believed the energizing impact of the rebates would be "negligible" and likened it to "pouring a glass of water into the ocean."

Even though Bernanke's forecast envisions an improving economic picture later this year, the Fed chief said it was nonetheless "important to recognize that downside risks to growth remain, including the possibilities that the housing market or the labor market may deteriorate to an extent beyond that currently anticipated" or that credit will become even harder to secure.

That's why, for now, Bernanke indicated the Fed is still inclined to lower interest rates.

Yet, that could change, depending on how the economy and inflation unfold.

"A critical task for the Federal Reserve over the course of this year will be to assess whether the stance of monetary policy is properly calibrated to foster our mandated objectives" of promoting healthy employment and economic growth while keeping inflation under control.

Inflation should moderate, Bernanke said. Yet last year's steep run-up in oil prices is a reminder that the Fed can't let down its inflation guard and must keep close tabs on the inflation expectations of investors, consumers and businesses. Those expectations can affect their behavior, which can affect the economy.

"Any tendency of inflation expectations to become unmoored or for the Fed's inflation-fighting credibility to be eroded could greatly complicate" the Fed's job, he said.

Stimulus from the new rescue package also should help the faltering jobs market, Paulson said. He estimated that it would create "more than half a million jobs by the end of this year."

Meanwhile, the Bush administration's efforts to help homeowners at risk of losing their homes is paying off.

In the final three months of last year, more than 470,000 received help from the company servicing their mortgages and almost 30 percent of those received a loan modification, Paulson said.

Still, the secretary said more needs to be done. He called on Congress to revamp mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and modernize the Depression-era Federal Housing Administration. He also asked Congress to pass legislation that will allow states to issue tax-exempt bonds and use the proceeds to help struggling homeowners refinance into more affordable mortgages.

The SEC is exploring the role of ratings agencies in the meltdown of subprime mortgages, Cox said. Critics allege ratings agencies didn't adequately assess risk when assigning ratings to certain complex mortgage securities.

Cox said he expects to receive preliminary reports from the agency's examinations in the coming months and a final report in the early summer.

Bernanke and Paulson have been fighting to keep the economy afloat. Foreclosures have climbed to record highs, financial companies have racked up multibillion-dollar losses from soured mortgage investments, Wall Street has convulsed, and employers have turned cautious in their hiring. Payrolls in January fell by 17,000, the first nationwide job loss in more than four years.

Economic growth practically stalled in the final three months of last year, and some economists believe it may actually be contracting now. By one rough rule of thumb, a recession occurs when there are two consecutive quarters -- six straight months -- when the economy shrinks.

Federal Reserve: http://www.federalreserve.gov
Title: Bernanke Says Economic Outlook Is Worse
Post by: DCUBED on February 14, 2008, 11:29:44 am
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080214/congress_recession_threat.html?.v=28&printer=1

Bernanke Says Economic Outlook Is Worse

Fed Chairman Bernanke Says Nation's Business Prospects Have Deteriorated

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told Congress Thursday the economic outlook has deteriorated and signaled a readiness to keep on lowering a key interest rate to shore things up.

Bernanke also told the Senate Banking Committee that the one-two punch of housing and credit crises has greatly strained the economy. And he forecast sluggish growth in the near term. Bernanke also noted that hiring has slowed and that people are likely to tighten their belts further because of high energy prices and plummeting home values.

"The outlook for the economy has worsened in recent months, and the downside risks to growth have increased," Bernanke said. "To date, the largest economic effects of the financial turmoil appear to have been on the housing market, which, as you know, has deteriorated significantly over the past two years or so."

Bernanke also told senators that the "virtual shutdown" of the market for subprime mortgages given to people with blemished credit histories or low incomes -- and a reluctance by skittish lenders to make "jumbo" home loans exceeding $417,000 -- have aggravated problems in the housing market.

Unsold homes have piled up and foreclosures have climbed to record highs.

"Further cuts in homebuilding and in related activities are likely," Bernanke cautioned.

Given all the dangers facing the economy, he said, the Fed "will act in a timely manner as needed to support growth and to provide adequate insurance against downside risks." Bernanke indicated that additional rate cuts were likely. Still, he voiced hope that economic growth will improve later this year.

Bernanke's Hill appearance with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Christopher Cox, chairman of the Security and Exchange Commission, came amid escalating worry that the economy may be drifting into recession. The troubles in the housing and credit markets alone threaten to push the economy into its first recession since 2001 -- if it hasn't fallen into one already.

Bernanke and Paulson don't believe the country will fall into a recession. Their forecasts still call for growth, albeit slow growth, they said. However, pair did say Thursday that the administration and the Fed are expected to downgrade their economic forecasts for this year.

"It would be less, but I do believe we'll keep growing," Paulson said. Bernanke said a new Fed new forecast due next week will "show lower projections of growth ....growth looks to be weak, but still positive."

On Wall Street, Bernanke's bearish assessment pulled stocks lower. The Dow Jones industrials lost more than 100 points in morning trading.

The Federal Reserve, which started lowering a key interest rate in September, has recently turned much more aggressive. Over the span of just eight days in January, it slashed rates by 1.25 percentage points -- the biggest one-month rate reduction in a quarter-century. Economists and Wall Street investors believe the Fed will cut rates even more at its next meeting in March and probably again in April.

"Our economy is clearly in trouble," said the committee's chairman, Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn. Restoring investor and consumer confidence, he said, is critical "if we are going to get back on our feet again."

Bernanke said his forecast is for the economy to continue to endure a "period of sluggish growth." That would be "followed by a somewhat stronger pace of growth starting later this year" as the effects of the Fed's rate cuts and a newly enacted stimulus package begin to be felt. The $168 billion package, which includes rebates for people and tax breaks for businesses, was speedily passed by Congress last week and signed into law on Wednesday by President Bush.

Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., was skeptical, saying he thought the energizing impact of rebates would be "negligible" and likened the action to "pouring a glass of water into the ocean."

Even though Bernanke's forecast envisions an improving economic picture later this year, the Fed chief said it was nonetheless "important to recognize that downside risks to growth remain, including the possibilities that the housing market or the labor market may deteriorate to an extent beyond that currently anticipated" or that credit will become even harder to secure.

That's why, for now, Bernanke indicated the Fed is still inclined to lower interest rates.

Yet, that could change, depending on how the economy and inflation unfold.

"A critical task for the Federal Reserve over the course of this year will be to assess whether the stance of monetary policy is properly calibrated to foster our mandated objectives" of promoting healthy employment and economic growth while keeping inflation under control.

Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., criticized policymakers for what he believed was a too slow response to the housing crisis. "We count on those at the top ... to sound an alarm," during a crisis, he said. Instead, "what we got was a snooze button ... we've been behind the curve."

Noting spreading credit problems, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., asked whether policymakers underestimated the severity of the situation.

Replied Paulson: "It's one thing to identify a problem. It's another thing to know exactly what to do about it."

Meanwhile, the administration's efforts to help homeowners at risk of losing their homes is paying off.

Paulson said that in the final three months of last year, more than 470,000 homeowners got help from companies servicing their mortgages and almost 30 percent of those received a loan modification.
Title: Re: Bernanke Says Economic Outlook Is Worse
Post by: 2Revolutions on February 14, 2008, 12:01:21 pm
The Federal Reserve Chairman Says the Fed is Prepared to Cut Interest Rates Again

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/wireStory?id=4290447 (http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/wireStory?id=4290447)
Title: Re: Bernanke Says Economic Outlook Is Worse
Post by: sid on February 14, 2008, 02:45:15 pm
The Federal Reserve Chairman Says the Fed is Prepared to Cut Interest Rates Again

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/wireStory?id=4290447 (http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/wireStory?id=4290447)
Worked well for the Japanese, now didn't it?
Title: Bernanke's State of the Economy Speech: "You are all Dead Ducks"
Post by: bigron on February 17, 2008, 06:31:27 am
Bernanke's State of the Economy Speech:

"You are all Dead Ducks" 

By Mike Whitney

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19365.htm (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19365.htm)

16/02/08 "ICH" -- - Even veteran Fed-watchers were caught off-guard by Chairman Bernanke's performance before the Senate Banking Committee on Thursday. Bernanke was expected to make routine comments on the state of the economy but, instead, delivered a 45 minute sermon detailing the afflictions of the foundering financial system. The Senate chamber was stone-silent throughout. The gravity of the situation is finally beginning to sink in.

 For the most part, the pedantic Bernanke looked uneasy; alternately biting his lower lip or staring ahead blankly like a man who just watched his poodle get run over by a Mack truck. As it turns out, Bernanke has plenty to worry about, too. Consumer confidence has dropped to levels not seen since the 1970s recession, real estate has gone off a cliff, credit-brushfires are breaking out everywhere, and the stock market continues to gyrate erratically. No wonder the Fed-chief looked more like a deck-hand on the Lusitania than the monetary-czar of the most powerful country on earth.

   Bernanke's prepared remarks were delivered with the solemnity of a priest performing Vespers. But he was clear, unlike his predecessor, Greenspan, who loved speaking in hieroglyphics.

Bernanke: "As you know, financial markets in the United States and in a number of other industrialized countries have been under considerable strain since late last summer. Heightened investor concerns about the credit quality of mortgages, especially subprime mortgages with adjustable interest rates, triggered the financial turmoil. However, other factors, including a broader retrenchment in the willingness of investors to bear risk, difficulties in valuing complex or illiquid financial products, uncertainties about the exposures of major financial institutions to credit losses, and concerns about the weaker outlook for the economy, have also roiled the financial markets in recent months.”

   Yes, of course. The banks are ailing from their subprime investments while Europe is sinking fast from $500 billion in unsellable asset-backed garbage. The whole system is clogged with crappy paper and deteriorating collateral. Now there are problems popping up in auction rate sales and the normally-safe municipal bonds. The whole financial Tower of Babel is cracking at the foundation. 

  Bernanke continues:  "Money center banks and other large financial institutions have come under significant pressure to take onto their own balance sheets the assets of some of the off-balance-sheet investment vehicles that they had sponsored. Bank balance sheets have swollen further as a consequence of the sharp reduction in investor willingness to buy securitized credits, which has forced banks to retain a substantially higher share of previously committed and new loans in their own portfolios. Banks have also reported large losses, reflecting marked declines in the market prices of mortgages and other assets that they hold. Recently, deterioration in the financial condition of some bond insurers has led some commercial and investment banks to take further markdowns and has added to strains in the financial markets."

Bernanke sounds more like an Old Testament prophet reading passages from the Book of Revelations than a Central Banker. But what he says is true; even without the hair-shirt. The humongous losses at the investment banks have forced them to go trolling for capital in Asia and the Middle East just to stay afloat. And, when they succeed, they're forced to pay excessively high rates of interest. The true cost of capital is skyrocketing. That's why the banks are protecting their liquidity and cutting back on new loans. Most of the banks have also tightened lending standards which is slowing down the issuance of credit and threatens to push the economy into a deep recession. When banks cramp-up; the overall economy shrinks. It's just that simple; no credit, no growth. Credit is the lubricant that keeps the capitalist locomotive chugging-along. When it dwindles, the system screeches to a halt.

 

"DOWNSIDE RISKS TO GROWTH HAVE INCREASED"

 

  Bernanke again: "In part as the result of the developments in financial markets, the outlook for the economy has worsened in recent months, and the downside risks to growth have increased. To date, the largest economic effects of the financial turmoil appear to have been on the housing market, which, as you know, has deteriorated significantly over the past two years or so. The virtual shutdown of the subprime mortgage market and a widening of spreads on jumbo mortgage loans have further reduced the demand for housing, while foreclosures are adding to the already-elevated inventory of unsold homes. Further cuts in homebuilding and in related activities are likely.....Conditions in the labor market have also softened. Payroll employment, after increasing about 95,000 per month on average in the fourth quarter, declined by an estimated 17,000 jobs in January. Employment in the construction and manufacturing sectors has continued to fall, while the pace of job gains in the services industries has slowed. The softer labor market, together with factors including higher energy prices, lower equity prices, and declining home values, seem likely to weigh on consumer spending in the near term."

 

So, let's summarize. The banks are battered by their massive subprime liabilities. Housing is in the tank. Manufacturing is down. Food and energy are up. Unemployment is rising. And consumer spending has shriveled to the size of an acorn. All that's missing is a trumpet blast and the arrival of the Four Horseman.

 How is it that Bernanke's economic post-mortem never made its way into the major media? Is there some reason the real state of the economy is being concealed from 'we the people'? 

Bernanke continues: "On the inflation front, a key development over the past year has been the steep run-up in the price of oil. Last year, food prices also increased exceptionally rapidly by recent standards, and the foreign exchange value of the dollar weakened. ...(If) inflation expectations to become unmoored or for the Fed's inflation-fighting credibility to be eroded could greatly complicate the task of sustaining price stability and reduce the central bank's policy flexibility to counter shortfalls in growth in the future."

  Right. So, if the Fed's rate-cutting strategy doesn't work and the economic troubles persist (and prices continue to go through the roof) then we're S.O.L. (sh** out of luck)  because the Fed has no more arrows in its quiver. It's rate cuts or death. Great. So, we can expect Bernanke to hack away at rates until they're down to 1% or lower (duplicating the downturn in Japan) hoping that the economy shows some sign of life before it takes two full wheelbarrows of greenbacks to buy a quart of milk and a few seed-potatoes.

 Sounds like a plan!

  We don't blame Bernanke. He's been remarkably straightforward from the very beginning and deserves credit. He's simply left with the thankless task of mopping up the ocean of red ink left behind by Greenspan. It's not his fault. He should be applauded for dispelling the decades-long illusion that a nation can borrow its way to prosperity or that chronic indebtedness is the same as real wealth. It's not; and the bill has finally come due.

 Of course, now that the low-interest speculative orgy is over; there's bound to be a painful unwind of hyper-inflated assets, falling home prices, tumbling stock markets, increased unemployment, and a generalized credit-contraction throughout the real economy. Ouch.  Who said it was going to be easy?

Bernanke's summation:

  "At present, my baseline outlook involves a period of sluggish growth, followed by a somewhat stronger pace of growth starting later this year as the effects of monetary and fiscal stimulus begin to be felt....It is important to recognize that downside risks to growth remain, including the possibilities that the housing market or the labor market may deteriorate to an extent beyond that currently anticipated, or that credit conditions may tighten substantially further."

  (Editor's translation) "Discount everything I've said here today if the economy blows up---as I fully-expect it will---from decades of regulatory neglect and the myriad multi-trillion dollar Ponzi-schemes which have put the entire financial system at risk of a major heart attack".

   Bernanke's candor is admirable, but it is little relief for the people who will have to soldier-on through the hard times ahead. Perhaps, next time he could spare us all the lengthly oratory and just forward a brief cablegram to Congress saying something like this: 

  "We are deeply sorry, but we have totally fu**ed up your economy with our monetary hanky-panky. You are all in very deep Doo-doo. Prepare for the worst."

     our sincerest regrets, 

                  the Fed

Title: McCain Says Bernanke Should Have Reduced Interest Rates Faster
Post by: DCUBED on February 17, 2008, 01:30:11 pm
 http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080217/pl_bloomberg/anqlpebuvhau

McCain Says Bernanke Should Have Reduced Interest Rates Faster

 Feb. 17 (Bloomberg) -- Republican presidential candidate John McCain said Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke should have been quicker to cut interest rates to try to avert a recession.

``I personally would have liked to have seen those rate cuts earlier,'' McCain said today on ABC's ``This Week with George Stephanopoulos.'' ``That doesn't mean I want him fired, it doesn't mean I've lost confidence,'' McCain said.

McCain, the Republican front-runner for the party's nomination, said that if elected, he would consider Bernanke's reappointment when his term is up in 2010.

Traders anticipate the Fed will cut rates a further half- point by March 18, after 2.25 percentage points of reductions since September. Fed officials lowered the overnight lending rate between banks by a half-point to 3 percent Jan. 30, after an emergency 75 basis-point reduction Jan. 22.

McCain, an Arizona senator, said the U.S. economy is ``very close'' to a recession.

Asked how his administration would differ from President George W. Bush's, McCain said he would do more to eliminate earmarks proposed by Congress, and he supports mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions through a cap-and-trade system, which Bush opposes.

$35 Billion

He said Bush allowed $35 billion in funding for pet projects, called earmarks, to be included in the budget over the last two year, money McCain said he would have cut.

McCain also pledged not to raise taxes if elected.

``No new taxes,'' McCain said. ``I could see an argument, if our economy continues to deteriorate, for lower interest rates, lower tax rates, and certainly decreasing corporate tax rates, which are the second-highest in the world.''

McCain said he also supports reducing government spending.

``Spending restraint is why our base is not energized,'' he said. ``Spending restraint is why we are having to borrow money from China.''

McCain said that as president he would seek congressional approval for any long-term accord to keep U.S. troops in Iraq. He also promised to consult with Congress before launching an attack on Iran, except in a ``dire emergency'' that would require immediate action.

``We have to have more of a partnership with the Congress. We have to have more consultation,'' McCain said.

Bush is negotiating a long-term military peacekeeping agreement with Iraq. The White House has said such status-of- forces agreements do not require congressional approval.

``It wouldn't bother me to bring it to the Congress,'' McCain said, taking aim at Democrats' efforts to set a timetable for withdrawal of troops. ``The issue takes care of itself when we succeed. I still say setting a date for withdrawal is chaos, genocide, and we'll be back, because al-Qaeda will then succeed.''
Title: Re: McCain Says Bernanke Should Have Reduced Interest Rates Faster
Post by: Noel Degrassi on February 17, 2008, 02:02:02 pm
McCain couldn't balance his checkbook. :-\
Title: Bernanke signals another rate cut
Post by: hellcatjr on February 27, 2008, 01:49:10 pm
Bernanke signals another rate cut
By JEANNINE AVERSA,
AP Economics Writer 
1 hour, 40 minutes ago 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080227/ap_on_bi_ge/bernanke_congress

By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer 1 hour, 40 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke warned Congress that the nation is in for a period of sluggish business growth and sent a fresh signal Wednesday that interest rates will again be lowered to steady the teetering economy.

"The economic situation has become distinctly less favorable" since the summer, the Fed chief told the House Financial Services Committee.

Since Bernanke's last such comprehensive assessment last summer, the housing slump has worsened, credit problems have intensified and the job market has deteriorated. Bernanke said the confluence of these events has turned people and businesses alike toward a more cautious attitude about spending and investment. This, he said, has further weakened the economy.

Incoming barometers continue to "suggest sluggish economic activity in the near term," Bernanke told lawmakers. At the same time, he added, the Fed must keep a close eye on inflation given the recent run-up in energy and other prices paid by consumers and businesses.

Were energy prices to continue to rise at a sharp clip — which the Fed doesn't anticipate — it would "create a very difficult problem" for the economy. It would spread inflation and would put another damper on growth, Bernanke said. If that happened, he added, it would be a "very tough situation."

For now though, the No. 1 battle is shoring up the economy, and Bernanke pledged anew to slice a key interest rate to help a struggling economy that many fear is on the verge of a recession — or possibly already in one.

The Fed "will act in a timely manner as needed to support growth and to provide adequate insurance against downside risks," Bernanke said, hewing closely to assurances he offered earlier this month.

The central bank, which started lowering a key interest rate in September, has recently turned much more aggressive. Over the span of just eight days in January, it slashed rates by 1.25 percentage points — the biggest one-month reduction in a quarter century. Economists and Wall Street investors predict the Fed will cut rates again at its next meeting on March 18.

As Bernanke began his first day of back-to-back appearances on Capitol Hill to discuss the economy, there was more bad news on the housing and manufacturing fronts. Sales of new homes fell in January for a third straight month and orders to factories for big-ticket manufactured goods dropped in January by the largest amount in five months.

On Wall Street, stocks fluctuated at first, then moved higher after the release of Bernanke's prepared comments.

Bernanke was hopeful that previous rate reductions along with a $168 billion stimulus package of tax rebates for people and tax breaks for business would energize the economy in the second half of this year.

Bernanke has come under some criticism for not acting sooner in cutting rates to respond to the economy's problems. However, Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., offered the Fed chief some sympathy. "There is perhaps no other public figure in American who has been subjected to as much Monday morning quarterbacking as you have over the past six months," Bachus said.

The panel's chairman, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., suggested that the economy is not suffering through a garden-variety slowdown.

"I don't want to appeal to you to use the word recession, because I'm not going to be responsible for the nervous people at the stock market who overreact when you twitch your nose," Frank told Bernanke. "But the problems we now have are different."

Much of the current problems can be traced to the housing meltdown. Asked when the housing market might stabilize, Bernanke thought it possible that by "later this year it will stop being such a big drag directly" on the economy. However, house prices probably will decline into next year, he added.

"It is very difficult to know, and we've been wrong before," Bernanke said.

Even as the Fed tries to shore up the economy, it must remain mindful of inflation pressures, Bernanke said.

Record high oil prices — topping $100 a barrel — are pushing consumer prices upward. That's shrinking paychecks, and with people feeling less well off because the values of their homes have dropped, consumer spending "slowed significantly" toward the end of the year, he said.

The Fed forecasts that inflation will moderate this year compared with last year. But the Fed's recently revised inflation projection of an increase between 2.1 percent and 2.4 percent is higher than its old forecast from the fall.

"Should high rates of overall inflation persist," Bernanke said, "the possibility also exists that inflation expectations could become less well anchored." If people think inflation is escalating, they'll act in ways that could make things even worse, a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy. And Bernanke said that could complicate the Fed's job of trying to nurture economic growth while also keeping inflation under control.

If oil prices continue to skyrocket this year, it would be "hard to maintain low inflation," Bernanke acknowledged.

With the economy slowing and prices rising, fears are growing that the country could be headed for a bout of stagflation, a dangerous economic brew not seen since the 1970s.

Bernanke said that at some point over the course of this year, the Fed will need to "assess whether the stance of monetary policy is properly calibrated" to foster the Fed's objectives of price stability "in an environment of downside risks to growth."

With home foreclosures at record highs, the Fed has proposed rules to crack down on a range of shady lending practices that has burned many of the nation's riskiest "subprime" borrowers — those with spotty credit or low incomes — who have been hardest hit by the housing and credit debacles. The rules also would curtail misleading ads for many types of mortgages and bolster financial disclosures to borrowers.

The effectiveness of the regulations will depend on strong enforcement, Bernanke said. To that end, the Fed is working with other federal and state regulators.

A legislative proposal that would, among other things, change bankruptcy laws to allow judges to cut interest rates and reduce what's owed on troubled borrowers' mortgages could have some "conflicting effects," Bernanke warned. It could help some homeowners and hurt others because it could lead to higher interest rates in the future, he said.

Bernanke said consumers need to be financially savvy — understanding mortgages, credit cards and other financial products.

"Well they certainly need to know the interest rate and how it varies over time and what that means to them in terms of payments," Bernanke said.
Title: Re: Bernanke signals another rate cut
Post by: sid on February 27, 2008, 03:08:44 pm
Quote
With home foreclosures at record highs, the Fed has proposed rules to crack down on a range of shady lending practices that has burned many of the nation's riskiest "subprime" borrowers — those with spotty credit or low incomes — who have been hardest hit by the housing and credit debacles. The rules also would curtail misleading ads for many types of mortgages and bolster financial disclosures to borrowers.

There's an old saying that "you can't cheat an honest man".

These people, with the exception a a few totally stupid ones I'm sure, knew they couldn't afford the houses they were buying and just let their own greed convince them they actually deserved that "shady" loan they got.
Title: Re: Bernanke signals another rate cut
Post by: Nailer on February 27, 2008, 07:14:41 pm
I just found out today that my brothers house is going through the forclosure process..
Title: Bernanke gets blasted at Senate Hearing!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by: Dig on February 28, 2008, 10:56:06 am
"Was the economy indicating the need for the drastic rate cut and devaluation of the dollar?"

Bernanke: "I think so."


You f**king think so?


You have stolen trillions from the middle class because of a hunch?


You gotta be f**king kidding me!
Title: Bernanke is a moron
Post by: EchelonMonitor on March 14, 2008, 04:41:04 am
Bernanke sees the Euro/Dollar going from 1.55 to 1.56 and says "See, the dollar is going up!"
Title: Re: Bernanke is a moron
Post by: MikiQuick123 on March 14, 2008, 04:53:35 am
Ron Paul made him squirm.


http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=7534
Title: Re: Bernanke is a moron
Post by: EchelonMonitor on March 14, 2008, 05:29:49 am
Omg, just found this music video about Bernanke from Columbia Business School--made in spring 2006 and very relevant to now.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ipJTqCbETog
Title: Re: Bernanke is a moron
Post by: MikiQuick123 on March 14, 2008, 05:39:36 am
I want to laugh and cry at the same time. Cool video Echelon!
Title: Re: Bernanke is a moron
Post by: EchelonMonitor on March 14, 2008, 05:44:35 am
Jim Rogers says Bernanke should resign and the Federal Reserve should be abolished.

He says Bernanke is throwing gasoline on a raging fire.

He also says that while other central banks around the world, including China, Europe, Norway, etc., are being honest about the situation, the Federal Reserve and US government are lying to the people.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=lTXEWh2yT_g
Title: Re: Bernanke is a moron
Post by: MikiQuick123 on March 14, 2008, 05:50:34 am
Saw this yesterday, the reporters got on my nerves with their jabs. They were clearly irritated by him. He is of the same opinion as Ron Paul.
Title: Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression
Post by: Optimus on March 20, 2008, 04:49:03 pm
Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression
Fed chief says, 'We did it. …very sorry, won't do it again'

Posted: March 19, 2008 9:02 pm Eastern
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=59405
By David Kupelian

Title: Re: Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression
Post by: vlunkk on March 20, 2008, 05:18:06 pm
Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression
Fed chief says, 'We did it. …very sorry, won't do it again'

Posted: March 19, 2008 9:02 pm Eastern
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=59405
By David Kupelian


great post, i posted the link to all my disbelieving friends.
Title: Re: Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression
Post by: Mr Grinch on March 20, 2008, 08:53:28 pm
    


WND Exclusive MONEYNETDAILY
Bernanke: Federal Reserve
caused Great Depression
Fed chief says, 'We did it. …
very sorry, won't do it again'
Posted: March 19, 2008
9:02 pm Eastern

By David Kupelian
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Despite the varied theories espoused by many establishment economists, it was none other than the Federal Reserve that caused the Great Depression and the horrific suffering, deprivation and dislocation America and the world experienced in its wake. At least, that's the clearly stated view of current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.

The worldwide economic downturn called the Great Depression, which persisted from 1929 until about 1939, was the longest and worst depression ever experienced by the industrialized Western world. While originating in the U.S., it ended up causing drastic declines in output, severe unemployment, and acute deflation in virtually every country on earth. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "the Great Depression ranks second only to the Civil War as the gravest crisis in American history."

What exactly caused this economic tsunami that devastated the U.S. and much of the world?

In "A Monetary History of the United States," Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman along with coauthor Anna J. Schwartz lay the mega-catastrophe of the Great Depression squarely at the feet of the Federal Reserve.


Here's how Friedman summed up his views on the Fed and the Depression in an Oct. 1, 2000, interview with PBS:

 

    PBS: You've written that what really caused the Depression was mistakes by the government. Looking back now, what in your view was the actual cause?

    Friedman: Well, we have to distinguish between the recession of 1929, the early stages, and the conversion of that recession into a major catastrophe.

    The recession was an ordinary business cycle. We had repeated recessions over hundreds of years, but what converted [this one] into a major depression was bad monetary policy.

    The Federal Reserve System had been established to prevent what actually happened. It was set up to avoid a situation in which you would have to close down banks, in which you would have a banking crisis. And yet, under the Federal Reserve System, you had the worst banking crisis in the history of the United States. There's no other example I can think of, of a government measure which produced so clearly the opposite of the results that were intended.

    And what happened is that [the Federal Reserve] followed policies which led to a decline in the quantity of money by a third. For every $100 in paper money, in deposits, in cash, in currency, in existence in 1929, by the time you got to 1933 there was only about $65, $66 left. And that extraordinary collapse in the banking system, with about a third of the banks failing from beginning to end, with millions of people having their savings essentially washed out, that decline was utterly unnecessary.

    At all times, the Federal Reserve had the power and the knowledge to have stopped that. And there were people at the time who were all the time urging them to do that. So it was, in my opinion, clearly a mistake of policy that led to the Great Depression.

Although economists have pontificated over the decades about this or that cause of the Great Depression, even the current Fed chairman Ben S. Bernanke, agrees with Friedman's assessment that the Fed caused the Great Depression.

At a Nov. 8, 2002, conference to honor Friedman's 90th birthday, Bernanke, then a Federal Reserve governor, gave a speech at Friedman's old home base, the University of Chicago. Here's a bit of what Bernanke, the man who now runs the Fed – and thus, one of the most powerful people in the world – had to say that day:

 

    I can think of no greater honor than being invited to speak on the occasion of Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday. Among economic scholars, Friedman has no peer. …

    Today I'd like to honor Milton Friedman by talking about one of his greatest contributions to economics, made in close collaboration with his distinguished coauthor, Anna J. Schwartz. This achievement is nothing less than to provide what has become the leading and most persuasive explanation of the worst economic disaster in American history, the onset of the Great Depression – or, as Friedman and Schwartz dubbed it, the Great Contraction of 1929-33.

    … As everyone here knows, in their "Monetary History" Friedman and Schwartz made the case that the economic collapse of 1929-33 was the product of the nation's monetary mechanism gone wrong. Contradicting the received wisdom at the time that they wrote, which held that money was a passive player in the events of the 1930s, Friedman and Schwartz argued that "the contraction is in fact a tragic testimonial to the importance of monetary forces."

After citing how Friedman and Schwartz documented the Fed's continual contraction of the money supply during the Depression and its aftermath – and the subsequent abandonment of the gold standard by many nations in order to stop the devastating monetary contraction – Bernanke adds:

 

    … Before the creation of the Federal Reserve, Friedman and Schwartz noted, bank panics were typically handled by banks themselves – for example, through urban consortiums of private banks called clearinghouses. If a run on one or more banks in a city began, the clearinghouse might declare a suspension of payments, meaning that, temporarily, deposits would not be convertible into cash. Larger, stronger banks would then take the lead, first, in determining that the banks under attack were in fact fundamentally solvent, and second, in lending cash to those banks that needed to meet withdrawals. Though not an entirely satisfactory solution – the suspension of payments for several weeks was a significant hardship for the public – the system of suspension of payments usually prevented local banking panics from spreading or persisting. Large, solvent banks had an incentive to participate in curing panics because they knew that an unchecked panic might ultimately threaten their own deposits.

    It was in large part to improve the management of banking panics that the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. However, as Friedman and Schwartz discuss in some detail, in the early 1930s the Federal Reserve did not serve that function. The problem within the Fed was largely doctrinal: Fed officials appeared to subscribe to Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon's infamous 'liquidationist' thesis, that weeding out "weak" banks was a harsh but necessary prerequisite to the recovery of the banking system. Moreover, most of the failing banks were small banks (as opposed to what we would now call money-center banks) and not members of the Federal Reserve System. Thus the Fed saw no particular need to try to stem the panics. At the same time, the large banks – which would have intervened before the founding of the Fed – felt that protecting their smaller brethren was no longer their responsibility. Indeed, since the large banks felt confident that the Fed would protect them if necessary, the weeding out of small competitors was a positive good, from their point of view.

    In short, according to Friedman and Schwartz, because of institutional changes and misguided doctrines, the banking panics of the Great Contraction were much more severe and widespread than would have normally occurred during a downturn. …

    Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.

    Best wishes for your next ninety years.

Today, the entire Western financial world holds its breath every time the Fed chairman speaks, so influential are the central bank's decisions on markets, interest rates and the economy in general. Yet the Fed, supposedly created to smooth out business cycles and prevent disruptive economic downswings like the Great Depression, has actually done the opposite.

Title: Re: Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression
Post by: yanaar on March 20, 2008, 09:59:46 pm
Guess Ron Paul's been getting to him (Bernanke).
Title: Reviving the R.T.C. : The Next Big Plan From The Bernanke Politburo
Post by: bigron on March 29, 2008, 07:56:33 am
Reviving the R.T.C.

The Next Big Plan From The Bernanke Politburo

By Mike Whitney

 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19632.htm

"Instead of just propping up bankrupt banks, the governments should be democratising them - mobilising their assets to stimulate the productive economy, repairing infrastructure, researching and developing new markets, and refitting western economies to combat climate change." Iain MacWhirter, "The Red Menace"   

28/03/08 "ICH' -- - The Federal Reserve is presently considering an emergency operation that is so risky it could send the dollar slip-sliding over the cliff. The story appeared in the Financial Times earlier this week and claimed that the Fed was examining the feasibility of buying back hundreds of billions of dollars of mortgage-backed securities (MBS) with public money to restore investor confidence and clear the struggling banks' balance sheets. The Fed, of course, denied the allegations, but the rumors abound. Currently the banking system is so clogged with exotic investments, for which there is no market, they can't perform their main task of providing credit to businesses and consumers. Bernanke's job is to clear the credit logjam so the broader economy can begin to grow again. So far, he has failed to achieve his objectives.

Since September, Bernanke has slashed interest rates by 3 percent and opened various auction facilities (Term Securities Lending Facility, the Term Auction Facility, the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, and the new Term Securities Lending Facility) which have made $400 billion available in low-interest loans to banks and non banks. He has also accepted a “wide range” of collateral for Fed repos including mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) which are worth considerably less than what the Fed is offering in exchange. But the Fed's injections of liquidity have not solved the basic problem which is the fall in housing prices and the persistent downgrading of mortgage-backed assets that investors refuse to buy at any price. In fact, the troubles are gradually getting worse and spreading to areas of the financial markets that were previously thought to be risk-free. The credit slowdown has also put additional pressure on hedge funds and other financial institutions forcing them to quickly deleverage to meet margin calls by dumping illiquid assets into a saturated market at fire-sale prices. This process has been dubbed the “great unwind”.

In the last six years, the mortgage-backed securities market has ballooned to a $4.5 trillion dollar industry. The investment banks are presently holding about $600 billion of these complex debt instruments. So far, the banks have written-down $125 billion in losses, but there's a lot more carnage to come. Goldman Sachs estimates that banks, brokerages and hedge funds will eventually sustain $460 billion in losses, three times greater than today. Even so, those figures are bound to increase as the housing market continues to deteriorate and capital is drained from the system.

The Fed has neither the resources nor the inclination to scoop up all the junk bonds the banks have on their books. Bernanke has already exposed about half of the Central Bank's balance sheet to credit risk. ($400 billion) But what is the alternative? If the Fed doesn't intervene, then many of country's largest investment banks will wind up like Bear Stearns; DOA. After all, Bear is not an isolated case; most of the banks are similarly leveraged at 25 or 35 to 1. They are also losing more and more capital each month from downgrades, and their main streams of revenue have been cut off. In fact, many of Wall Street's financial titans are technically insolvent already. The generosity of the Fed is the only thing that keeps them from bankruptcy. 

It's generally accepted that the market for MBS will not improve until housing prices stabilize, but that's a long way off. Mortgages are the cornerstone upon which the multi-trillion dollar structured investment market rests, and that cornerstone is crumbling. If housing prices continue to fall, the MBS market will remain frozen and banks will fail; it is as simple as that. No one is going to purchase derivatives when the underlying asset is losing value. The Bush administration is pushing for a “rate freeze” and other clever ways to keep homeowners from defaulting on their mortgages, but its a hopeless cause. The clerical work needed to change these complex mortgages is already proving to be a daunting task. Plus, since 60 percent of these mortgages were securitized, it is nearly impossible to change the terms of the contracts without first getting investor approval; another fly in the ointment.

Also, the tentative plans to expand Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so they can absorb larger mortgages (up to $729,000 jumbo loans) is putting an enormous strain on the already-overextended GSE's. By attempting to reflate the housing bubble, the administration will only increase the rate of foreclosures and put the two mortgage behemoths at risk of default without any clear sign that it will help.

Yesterday's release of the Case/Schiller Index of the 20 largest cities in the country, shows that housing prices have slipped 10.7 percent in the last year while sales were down 23 percent year over year. That means that retail equity of US homes just took a $2 trillion haircut. Still, prices have a long way to go before they catch up to the 50 percent decline in sales from the peak in 2005. From this point on, prices should fall and fall fast; following a trajectory as steep as sales. Many economist expect housing prices to drop at least 30% (Paul Krugman and G-Sax) which means that $6 trillion will be shaved from aggregate home equity. In a slumping market, many homeowners will be better off just “walking away” from their mortgage instead of making payments on an asset of steadily decreasing value. Who wants to make monthly payments on a $500,000 mortgage when the current value of the house is $350,000? It's easier to pack the kids and vamoose then waste a lifetime as a mortgage slave. Besides, the Bush administration has no interest in helping the little guy stay out of foreclosure. Its a joke. All of the rescue plans are designed with just one purpose in mind; to save Wall Street and the banking establishment. Period.

There is a widespread belief that Bernanke has been proactive in addressing the turmoil in the credit markets. But it's not true. The Fed chairman has simply responded to events as they unfold. The collapse of Bears Stearns came just weeks after the SEC had checked the bank's reserves and decided that they had sufficient capital to weather the storm ahead. But they were wrong. The bank's capital ($17 billion) vanished in a matter of days after word got out that Bear was in trouble. The sudden run on the bank created a risk to other banks and brokerages that held derivatives contracts with Bear. Something had to be done; Rome was burning and Bernanke was the only man with a hose.

According to the UK Telegraph: “Bear Stearns had total (derivatives) positions of $13.4 trillion. This is greater than the US national income, or equal to a quarter of world GDP - at least in "notional" terms. The contracts were described as "swaps", "swaptions", "caps", "collars" and "floors". This heady edifice of new-fangled instruments was built on an asset base of $80bn at best.

On the other side of these contracts are banks, brokers, and hedge funds, linked in destiny by a nexus of interlocking claims. This is counterparty spaghetti. To make matters worse, Lehman Brothers, UBS, and Citigroup were all wobbling on the back foot as the hurricane hit.

"Twenty years ago the Fed would have let Bear Stearns go bust," said Willem Sels, a credit specialist at Dresdner Kleinwort. "Now it is too interlinked to fail." (Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, UK Telegraph)

Bernanke felt he had no choice but to step in and try to minimize the damage, but the outcome was disappointing. Bernanke and Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson worked out a deal with JP Morgan that committed $30 billion of taxpayer money, without congressional authority, to buy toxic mortgage-backed securities from a privately-owned business that was failing because of its own speculative bets on dodgy investments. Wow. The transaction turned out to be bad for shareholders, bad for employees and bad for taxpayers. It made the Federal Reserve look like the unelected and unaccountable oligarchy of bankster sharpies they really are. The only people who made out were the investors who were holding derivatives contracts that would have been worthless if Bear went toes up.

Still,the prospect of a system-wide derivatives meltdown left Bernanke with few good options, notwithstanding the moral hazard of bailing out a maxed-out, capital impaired investment bank that should have been fed to the wolves.

It is worth noting that derivatives contracts are a fairly recent addition to US financial markets. In 2000, derivatives trading accounted for less than $1 trillion. By 2006 that figure had mushroomed to over $500 trillion. And it all can be traced back to legislation that was passed during the Clinton administration.

“A milestone in the deregulation effort came in the fall of 2000, when a lame-duck session of Congress passed a little-noticed piece of legislation called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. The bill effectively kept much of the market for derivatives and other exotic instruments off-limits to agencies that regulate more conventional assets like stocks, bonds and futures contracts.

Supported by Phil Gramm, then a Republican senator from Texas and chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, the legislation was a 262-page amendment to a far larger appropriations bill. It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton that December.” (“What Created this Monster” Nelson Schwartz, New York Times)

Now the investment giants are lashed together by trillions of dollars of unregulated counterparty swaps. If one bank fails, it could domino through the whole system. Bernanke now finds himself in the unenviable position of having to make sure that all the equity bubbles are properly inflated so the banking system doesn't suddenly come crashing to earth. Meanwhile, the tumbling housing market has paralyzed the corporate bond and structured investment markets which means that Bernanke's job will get much harder, if not impossible.

The Fed chief is now facing a number of brushfires that will have to be put out immediately. The first of these is short term lending rates, which have stubbornly ignored Bernanke's massive liquidity injections and continued to rise. The banks are increasingly afraid to lend to each other because they don't really know how much exposure the other banks have to risky MBS. This distrust has sent interbank lending rates soaring above the Fed funds rate to more than double in the past month alone. So far, the Fed's TAF hasn't helped to lower rates, which means that Bernanke will have to take more extreme measures to rev up bank lending again. That's why many Fed-watchers believe that Bernanke will ultimately coordinate a $500 billion to $1 trillion taxpayer-funded bailout to buy up all the MBSs from the banks so they can resume normal operations. Of course, any Fed-generated scheme will have to be dolled up with populous rhetoric so that welfare for banking tycoons looks like a selfless act of compassion for struggling homeowners. That shouldn't be a problem for the Bush public relations team.

The probable solution to the MBS mess is the restoration of the Resolution Trust Corp., which was created in 1989 to dispose of assets of insolvent savings and loan banks. The RTC would create a government-owned management company that would buy distressed MBS from banks and liquidate them via auction. The state would pay less than full-value for the bonds (The Fed currently pays 85% face-value on MBS) and then take a loss on their liquidation. “According to Joseph Stiglitz in his book, Towards a New Paradigm in Monetary Economics, the real reason behind the need of this company was to allow the US government to subsidize the banking sector in a way that wasn't very transparent and therefore avoid the possible resistance.”

The same strategy will be used again. Now that Bernanke's liquidity operations have flopped, we can expect that some RTC-type agency will be promoted as a prudent way to fix the mortgage securities market. The banks will get their bailout and the taxpayer will foot the bill.

The problem, however, is that the dollar is already falling against every other currency. (On Wednesday, the dollar plunged to $1.58 per euro, a new record) If Bernanke throws his support behind an RTC-type plan; it will be seen by foreign investors as a hyper-inflationary government bailout, which could precipitate a global sell-off of US debt and trigger a dollar crisis.

Reuters James Saft puts it like this:

“It is also hugely risky in terms of the Fed's obligation to maintain stable prices.... it could stoke inflation to levels intolerable to foreign creditors, provoking a sharp fall in the dollar as they sought safety elsewhere.” (Reuters)

Saft is right; foreign creditors will see it as an indication that the Fed has abandoned standard operating procedures so it can inflate its way out of a jam. According to Saft, the estimated price for this folly could be as high as $1 trillion dollars. Foreign investors would have no choice except to withdraw their funds from US markets and move them overseas. In fact, that appears to be happening already. According to the Wall Street Journal:

"While cash continues to pour into the U.S. from abroad, this flow has been slowing. In 2007, foreigners' net acquisition of long-term bonds and stocks in the U.S. was $596 billion, down from $722 billion in 2006, according to Treasury Department data. From July to December as jitters about securities linked to US subprime mortgages spread, net purchases were just $121 billion, a 65% decrease from the same period a year earlier. Americans, meanwhile, are investing more of their own money abroad.” ("A US Debt Reckoning" Wall Street Journal)

$121 billion does not even put a dent the $700 billion the US needs to pay its current account deficit. When foreign investment drops off, the currency weakens. Its no wonder the dollar is falling like a stone.

Bernanke should seriously consider the consequences of his next move before he acts. Once the dollar starts to free-fall, there's no telling where it will land.
 
Title: Bernanke Warns of Possible Recession (well fcking DUH, thanks Ben)
Post by: hellcatjr on April 02, 2008, 10:31:49 am
Bernanke Warns of Possible Recession
Wednesday April 2, 11:21 am ET
By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke warned Wednesday the economy may shrink over the first half of this year and that "a recession is possible." Yet, he didn't offer any assurances of further interest rate cuts.


Bernanke's testimony to the Joint Economic Committee was a much more pessimistic assessment of the economy's immediate prospects amid a trio of crises -- housing, credit and financial.

"It now appears likely that gross domestic product (GDP) will not grow much, if at all, over the first half of 2008 and could even contract slightly," Bernanke told lawmakers. (O rly? When our GDP for Q4 was what 0.6%? And a 'slight' contraction? We don't have 'room' for slight contractions.)

GDP measures the value of all goods and services produced within the United States and is the best barometer of the United States' economic health. Under one rule, six straight months of declining GDP, would constitute a recession.

Still, Bernanke said that he expects more economic growth in the second half of this year and into 2009, helped by the government's $168 billion stimulus package of tax rebates for people and tax breaks for businesses as well as the Fed's aggressive reductions to a key interest rate. Nevertheless, the chairman acknowledged uncertainty about the Fed's next steps, notwithstanding the mounting economic woes.

"Much necessary economic and financial adjustment has already taken place, and monetary and fiscal policies are in train that should support a return to growth in the second half of this year and next year," Bernanke said.

To try to limit the damage, the Federal Reserve has aggressively cut a key interest rate, now at 2.25 percent, to spur buying and investing by individuals and businesses. At the Fed's last meeting in March, however, two members dissented from the Fed's decision to sharply cut rates, showing a rare division in the often unified front the Fed shows the public. The dissenting officials, who had reputations for being extra concerned about inflation, favored a smaller reduction. Although Bernanke said he hopes inflation will moderate in coming quarters, he acknowledged that high energy prices have clouded the inflation outlook.

Many economists had predicted the Fed might drop it key that rate again when it next meets April 29-30, although Bernanke's remarks cast some doubt on that scenario.

On Wall Street, stocks initially dropped after the Fed chief's remarks but later turned slightly positive.

Housing, credit and financial woes are threatening to push the country into a deep recession. The situation has emerged as a top concern for presidential contenders and a hot-button issue for Congress. It has thrust the White House and the Fed in crisis-management mode.

Faced with mounting home foreclosures and job losses, Bernanke has been under immense political and public pressure to provide relief and help turn around a faltering economy.

Committee Chairman Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., peppered Bernanke with questions about the Fed's moves to aid once mighty Wall Street firm Bears Stearns and then juxtaposed that with -- what he believed was a lack of help -- to millions of people at risk of losing their homes.

"I hope that you will use your position to jawbone this administration to get behind the housing relief effort before Congress." Schumer said. "Addressing the housing crisis head-on will do as much to instill confidence in the markets as lowering interest rates or bolstering regulatory oversight of wayward mortgage lenders and financial institutions. We need to do all of it."

"Wall Street has been helped. Now it's time to help Main Street," added Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y.

Many private analysts believe the economy contracted in the first three months of this year, signaling the start of a recession. The government releases first-quarter results later this month. The economy lost jobs in January and February, with many economists bracing for more losses when the report for March is released on Friday. Bernanke said he expected unemployment to move "somewhat higher in coming months."

"Clearly, the U.S. economy is going through a very difficult period," he told lawmakers, adding that all the problems have weighed heavily on consumers whose spending is indispensable to economic vitality.

The Fed also has taken a series of extraordinary steps in recent weeks and months to prop up the nation's financial system, which has been in state of high jeopardy.

In a controversial move, the Fed backed a $29 billion lifeline as part of JP Morgan's deal to take over the troubled Bear Stearns, the nation's fifth largest investment house, which was on the brink of bankruptcy. Bear Stearns had invested heavily in risky mortgage-backed securities that eventually soured with the collapse of the housing market.

Bernanke defended the move. "With financial conditions fragile, the sudden failure of Bear Stearns likely would have led to a chaotic unwinding of positions in those markets and could have severely shaken confidence," he said. "The damage caused by a default by Bear Stearns could have been severe and extremely difficult to contain."

Although the taxpayers are on the hook for the $29 billion, Bernanke said he was "reasonably confident we'll be able to recover the full amount." He also said that Bear Stearns' investments that the Fed took control of "are entirely investment grade."

In addition, the Fed -- in the broadest use of its credit authority since the 1930s -- agreed to temporarily let big investment firms obtain emergency financing from the Fed, a privilege that previously had been granted only to commercial banks.

Those actions have prompted criticism from Democrats and others who contend that the Fed is bailing out Wall Street and putting billions of taxpayers' dollars at potential risk. Bernanke and the Bush administration argued that the actions were warranted to avert a potential meltdown in the entire financial system, something that would have devastating consequences for the overall economy.

Asked about the Bush administration's plan to revamp the country's creaking financial system, Bernanke said it was vital for the Fed to have sufficient enforcement powers. Under the plan, the Fed would become a top cop in charge of financial market stability but would lose its day-to-day supervision of U.S. banks.
Title: Re: Bernanke Warns of Possible Recession (well fcking DUH, thanks Ben)
Post by: Nailer on April 02, 2008, 10:34:46 am
I believe he is a little behind the times.. He must have taken the special kids schoolbus
Title: Re: Bernanke Warns of Possible Recession (well fcking DUH, thanks Ben)
Post by: andy1033 on April 02, 2008, 10:48:03 am
He knows, being a supposed historian on the 29 crash he knows what history shows him.
Title: Bernanke, J.P. Morgan (Jamie Diamond) and Bear Stearns (Allen Schwartz) testify
Post by: boomerkel on April 03, 2008, 09:55:06 am
Bernanke, J.P. Morgan (Jamie Diamond) and Bear Stearns (Allen Schwartz) testifying Senate Finance Committee

Tune into CNBC to hear Bernanke, Jamie Diamond and Allen Schwartz explain away why our money is being used to bailout Bear Stearns and J.P. Morgan.  The reality is that it’s not just a bailout it a HUGE COVERUP.  They could not afford to see Bears Stearns go into bankruptcy and have all Bear's documents accessible in the public domain.  But, then again, some judge would have sealed the records like they did with REFCO.

The only thing that Senator Christopher Dodd and a majority of Congress  are trying to do here is convince the dumb ass public that they have thoroughly looked into this transaction, but I will guarantee you that you will hear nothing about all the skeletons in Bear and Morgan's closets, that being thousands of companies destroyed by Naked Short Selling.

I can’t wait to hear what  Ron Paul has to say!

For a more detail explanation click on the following links:

 Which Bear Stearns Story Do You Think is the Truth? (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=33545.msg140764#msg140764)

 This Absolutely Amazes Me! … Several Forum Members Made Excellent (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=33225.msg139091#msg139091)

  NAKED SHORT SELLING ... What is That? (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=31380.0)


Cox is so full of POOP!

This Should Be A History Making Cover Up!


Senate Panel Chief Questions Dimon's Fed Seat
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2645506520080326?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&rpc=22&sp=true

"The chairman of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee on Wednesday expressed concern that JPMorgan Chase & Co head Jamie Dimon held a Federal Reserve Bank of New York board seat while his bank was in talks with the Federal Reserve over a deal to acquire Bear Stearns." ... Sounds like a conflict of interest to me!

FINANCE LEADERS QUESTION PLAYERS IN BEAR STEARNS DEAL
Baucus-Grassley letter asks Fed, Treasury Secretary, and CEOs to detail agreement
http://finance.senate.gov/press/Bpress/2008press/prb032608.pdf


Title: Re: Bernanke, J.P. Morgan (Jamie Diamond) and Bear Stearns (Allen Schwartz) testify
Post by: boomerkel on April 03, 2008, 10:29:27 am

I left something out ... Who bought all those PUTS? ??? ... We still don't have an answer! 8)

 "Who Traded 55,000 Bear $30 Puts Tuesday?" (http://www.thestreet.com/newsanalysis/optionsfutures/10407812.html)

Title: Re: Bernanke, J.P. Morgan (Jamie Diamond) and Bear Stearns (Allen Schwartz) testify
Post by: boomerkel on April 03, 2008, 10:49:09 am

Similar to Chairman Cox's prior responses

Before SEC Chairman Cox ...  "Senator Robert F. Bennett Questions Naked Short Selling" (http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=652216599)

Chairman Cox's responses are pathetic!

Title: Re: Bernanke, J.P. Morgan (Jamie Diamond) and Bear Stearns (Allen Schwartz) testify
Post by: boomerkel on April 03, 2008, 11:49:12 am

They just spoke about how well the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigates.  The reality is, as originally designed, they inhibit investigations and they attack little people like Martha Stewart, using them as examples of how efficient they operate.  On the flip side John Mack chairman of Morgan Stanley gets away with murder.

Here is an email that I sent out to every email address that I could put my hands on:

Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 17:11:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Boomerkel" <[email protected]>   
Subject: PBS Special Featuring Gary Aguirre - What A Loon! A Kook! Oh, Wait, He Isn't...

Everyone who claims that those concerned over a systemic collapse due to Wall Street larceny, personified by a corrupt SEC and all-powerful hedge funds, are a bunch of loons, have a tough job now after the Bloomberg, and now the PBS special...
 
Everyone needs to watch the PBS special featuring Gary Aguirre. It's a great program, and underscores the reasoned, calm, rational demeanor of the man (Gary Aguirre) that the SEC is trying to paint as a crazy.
 
And it is chilling, in that when you listen to it, the truth cuts through like a laser light.
 
The system is broken, powerful hedge funds are untouchable, and those chartered with protecting the public are bought and paid for by the hedge funds.... Watch the program.

  "Who's keeping an eye on those high-stakes hedge funds?"  (http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/315/video.html?playertype=windowsmedia;speed=hi;mediatype=video;media=%2Fmedia4%2Fnow%2FPBS-NOW1315V-hi.rm%2C%2Fmedia4%2Fnow%2FPBS-NOW1315V-lo.rm%2C%2Fnow%2FPBS-NOW1315V-hi.wmv%2C%2Fnow%2FPBS-NOW1315V-lo.wmv%2C%2Fnow%2FPBS-NOW1315V-hi.mov%2C%2Fnow%2FPBS-NOW1315V-lo.mov;playertemplate=%2Fnow%2Fmedia_player%2Fvideo1.html;helptemplate=%2Fnow%2Fmedia_player%2Fhelp.html;title=Stock%20Alert;description=Who%27s%20keeping%20an%20eye%20on%20those%20high-stakes%20hedge%20funds%3F;basepath=%2Fnow%2Fshows%2F315%2Fvideo.html;prefchange=1)


Title: Re: Bernanke, J.P. Morgan (Jamie Diamond) and Bear Stearns (Allen Schwartz) testify
Post by: Loungin on April 03, 2008, 12:03:01 pm
Thanks for the update on this Boom!  Too busy at work to tune in and see what is happening.  If we get a clip of RP grilling these crooks, lets link it up for all to see.
Title: Re: Bernanke, J.P. Morgan (Jamie Diamond) and Bear Stearns (Allen Schwartz) testify
Post by: boomerkel on April 03, 2008, 12:56:06 pm
One Final Comment:

Black Rock has been designated by the FED to manage the 29 Billion that is being loaned (which is our fiat money that the FED has control of) to J. P. Morgan to foot the acquisition of Bear Stearns by J.P. Morgan.  Does anyone on this forum know anything about BlackRock and the origin of their huge wealth?  BlackRock and others sucked HUD (Housing and Urban Development) dry.  Catherine Austin Fitts won a bid to design a software system that would automate and increase efficiency with respect to properties being taken in by those defaulting on homes (sound familiar).  Ms. Fitts increased recovery from approximately 30% to 90% with her technology by putting these properties out to bid.  The Boys Club didn't like that ... so they framed her. Read the DOC below ... This is a pretty incredible read and EYE OPENING!

Excerpts from Catherine Austin Fitts' "Summary of Events as of February 2001"
http://www.dunwalke.com/media/summary.html 

"The next day, Ervin also filed a Federal False Claims Act "whistleblower" or “Qui Tam” lawsuit under seal alleging that Hamilton and HUD had engaged in bid rigging and insider trading to favor certain investors, including Goldman Sachs and BlackRock/PNC.  (See summary of False Claims Act)  Because the Qui Tam case was under seal, Hamilton had no knowledge of the existence of the case, that Hamilton had been named, or the nature of the allegations.  As a debt collector for a large portion of HUD's portfolio of defaulted mortgages, Ervin had lost a substantial amount of its business as a result of the success of the HUD loan sales. (See copies of Qui Tam and Bivens suits) Ervin’s efforts to interest Wall Street in hiring it to help with bids, and to bid, had also been unsuccessful. (See Penn Capital memorandum)"

"In August of 2000, Ervin served the Qui Tam complaint upon Hamilton for the first time. Just before it served the complaint, Ervin voluntarily dismissed Goldman Sachs and BlackRock/PNC and other bidders as defendants, notwithstanding the fact that they were the bidders who, according to Ervin’s imaginative and baseless allegations, had made away with billions of dollars worth of mortgage notes for hundreds of millions less than fair market value.[6] (See Hamilton's motion to dismiss Qui Tam case)"

"[6] The initial July 1996 complaint named Hamilton, Goldman Sachs and BlackRock Capital as defendants.  In the subsequent amendment in 1999, Ocwen Capital (formerly known as Berkeley), a loan sales bidder, and Williams Adley, a minority contracting firm that provided due diligence services for most of the loan sales, were added as defendants.   When the government elects not to adopt a qui tam case, the “relator” [Ervin, in this case] must decide whether to go forward with the case without the government.  Although the government is no longer a party, it is permitted under the False Claims Act to reenter the case.  Its permission was required (and given) for Ervin to drop all of the loan sale bidders as defendants."

THIS IS THE COVER UP ...  Over Eighty (80) Years of COUNTERFEITING, COUNTERFEITING, COUNTERFEITING, Ad Infinitum, Ad Nausea (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=33742.msg141703#msg141703)


Title: Paul Lectures Bernanke
Post by: mickswann on April 03, 2008, 01:17:12 pm
I just watched the video on pp.
Just what the hell is going on with that guy sitting behind Ron Paul?
Is he having some kind of seizure?
Title: Re: Bernanke, J.P. Morgan (Jamie Diamond) and Bear Stearns (Allen Schwartz) testify
Post by: boomerkel on April 04, 2008, 12:35:37 pm
UPDATE:

I just heard Allen Schwartz complaining on the Tele (BoobTube) that his poor little company was shorted (Huuuuum ... Could it have been Naked Shorting ???) and he is not haaaaaappy :-[ HHHHhhhhhaaaaaaaahahahahahahahhahahh ;D I love it ... The biggest shorter got shorted! ;D

(http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Sy6fNQ_jtiBs2M:http://recordcollectorsoftheworldunite.com/artists/eddieandthesubtitles/skeletonslp.jpg)  (http://www.irishblogs.ie/images/219136.jpg) (http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:kOSBOfGdG7T69M:http://jasonsteckel.net/wp-content/images/skeletonsincloset.jpg)  (http://press.princeton.edu/images/j6812.gif)  (http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/7582/skully3xj.jpg)  (http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/epa0672l.jpg) (http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1113/530763374_5bd2f0098d.jpg?v=0)

More Bailouts Could Follow Bear Stearns

BY RUSSELL BERMAN - Staff Reporter of the Sun April 4, 2008
URL: http://www2.nysun.com/article/74155


WASHINGTON — Top financial regulators are defending their decision to rescue Bear Stearns from collapse last month, but under intense and skeptical grilling from lawmakers they could offer no assurances that the extraordinary move would be the only taxpayer-backed bailout of a major Wall Street bank.

In congressional testimony yesterday, the officials said they took the best option available to them when they offered up to $30 billion in government funds to back the sale of Bear Stearns to JPMorgan Chase, insisting that the potential failure of Bear Stearns could have brought down other major firms as well.

"We judged that a sudden, disorderly failure of Bear would have brought with it unpredictable but severe consequences for the functioning of the broader financial system and the broader economy," the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Timothy Geithner, told members of the Senate Banking Committee on Capitol Hill.

Yesterday's hearing amounted to a public post-mortem on the rescue of Bear Stearns, as federal officials and executives from the two banks recounted a round-the-clock flurry of conference calls and meetings that precipitated the takeover of Bear Stearns three weeks ago.

While the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Christopher Cox, said regulators had been monitoring Bear Stearns on a daily basis since 2007, its rapid deterioration in value March 13 — caused by customers scrambling to withdraw cash and lenders refusing to extend credit — caught officials by surprise.

The firm's chief executive, Alan Schwartz, blamed the collapse on the lightning-quick spread of "unfounded rumors and attendant speculation" that Bear Stearns was in the midst of a liquidity crisis. The rumors, he said, "became a self-fulfilling prophecy."

"There was, simply put, a run on the bank," Mr. Schwartz said.

Federal officials said they offered the $30 billion in public backing once JPMorgan concluded it could not buy the firm on its own without great risk to its shareholders. "This wasn't a negotiating posture. It was the plain truth," the chief executive of JPMorgan, Jamie Dimon, said. The bank agreed to assume the first $1 billion in losses if the deal does not earn a profit. "We went absolutely as far as we could go," he said.

Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle pressed the regulators — occasionally in exasperated tones — to explain how they could be caught off-guard by the Bear Stearns collapse and what they were doing to prevent defaults by other major financial institutions. "There were an awful lot of red flags, not just in the last six weeks, not just in the last six months," Senator Bunning, a Republican of Kentucky, said.

"Nobody was watching the store. So it was eventually going to happen. It just happened to be Bear Stearns," he added.

A Democrat of New Jersey, Senator Menendez, similarly scolded the panel. "I think what we have here is a clean-up brigade," he said, "not a protector of all the institution that we need protected for the well being of all Americans."

The chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, acknowledged that the Fed's action constituted a "bailout," but he characterized it as a bailout of the economy and not Bear Stearns investors. "If you wanted to say we bailed out the market in general, I guess that's true," he said.

He expressed confidence, but could not guarantee, that taxpayers would get most of their $30 billion back. "We believe we will recover most or all of it. Probably all of it," Mr. Bernanke said.

Mr. Geithner stressed that the threat of future instability was not over, and he called for regulatory changes that established better safeguards to ensure greater liquidity for financial firms and a reduced risk of sudden failure.

Officials said they recognized that the Fed's move raised "moral hazard" concerns, but they sought to underscore that Bear Stearns investors were not in an enviable position and that the risk of inaction to the broader economy outweighed the worry that the rescue would encourage dangerous betting.

Still, the committee's Democratic chairman, Senator Dodd of Connecticut, urged the SEC to investigate claims of short-selling in advance of the Bear Stearns collapse, pointing out that investors who bought $600 worth of stock before the deal could have made out with $37,000 just days later.

"Your hopes will be, I think, met and exceeded," Mr. Cox replied, though he avoided discussing an ongoing inquiry. "The rumors," he added, "are too big to miss."

Title: Re: Bernanke, J.P. Morgan (Jamie Diamond) and Bear Stearns (Allen Schwartz) testify
Post by: boomerkel on April 12, 2008, 10:21:19 am

April 10, 2008: 12:48 AM EST

NEW YORK (Dow Jones) -- Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker on Wednesday challenged recent moves by the central bank, including its $29 billion bailout of Bear Stearns Cos. and interest rate cuts, saying both could create more problems than solutions.

Last month's rescue of Bear Stearns (BSC) and the subprime mortgage mess that led up to it illustrate sharp differences between investment and commercial banks, with the latter better capitalized and regulated, and therefore better able "to protect against these crises," said Volcker, speaking at the Harvard Club of New York City.

The Fed intervention also calls into question what role the central bank might be expected to play if and when other such scenarios arise, said Volcker, who chaired the Fed from 1979 to 1987.

"Taking this kind of action in an emergency does create a precedent in people's minds... the more you support the market, the more political concerns arise. The Federal Reserve is supposed to be above all that," said Volcker.

"Financial crises don't come along unless there are underlying problems," said Volker, who pointed to years of the U.S. consuming more than it produces, with U.S. debt financed by money from abroad and Americans buying cheap goods from overseas.

"The only trouble is you can't go on forever spending more than you're producing," he said.

Volcker, whose Fed is credited for halting the stagflation crisis of the 1970s, also maintained the central bank's interest rate cuts won't be an easy fix to current financial problems. "The history of markets is littered with the idea you can solve problems by raising inflation," he said.

Addressing the same audience, former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers said the U.S. economy is "currently in recession," but the next administration would likely inherit an economy on the cusp of recovery.

"In a technical sense the recession will have ended when the next president takes office," although the climate may not feel much improved, said Summers, a Harvard University professor who led the U.S. Treasury during the Clinton Administration.

David Walker, up until recent weeks the country's comptroller general, lashed out at the "imprudent and immoral practices of the Federal government," saying the current policy of low taxes and high government spending means "tomorrow's taxpayers will pay the bill, (including) those too young to vote and some of them not born yet."

For a financial system to work, it needs to have incentives "for people to behave the right way," adequate transparency, and individual and institutional accountability when things go wrong, said Walker, who for a decade headed the Government Accountability Office.

UPDATE: Former Fed Chief Volcker Questions Wisdom Of Bear Bailout, Cuts (http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djhighlights/200804100048DOWJONESDJONLINE000038.htm)

  (END) Dow Jones Newswires
  04-10-08 0048ET
  Copyright (c) 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.


Title: Re: Bernanke, J.P. Morgan (Jamie Diamond) and Bear Stearns (Allen Schwartz) testify
Post by: boomerkel on April 17, 2008, 09:25:21 am

 Everything Alex Jones Needs To Know About Robert F. Bickel Before We Call! (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=35499.msg151846#msg151846)

Title: Message To Fed Chief Bernanke: "Enough With The Cuts, Already"
Post by: bigron on April 23, 2008, 06:44:55 am
Message To Fed Chief Bernanke:
 "Enough With The Cuts, Already"
 
By Mike Whitney
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19787.htm

22/04/08 "ICH" -- -- Stop Last week's stock market blowout added more than 4 percent to the Dow Jones Industrials, but it had no affect on Libor rates. Libor rose steadily from Tuesday through Friday signaling more troubles in the banking system. Libor, which means London Interbank-Offered Rate, is the rate that banks charge each other for loans. It has a dramatic effect on nearly area of investment. When the rate soars, as it did last week, it means that the banks are either too weak financially to lend to each other or too worried about the ability of the other bank to repay them. Either way, it puts a crimp in lending. Banks serve as the transmission point for credit to the broader economy via business and consumer loans. When they're bogged down by their own bad investments or when risks increase; rates go up and the whole process slows to a crawl. When banks are unable to extend credit freely, business activity decreases and GDP shrinks.
 
The sudden surge in stocks is not a sign that things are back to normal; far from it. If anything, things are worse than ever. Credit remains unusually tight despite Bernanke's cuts to the Fed Funds rate or the creation of various “auction facilities” that remove mortgage-backed securities (MBS) from banks balance sheets. Businesses and consumers are still having a hard time getting funding, which means that the velocity of money in the financial system is decelerating rapidly increasing the likelihood of a system-wide freeze-up. Libor is just the flashing red light.
 
A rise in Libor adds billions in additional interest payments for homeowners, businesses and other borrowers. According to the Wall Street Journal:
 
“Libor is one of the world's most important financial indicators. It serves as a benchmark for $900 billion in subprime mortgage loans that adjust -- typically every six months -- according to its movements. Companies globally have nearly $9 trillion in debt with interest payments pegged to Libor, according to data provider Dealogic.”

 Commercial real estate deals are mostly pegged to Libor as are adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs). In fact, most of the mortgages that were written up during the boom-years were tied to Libor. That's why Peter Fitzgerald, chief financial officer at Radco Cos., said, "If Libor were at 4% instead of under 3%, there would be a disaster that would take years to unwind.” (WSJ)
 
Rising Libor puts the Fed and the Bank of England in a tough spot. They're trying to keep rates artificially low so the banks can increase their lending and recoup their losses, but the market is not cooperating. The market is driving Libor upward, which means the Fed is losing control. The real cost of money is going up.
 
The Bank of England was forced to intervene on Monday. Mervyn King, the UK's central bank governor, launched a “Special Liquidity Scheme” to “improve the liquidity of the banking system and raise confidence in financial markets while ensuring that the risk of losses on the loans they have made remains with the banks.” The plan will provide $100 billion for "illiquid assets of sufficiently high quality” (Mortgage-backed securities) to “unfreeze” bank lending. The plan is similar to the Fed's auction facilities which have provided over $200 billion in exchange for dodgy MBS, collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and commercial paper (ABCP) According to Bloomberg:
 
“The Central Banks move allows financial institutions to add government bonds to their inventory of liquid assets and make it easier for them to raise cash and lend, especially to consumers seeking home loans. In return the government will hold the riskier mortgage-backed securities.” The BOE said the swaps would be for a period of one year and could be renewed for up to three years, although the banks would be on the hook for losses on their loans. Its a sweet deal for the investment banks and a total loser for the British taxpayer who could get stuck with hundreds of billions of worthless MBS.
 
The $100 billion liquidity-injection is the biggest bailout in the BOE's history, and it was granted without public input or Parliamentary authorization, just like the Bear Sterns transaction. The bankers call the shots while the public picks up the tab. The BOE's action puts to rest the idea that “the worst is behind us”. It isn't; in fact, recent estimates suggest that the losses to the banking system could exceed $1 trillion. There's still a lot of carnage ahead.
 
The $100 billion will help to stabilize the money markets and put the banks on sounder footing, but it does nothing to help the housing market. The British real estate market is on life support because most of the mortgage financing was coming from investors who bought MBS. Mortgage securities are currently down 92 percent from the same period last year, which leaves potential buyers without a funding source. The BOE is considering creating a British-style Fannie Mae to kick-start the flagging housing industry by providing government-backed loans. The private sector will not be a big player in the housing market for the foreseeable future.
 
The same is true in the US. If the Fed can't bring Libor down with interest rate cuts, then it will have to develop a back-up plan. The next step would be “quantitative easing”; a monetary policy that was implemented by the Bank of Japan in 2001 “to revive that country's economy that was stagnant for a decade. Quantitative easing entails flooding the banking system with excess reserves, resulting in pushing the benchmark overnight bank lending to zero.” (Reuters) There are indications that Bernanke is preparing for this radical option already, but there's little chance that it will succeed. Whether the banks are able to lend or not is irrelevant. Public attitudes towards indebtedness have changed dramatically in the past few months. Overextended consumers are looking for ways to pay off their debts and live within their means. This will make it more difficult for Bernanke to reflate the equity bubble through credit expansion. When people are frightened or pessimistic about the future, they naturally curtail their spending. A recent poll conducted by the Washington Post/ABC illustrates how the publics attitude towards the economy has darkened in a matter of months. According to the survey:
 
“Nine out of ten Americans now give the economy a negative rating, with a majority saying it is in 'poor' shape, the most to say so in more than 15 years. And the sense that things are bad has spread swiftly. The percentage who hold a negative view of the economy is up 33 points over the last year, and the percentage who rate the economy 'poor' has increased 13 points in the last two months. That is the quickest 60-day decline since the Post and ABC started asking the question in 1985” (Washington Post)
 
The average American is showing a better grasp of the deteriorating economic conditions than the stock market. Housing sales continue to tumble, manufacturing is off, unemployment is steadily increasing, retail sales are flat, and inflation is soaring. Consumers are feeling the pinch of rising food and energy costs, loss of home equity and a general downturn in the credit markets. Money is tight and jobs are scarce.
 
ARE YOU BETTER OFF THAN YOU WERE 8 YEARS AGO?
 
When George W. Bush took office in 2000, oil was $28 per barrel, the euro was $.87 on the dollar, gold was $274 per ounce, and the national debt was $5.9 trillion. Today, oil is a record $114 per barrel, the euro is nudging $1.60 on the dollar, gold is $945 per ounce, and the National Debt is $9 trillion. The country is presently engaged in a $2 trillion war in Iraq with no end in sight. The federal government has expanded over 30% under Bush. Wages for working people have stagnated, unemployment has risen, 47 million Americans are without health care, and the economy is slipping into recession. By every objective standard, the country is worse off today than when Bush first took office.
 
The Federal Reserve has played a major role in America's economic decline. Greenspan's “weak dollar” policy pushed trillions of dollars of credit into the hands of people who had no realistic prospect of paying it back. Now the banks are buried beneath a mountain of bad investments and foreclosures are at record highs. (In California 65,000 homes are now in some stage of foreclosure while the total number of homes sold in February—new and used---was a mere 20,513) Michael S. Rozeff explains the current downturn in his article “The Subprime Crisis and Government Failure”:
 
“How are we to explain and understand the details of the subprime crisis? Is it a sudden outcropping of market madness? Is this an instance of a free market gone haywire? Is it a case of mass lender stupidity? Is it a case of greed and corruption? Is it a case of inefficient regulation by the states?
 
The subprime crisis is none of these. Its origin lies in a housing price bubble brought about by excessive central bank money creation and the subsequent puncturing of this bubble...
 
Fiat money inflations often bring on real estate booms followed by busts. These inflations are the common element in real estate cycles that span many countries and many centuries, and they put the lie to the hypothesis that bad lending practices are the culprit. Fraudulent money creation is the culprit, not faulty evaluation of the credit risks of borrowers.” (Michael S. Rozeff , “The Subprime Crisis and Government Failure”, lewrockwell.com)
 
The knock-on effects of the housing bust are just now rippling through the broader economy. Consumer spending is sluggish, growth is weak, and the stock market is more volatile than anytime since the 1930s. The Fed has usurped congressional powers to deal with insolvency problems at the banks. Public money is now being provided for the purchase of dubious assets held by unregulated investment banks owned by private speculators. The Fed is simply making up the rules as it goes along. Bernanke's actions have not yet been challenged by any congressman or senator.
 
The Fed's monetary policies have triggered a run-up in commodities prices which is driving up the cost of everything from corn to copper. Food riots have broken out in capitals around the world and leaders are worried about growing political instability. The media is blaming drought, high energy prices, and biofuels for the sudden rise in prices, but these are only secondary factors. Currency devaluation has played a bigger role than shortages or blight. The world is awash in dollars which are steadily losing value. Pension funds and foreign central banks are diverting dollars into commodities rather than keeping them in corporate bonds or the sagging stock market. Here's an excerpt from the Wall Street Journal that sums it up:
 
“Inflation is rising throughout the world due to dollar weakness, and the prices of such commodities as oil and corn have soared. ..As former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker noted last week, we are already in a “dollar crisis”. Even the IMF---typically the temple of devaluationists—is alarmed by the dollar's fall. Dollar weakness has already contributed to soaring commodity prices that have walloped US consumers just when their spending is most needed to offset the housing slump. ...The commodity boom is result in large part of the Fed's weak dollar policy, and it may have tipped the US into recession that could have been avoided.” (Wall Street Journal)
 
Economics editor for the UK Telegraph, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, draws the same conclusion in his recent article, "Oil, Surges as Investors hunt for Anti-dollar":
 
“Société Générale said the near $30 spike in prices since early February is largely due to money pouring into commodity index funds, now worth some $200bn. Crude has taken on a "safe-haven" role for investors fleeing the dollar, or those betting that central banks will let rip with excess liquidity.
 
"This is now entirely investor driven," said Dr Frederic Lasserre, Société Générale's head of commodities research. He added that most of the money is coming from pension funds, insurers and other long-term investors. They view the US recession as a mere hiccup in a powerful upward cycle, convinced that Chinese and Mid-East demand will hold up long enough for America to recover. "They are all convinced by the fundamental tightness of the market," he said.” (UK Telegraph)

Commodities prices are now being driven by an ever-weakening dollar. As Pritchard notes, oil futures have become a sort of “anti-dollar”; a more reliable store of value than the anemic greenback.

The Fed's loose money policies have put the dollar at risk of losing its role as the world's reserve currency. If the dollar falls from its perch, the empire will soon follow. The macroeconomic impact of Greenspan's low interest rates will be seismic. Foreign banks and investors currently hold $6 trillion in dollar-based assets and currency. When the dollar falls; speculation will increase and prices will rise. Currently, the US is exporting its inflation and fueling political unrest in the process. If Bernanke continues to slash interest rates, the problems will only get worse. The Fed could raise rates by 50 basis points tomorrow and the commodities bubble would explode overnight, but that doesn't look likely.
 
The idea that soaring commodity prices are the result of speculation is controversial. (I could be wrong!) Economist Paul Krugman does not think that “low interest rates and irrational exuberance” are responsible for the high prices. Rather, he thinks they are the result of “rapidly growing demand and constrained supply”. This is certainly possible. Perhaps, there is no bubble at all.
 
Currency Intervention to Save the Dollar
 
The G-7 finance ministers met in Washington last week and announced their “resolve” to minimize the volatility in the currency markets. Many people took this to mean that foreign central banks would take a more active role in shoring up the dollar. So far, there's been no indication of support. The dollar has stayed within the $1.58-1.59 per euro range for more than a week. Help could be on the way but, then, maybe not. The only one who can really save the dollar now, is Bernanke. All he needs to do is indicate that the rate cuts are over and the bleeding will stop. But that might be too much to hope for. Bernanke has already cut the Fed Funds rate from 5.25 percent to 2.25 percent since September. (way below the 4.1 percent rate of inflation) Its clear that he sees a deflationary tidal wave about to hit sometime in the next few quarters. Why else would he slash rates so aggressively while stretching the Fed's mandate (“make sure the markets function properly”) to the limit? 
 
Last week, former Fed chairman Paul Volcker took the unusual step of publicly chastising Bernanke in a speech he gave to the Economic Club of New York. Volcker's comments indicate the level of frustration with the Fed's dollar-savaging rate cuts which have caused problems around the world. Volcker said “The recession is not the Fed's problem. It's the government's. The Fed's job is to defend the currency and fight inflation—exactly the opposite of what this Fed is doing.” The former Fed chief thinks Bernanke should raise rates now, because if he doesn't, he'll have to raise them even more later, “with even more awful consequences.”
 
Martin Feldstein, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under Ronald Reagan, joined Volcker in blasting the Fed and calling for an end to the rate cuts. In a Wall Street Journal editorial on April 15 Feldstein said:
 
“It's time for the Federal Reserve to stop reducing the federal funds rate, because the likely benefit is small compared to the potential damage....Lower interest rates could raise the already high prices of energy and food, which are already triggering riots in developing countries. In order to offset the inflationary impact of higher imported commodity prices, central banks in those countries may raise interest rates. Such contractionary policies would reduce real incomes and exacerbate political instability....lowering interest rates stimulates economic activity to a point at which labor and product markets cause wages and prices to rise. That is unlikely to happen in the U.S. in the coming year. The general weakness of the economy will keep most wages and prices from rising more rapidly.....But high unemployment and low capacity utilization would not prevent lower interest rates from driving up commodity prices.
 
Lower interest rates induce investors to add commodities to their portfolios. When rates are low, portfolio investors will bid up the prices of oil and other commodities to levels at which the expected future returns are in line with the lower rates.”
 
Feldstein is right. Additional cuts will probably have negligible effect on housing and consumer spending, but they could be a death-blow to the dollar. It's not worth it. Lower rates will be devastating for people living in poorer countries. In the US, middle class families spend only 15 percent of net earnings on food. In poorer countries people spend upwards of 75 percent of their income just trying to feed themselves. That's why riots are breaking out everywhere; the Fed's monetary policy is a catalyst for political instability.
 
Besides, lower interest rates don't necessarily increase demand or make credit more easily available. The only way to spark demand is to make sure that wages keep pace with production so that workers can buy the things they produce. That's the only way to create a prosperous economy, too; build a strong and well-educated work-force.
 
“Economic recovery will require resolving the difficult problems of the credit markets, dealing with the millions of homeowners who may now be tempted to default on mortgages that exceed the value of their homes, and reducing the risk that the ongoing decline in house prices will push millions of additional homeowners into a vulnerable, negative equity condition,” says Feldstein. “A lower fed funds rate will not solve any of those problems.”
 
Right again. The problems we face can't be resolved with rate cuts and auction facilities. They require new thinking, fiscal solutions and public engagement. There's no quick fix and no perfect solution; not everyone will get a fair deal. But its pointless to wreck the currency when nothing is gained by it.

Title: Re: Message To Fed Chief Bernanke: "Enough With The Cuts, Already"
Post by: EchelonMonitor on April 23, 2008, 06:58:08 am
Bernanke is a madman:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwGUTGCvz7I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipJTqCbETog&feature=PlayList&p=E750BBDDF1538521&index=68
Title: Volker rips Bernanke a new one (very unusual)
Post by: InsideJob on April 23, 2008, 04:35:26 pm
http://www.myprops.org/content/A-blunt-former-Fed-chairman-takes-on-Bernanke-take-heed-of-what-he-says/

A blunt former Fed chairman takes on Bernanke.

Take heed of what he says

AVNER MANDELMAN 00:00 EDT Saturday, April 12, 2008

A few days ago an unusual event took place: Paul Volcker, the mythical U.S. Federal Reserve Board chairman from the Reagan years, criticized the policy of the current Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke, in a speech to the Economic Club of New York.

Just so you grasp how extraordinary this was, you should first understand that normally a past Fed chairman scrupulously avoids saying anything at all about current Fed policy - for the simple reason that the current Fed chairman's words are one of his most important tools: They can sway markets.

This ability does not fade entirely when a Fed chairman leaves.

So when a past Fed chairman speaks, his words can clash with those of the present one and make that one's job difficult. Out of professional courtesy, past Fed chairmen therefore keep quiet; Mr. Volcker especially - the man who hiked interest rates to 20 per cent to kill inflation, at the cost of a deep recession. But last week Mr. Volcker spoke his mind bluntly. He said, in effect, that the current Fed is not doing its job.

This would have been unusual enough. But Mr. Volcker went further. Not only is the Fed not doing its job, he said, but it is doing the wrong job: It is defending the economy and the market, instead of defending the dollar. And just to stick the knife in, Mr. Volcker added that this bad job now will make the real job - defending the greenback - much harder later. It'll cause even greater economic suffering.

In plain words, Mr. Volcker implied that the current Fed is not only incompetent, but that its actions are dangerous.

There is no record of Mr. Bernanke's reaction, nor that of anyone else inside the Fed. But there was plenty of buzz in the market because what Mr. Volcker said amounted to a rousing call to raise interest rates. Yes, raise rates, and do it now.

Can you imagine what this would do to the market? I sure can, which brings me to the gap between physical economic reality as we witness it every day in our physical investigations, and the surreal market chatter we see and hear on TV. This gap has never been wider - but it will inevitably close as markets catch up to reality - as just forecast by former president Ronald Reagan's Fed chairman. Let me cite three items, then go back to Mr. Volcker.

First, commercial real estate. You surely have read about the residential real estate problems - subprime loans syndicated and resold, causing the implosion of several U.S. financial institutions. The writeoffs and damage here total close to a trillion dollars, said the IMF recently. That's about one-seventh of the U.S. gross domestic product, or more than three years of growth.

But what of commercial real estate? I heard recently from some savvy private real estate investors that although commercial real estate fell by 20 per cent, it should fall by a further 20 to 30 per cent before it provides a reasonable rate of return. So whatever economic damage was done to the economy by residential real estate speculation may eventually be equalled by commercial real estate. Say another 10th or seventh of GDP erased, or another two-three years of growth gone.

Second, there's also the war in Iraq. Some U.S. economists recently estimated it has cost about two trillion dollars to date - another two-sevenths of U.S. GDP. That's five more years of GDP growth gone.

And third, we haven't even begun to tally the private equity blowups that are surely coming.

Taken all together, the economic damage spells a very bad and long recession. How to fix it? No problem, say the actions of Mr. Bernanke's Fed. Let's print the missing money - and it doesn't matter if it causes inflation and tanks the dollar. Because that's not our job.

Up to now Mr. Volcker kept quiet, but no more. In his speech he just said, in effect, that the recession is not the Fed's problem. It's the government's. The Fed's job is to defend the currency and fight inflation - exactly the opposite of what this Fed is doing. The solution? Raise interest rates, Mr. Volcker practically said, no matter the consequences now, because if you don't, you'll have to raise them even more later, with even more awful consequences.

Will rates indeed rise? I have no doubt they must. Not now, perhaps, but at the end of this year or the beginning of 2009, with a new president in the White House. The stock market, which usually looks six to nine months ahead, already understands this and may soon react. In fact, when Mr. Volcker's words sink in, the markets are likely to sink as this bear market rally ends.

For surely you understand we are still in a bear market - and only in the beginning of it? Yes, we are experiencing a rally, and like most bear rallies, it is sharp and spiky. But when bear rallies end, they leave a lot of spiked bulls behind - and this rally should be no different. When it is over - in the next few weeks, methinks - the waterfall could continue, as the market begins to digest the inevitability of higher inflation and higher interest rates ahead.

Against all protocol, Mr. Volcker just went out on a limb and warned you of this. I urge you to heed his words.

© The Globe and Mail
Title: WS Journal Forum: Discussion- Who does Benedict Benjamin Bernanke work for?
Post by: Catalina on July 01, 2008, 05:21:20 pm
Source http://www.wallstreetbear.com/board/view.php?topic=49097&post=158942
crash - Mon, Jun 30, 2008

BY ROB KIRBY

Do any of you ever wonder who this guy is really working for, anyway? Well, in case anyone cares, here’s what he’s supposed to be doing:


    Mission

    The Federal Reserve System is the central bank of the United States. It was founded by Congress in 1913 to provide the nation with a safer, more flexible, and more stable monetary and financial system. Over the years, its role in banking and the economy has expanded.
    Today, the Federal Reserve’s duties fall into four general areas:

          o conducting the nation’s monetary policy by influencing the monetary and credit conditions in the economy in pursuit of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates
          o supervising and regulating banking institutions to ensure the safety and soundness of the nation’s banking and financial system and to protect the credit rights of consumers
          o maintaining the stability of the financial system and containing systemic risk that may arise in financial markets
          o providing financial services to depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign official institutions, including playing a major role in operating the nation’s payments system

Appearances Vs. Realities

Just last week, the good folks over at Barclays Bank chimed-in with this assessment of Benedict Bernake’s efforts to-date:

    “Barclays Capital said in its closely-watched Global Outlook that US headline inflation would hit 5.5pc by August and the Fed will have to raise interest rates six times by the end of next year to prevent a wage-spiral. If it hesitates, the bond markets will take matters into their own hands. "This is the first test for central banks in 30 years and they have fluffed it. They have zero credibility, and the Fed is negative if that's possible. It has lost all credibility," said Mr Bond.”

Perhaps Mr. Bond [James, perhaps?] should have mentioned that the Fed and the old lady of Threadneedle St. [The Bank of England] have the same ownership. Not to worry. Surely there’s room for both of them “under the bus.”

Who Owns the Federal Reserve?
         
The private ownership of the Fed is a closely guarded secret. However, it is generally believed that the following banks/families have at least some stake:

1. Rothschild Bank of London
2. Warburg Bank of Hamburg
3. Rothschild Bank of Berlin
4. Lehman Brothers of New York
5. Lazard Brothers of Paris
6. Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York
7. Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy
8. Goldman, Sachs of New York
9. Warburg Bank of Amsterdam
10. Chase Manhattan Bank of New York.

Now, the long answer is more complex.

According to the information presented there (assuming not much has changed since 1976) it would appear that the Bank of England actually owns the Federal Reserve and the IRS.

The Bank of England is, in turn, almost certainly owned by the Rothschild family, though if they saw fit to sell shares, they would not be required to report this since these are privately traded companies we're talking about.

Please note that to determine who controls these institutions, it's not enough to simply list the shareholders. One must also take into consideration who, in turn, owns the shareholders themselves. Furthermore, the influence and connections of the chairmen cannot be ignored, as these men are the ones making the decisions.

Then again, perhaps the good folks over at Barclays Bank are simply getting upset with recent declines in the value of their investments [data compliments of Great Red Dragon]: Chart http://www.financialsense.com/Market/kirby/2008/0630.html
Title: Bernanke to Testify to Congress Today
Post by: ekt8750 on July 15, 2008, 09:04:28 am
This should be really good. Hopefully he gets to face another round of wrath from Ron Paul.
Title: Re: Bernanke to Testify to Congress Today
Post by: HeismaN on July 15, 2008, 09:08:09 am
Do you know around what time,  he will testify?
Title: Re: Bernanke to Testify to Congress Today
Post by: ekt8750 on July 15, 2008, 09:09:39 am
Sometime in the 10AM ET hour.
Title: Re: Bernanke to Testify to Congress Today
Post by: SuzakaDusk on July 15, 2008, 09:11:20 am
Will Ron Paul be in attendence?
Title: Re: Bernanke to Testify to Congress Today
Post by: ekt8750 on July 15, 2008, 09:14:28 am
One would hope so.
Title: Re: Bernanke to Testify to Congress Today
Post by: SuzakaDusk on July 15, 2008, 09:16:28 am
Me to. I like how Ron Paul questions the traitor;)
Title: Re: Bernanke to Testify to Congress Today
Post by: ekt8750 on July 15, 2008, 09:19:22 am
He will be testifying to the House Banking Committee (Ron Paul's committee) later. Right now he's talking to the Senate Banking Committee.
Title: Re: Bernanke to Testify to Congress Today
Post by: Real Truth on July 15, 2008, 09:19:57 am
Me to. I like how Ron Paul questions the traitor;)
time to watch the traitors squirm in their seats
Title: Bernanke reports on sound of Economy.
Post by: scary on July 15, 2008, 09:47:58 am
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?action=post;board=1.0

Live...wow.
Title: Re: Bernanke reports on sound of Economy.
Post by: changedname on July 15, 2008, 10:04:18 am
Your url is linking to new topics here! maybe you need to check your link again?
Title: Re: Bernanke reports on sound of Economy.
Post by: scary on July 15, 2008, 10:11:36 am
http://www.c-span.org/watch/cs_cspan3_wm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS3

Sorry Guys...Disregard link on first post...lol Sorry!
Title: Re: Bernanke reports on sound of Economy.
Post by: Kregener on July 15, 2008, 10:14:23 am
Ben Bernanke reporting on a sound Economy = John Wayne Gacy reporting on childcare...
Title: Re: Bernanke reports on sound of Economy.
Post by: MR2 on July 15, 2008, 10:14:43 am
Did he just say the devaluation of the Dollar is 25%?

Title: Re: Bernanke reports on sound of Economy.
Post by: Kregener on July 15, 2008, 10:17:40 am
25% since Bush took office alone.

Their Great Ponzi Scheme is teetering on the edge.

Brace yourselves...
Title: Re: Bernanke reports on sound of Economy.
Post by: dr4gon on July 15, 2008, 10:19:53 am
Ok so he is still talking but let me just say that was one of the most amazing things ive ever seen. The market was plunging big time, all of a sudden Bush and Bernanke are both making statements. I chose to listen to Bush (im not in the mood for Bernankes too cool for school bullshit, i wanted to see someone sweat) and ... wow.....ive never seen him so shit scared. I was, and still am shaken up by it.

Anyway traders seem to be buying Bernankes bullshit because they couldn't have been listening to Bush. Although oil dropped about 9 dollars after he was talking about 'supposed reserves' (supposed my ass). Another bandaid applied, but i feel this is the last chance we will all get before it all goes to hell. Get your gold, get your food, and get ready for total pandemonium.
Title: Re: Bernanke reports on sound of Economy.
Post by: dr4gon on July 15, 2008, 10:24:30 am
*Sorry if this is off topic*

And ill add he (Boosh) also let slip that 'covert ops' were going on 'in other fronts' while talking about iraq/afghanistan (iran maybe?) lol I couldnt believe my ears. He slipped up numerous times, like reading from the list of reporters questions in front of him he would say 'ok olivier, next question' and point to the wrong reporter. Then oops he's over there.

I could be wrong but i think today was the day it dawned on him just how far his masters have bent him over and left him for dead.

*edit* also talked about 'groups' (read truth movement) and said 'like moveon.org' (free plug, why didnt he say infowars! ><)

He was a mess

Anyway gonna try get some sleep, who knows what ill wake up to. (<< aussie)
Title: Re: Bernanke reports on sound of Economy.
Post by: Rock on July 15, 2008, 10:33:27 am
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=49520.0
Title: Re: Bernanke to Testify to Congress Today
Post by: Rock on July 15, 2008, 10:33:58 am
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=49520.0
Title: Paulson and Bernanke Stampede Washington - Continue Raid On The Public Purse
Post by: bigron on September 19, 2008, 06:50:01 am
Paulson and Bernanke Stampede Washington - Continue Raid On The Public Purse

Citing Grave Financial Threats, Officials Ready Massive Rescue

Lawmakers Work With Fed, Treasury To Try to Restore The Flow of Money

By Binyamin Appelbaum and Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writers
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/18/AR2008091804200.html?hpid=topnews

19/09/08 "Washington Post" -- - Friday, September 19, 2008; Page A0 -- The Bush administration is urgently preparing a massive intervention to revive the U.S. financial system, including a plan to sweep away the unpaid loans that are choking banks and blocking the flow of money to borrowers.

Congressional leaders gave bipartisan support to the administration's efforts after a meeting last night with Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke.

Paulson and Bernanke presented a "chilling" picture of the state of the financial system, according to a participant in the meeting who spoke on condition of anonymity. Lawmakers were told that the consequences would be grave if they failed to pass legislation by the end of next week. Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) committed to meeting that deadline.

The plan involves using hundreds of billions of dollars in government funding to buy bad loans, leaving banks with more money and fewer problems, according to two sources familiar with what was said at the meeting.

After the meeting, Paulson told reporters the proposal was "an expeditious solution that is aimed right at the heart of this problem."

Also last night, the Fed was considering offering backing for money-market mutual funds, which have had massive withdrawals in recent days, said a source familiar with the discussions.

And the Securities and Exchange Commission is considering further limits on short-selling, a practice that allows investors to bet on a decline in a company's stock price, according to a person familiar with the matter. Critics of the practice say short sellers are driving down the share prices of financial companies, thereby contributing to their destruction.

The government has already tried three times this month to keep money flowing through the financial system. It took over the two largest providers of funding for mortgage loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It created a new source of funding for investment banks. And it took over the insurance giant American International Group.

Now the government is contemplating its broadest -- and perhaps most expensive -- intervention to date.

The urgency has only grown with each successive intervention because the first three tries have not worked. People are withdrawing money from money-market mutual funds. Banks are refusing to lend to one another. Several large financial companies need money to stay in business, including the bank Washington Mutual, which is seeking a buyer.

Regulators and the banking industry are increasingly concerned about customer withdrawals from money-market funds. Crane Data, which tracks the industry, said total deposits in money-market funds fell Wednesday by at least $79 billion, or about 2.6 percent. Financial executives have told government officials in recent conversations that the rising pace of withdrawals is the equivalent of a bank run and that if it continues, it will drain a massive and critical source of funding.

Money-market funds are particularly important because they buy short-term debt, which is used by financial companies and other corporations to finance day-to-day activities.

According to legislative aides, yesterday's meeting was arranged after Pelosi called Paulson's office mid-afternoon to discuss the state of the markets. During that call, Paulson asked to meet with Pelosi, Reid and key lawmakers from the banking committees. That meeting took place at 7 p.m. in Pelosi's office on the second floor of the Capitol.

Paulson and Bernanke did not present lawmakers with a written proposal but are expected to do so by tonight, congressional aides said.

During the meeting, one lawmaker worried aloud that Paulson was asking for "a blank check," according to a participant. There was also a "healthy debate" about whether this action would finally stabilize the markets.

"They couldn't answer yes to that question," the participant said.

Paulson and Bernanke generally have kept Congress at arm's length as they have sought to deal with the financial crisis. Yesterday, however, after meeting with congressional leaders, they exchanged awkward compliments with the lawmakers at a news conference. Lawmakers had been increasingly critical of the Fed and Treasury leaders for failing to consult with Capitol Hill. The administration will need congressional approval to commit taxpayer money to its new plan.

"We'll do this as quickly as we can. We're not talking about a month," said Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, which would probably review the plan before it went to the House floor.

A hearing on the topic that Frank had scheduled for next Wednesday could now become a legislative drafting session, he said.

Also yesterday, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, suggested that the government create an entity that would operate much like the Depression-era Reconstruction Finance Corp. -- it would buy "equity and possibly secured debt," providing desperately needed cash to companies while permitting the government to share in any profit.

"The government would get repaid before the others in the financial chain," Schumer said.

If a plan does move forward, Democrats may try to demand concessions from the suddenly humbled industry, Schumer said, including support for a proposal to permit bankruptcy judges to modify mortgages for distressed borrowers. Currently, judges may set new terms for mortgages on second homes but not on primary residences.

That idea is contentious and has been fiercely opposed by the banking industry. Frank said he would instead demand that banks reduce the number of foreclosures.

Still, it's not clear that Democrats would insist on such concessions at the expense of passing the plan quickly.

"The costs of doing nothing are enormous," Frank said. He added that with the recent deterioration in the financial markets, "I think the timetable for something has been greatly sped up."

© Copyright 1996-2008 The Washington Post Company
Title: Bernanke: Not Only Should Taxpayers Buy the Toxic Waste...
Post by: DCUBED on September 24, 2008, 05:11:25 pm
http://cryptogon.com/?p=4225

Bernanke: Not Only Should Taxpayers Buy the Toxic Waste, They Should Pay Premium Prices for It

(http://cryptogon.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/bernankepaulsonfail.jpg)

In a sane world, these monsters would be torn limb from limb and shredded into maggot food—a role in which they could actually do some good.

Drill holes around the base of a bucket. Place some banker parts in the bucket with a bit of straw and hang it a couple of feet above your chickens. After a few days (during warm weather), the maggots will spill out onto the ground. The chickens will gather below the bucket, waiting for the protein packed morsels to fall from above.

Of course, I’m not actually suggesting that people should kill bankers and turn them into maggot food.

The stench would be overpowering. And that’s before the maggots could do their handy work.

Via: AP:

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told Congress Tuesday the government should pay more than “fire-sale” prices for the toxic assets it would acquire under a proposed $700 billion bailout plan. That could mean both higher initial costs for taxpayers and reduced returns when the assets are later resold.

Bernanke’s comment was the first indication of how he and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson are thinking about formulating the rescue plan’s medicine in a way that doesn’t kill the patients. Requiring banks and other financial institutions to sell troubled loans and other assets anywhere close to recent sales prices of only a few cents on the dollar could wipe out the net worth of many and lead to a new wave of bank failures.

The Fed chairman said he favors buying the assets based on their “hold-to-maturity” value, which would require an estimate to be made of what each security will eventually be worth as payments come in over the years.

“If the Treasury bids for and then buys assets at a price close to the hold-to-maturity price, there will be substantial benefits,” Bernanke told the Senate Banking Committee. “First, banks will have a basis for valuing those assets and will not have to use fire-sale prices. Their capital will not be unreasonably marked down.”
Title: Are Bush/Paulson/Bernanke paying off a gambing debt due on October 1st?
Post by: Dig on September 25, 2008, 11:20:00 am
WTF is the rush with the $trillions of dollars being stolen from 300 million American citizens?

The president acts like a fricking gambling junkie that says...

"I need X money by Y...

But I cannot explain why."

Does anybody buy this total bullshit scam?
Title: Re: Are Bush/Paulson/Bernanke paying off a gambing debt due on October 1st?
Post by: independentWV on September 25, 2008, 11:21:33 am
Absolutely Not, Arrest the criminals.
Title: Markets holding steady, but Bernanke will cut fed rate to devalue the dollar!
Post by: Dig on October 07, 2008, 07:07:01 am
The federal reserve has to be the greatest threat to the free world ever.

International markets held steady and things were calming sown/leveling off. 

So what does the fed do?

DROPS INTEREST RATES TO DEVALUE THE DOLLAR!

WTF is wrong with these financial terrorists?
Title: Bernanke hints at rate cut
Post by: DCUBED on October 07, 2008, 01:47:51 pm
http://biz.yahoo.com/cnnm/081007/100708_bernanke_speech.html

Bernanke sees worsening economy, hints at rate cuts

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke predicted that the global financial markets crisis is likely to restrain the economy well into next year and signaled that the Fed may be getting ready to cut interest rates.

But he said he believes the unprecedented steps taken to have the Treasury Department and the Fed intervene in financial markets were done in time to prevent more expensive and permanent damage to the nation's leading financial institutions.

In a speech before the National Association of Business Economics in Washington on Tuesday, Bernanke said the threat of inflation has receded recently, while the economy has continued to weaken. This could be interpreted as a sign that the central bank might be preparing to lower its key fed funds rate soon.

"Overall, the combination of the incoming data and recent financial developments suggests that the outlook for economic growth has worsened and that the downside risks to growth have increased," he said.

"In light of these developments, the Federal Reserve will need to consider whether the current stance of policy remains appropriate," he added.

The fed funds rate is the primary lever the central bank uses to influence the economy. Lower rates can help reduce the borrowing costs for businesses and consumers on a wide range of loans, including business lines of credit, credit card rates and home equity loans. These cheaper loans can increase economic activity.

But lower rates can also add to inflation pressures since they tend to reduce the value of the dollar and make imported goods, most notably oil, more expensive.

The Fed cut rates seven times between September 2007 and this April, but held them steady at 2% at its past three meetings due to inflation concerns.

The Fed's next scheduled meeting is Oct. 28-29. Some investors and economists have suggested the current financial crisis could lead the Fed to announce an emergency rate cut ahead of that meeting.

Bernanke again pointed to falling housing prices as a primary cause of the problems in the nation's financial sector. But he warned "the slowdown in economic activity has spread outside the housing sector."

And he added that tighter credit conditions mean that the economic weakness is likely to continue into 2009.

"The heightened financial turmoil that we have experienced of late may well lengthen the period of weak economic performance," he said.

Bernanke defended the $700 billion bailout package passed by Congress and signed into law last week. The rescue plan will allow Treasury to buy damaged mortgage-backed securities from financial firms.

Bernanke said the bailout, as well as moves by the Fed this week to inject hundreds of billions more into the banking system and buy commercial paper used by many businesses to finance their day-to-day operations, were necessary actions to take at this time of economic stress.

"These are momentous steps, but they are being taken to address a problem of historic dimensions," he said.

And he predicted that the efforts would be successful in returning the economy into a growth path.

"The steps being taken now to restore confidence in our institutions and markets will go far to resolving the current dislocations in the markets," he predicted. "I believe that the bold actions taken...together with the natural recuperative powers of the financial markets, will lay the groundwork for financial and economic recovery."
Title: Re: Bernanke hints at rate cut
Post by: heavyhebrew on October 07, 2008, 01:55:02 pm
This clown has no clue.
Need to manufacture a crisis but worried about deniablity? Put someone in clown shoes in charge.
Title: Re: Bernanke hints at rate cut
Post by: Geolibertarian on October 07, 2008, 01:55:24 pm
People are already maxed out on credit (or unemployed), so who the heck can even qualify for a loan these days?

Indeed, the last I heard major banks were denying loans even to those with high credit ratings.
Title: Re: Bernanke hints at rate cut
Post by: angndon on October 07, 2008, 02:08:41 pm
Exactly, you don't solve a debt crisis by making more debt available.

I'm actually glad that I had to quit work to stay home and take care of my vaccine-injured child (who is recovered now).  We had to cut way back on our spending and we experienced some bad credit for a while that prevented us from being tempted to charge everything or borrow on our home equity.  I really don't think I would have done that though because I saw how stressful it was to manage the little debt we had.  But losing one income forced us to learn to live frugal.  Now I'm not so afraid of living through all this chaos.  It will be tough but at least I won't be clueless like the rest of my friends who are living paycheck to paycheck to keep up with their credit card/ home equity payments.
Title: Re: Bernanke hints at rate cut
Post by: larsonstdoc on October 07, 2008, 02:13:38 pm



  A rate cut will tank the dollar and gold and silver SHOULD GO UP.
Title: Bernanke running out of ammo
Post by: bigron on October 09, 2008, 08:58:21 am
Bernanke running out of ammo

By Julian Delasantellis
 http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JJ10Dj01.html

A well-worn bit of wisdom from rural America advises one that it is pointless to "close the barn door after the cows have escaped". By participating in yesterday's global round of short-term interest rate cuts, US Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke cannot be said to have been guilty of this offense. Instead, what he has done is to close the barn door after the cows have escaped, been captured down the road by cattle rustlers, then sold, slaughtered and ground up into dog food chunks.

For the 10th time since August, 2007, the Federal Reserve has engineered an interest rate cut in order to counter the spreading effects of the now global financial and credit crisis. With twin 50 basis point cuts in both the Discount Rate, to 1.75%, and the Federal Funds Target Rate, to 1.5%, the Fed has now just about

 

emptied its magazine of possible interest rate cuts.

Yesterday's cuts, coordinated across the globe with the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, the Swiss Central Bank, and the Riksbank of Sweden, with the Bank of China participating independently with cuts of its own, are the latest policy initiatives employed by desperate and besieged world economic officials to contain a truly awesome fire-breathing ogre that goes by the name of deleveraging, a monster that seems to get worse, and more importantly, laugh away all attempts to contain it, with every passing day.

It's only natural to characterize the world financial crisis by what's happening in the world's stockmarkets. Wednesday was one of those days, when from the moment the sun burst across the horizon in the Western Pacific until it waned in New York about 21 hours later, there was nothing but pain and sorrow for those learning the painful lesson that yet another mortal deity constructed of man, in this case the religion of the God of Money, had failed.

Stocks opened in Tokyo, proceeded to fall by the greatest amount since the crash of 1987 and stock trading was halted in Indonesia (as it was in Russia, Ukraine, and Romania) after its benchmark stock index, the Jakarta Composite, dropped 10% early in the trading day. Most major European indices, even after the news of the coordinated rate cuts were announced, fell by between 4% and 7%.

In the United States, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, after making a feeble attempt at a rally in the first hours of trading, was back selling off in the afternoon, closing down a further 189 points. Just since mid-day last Friday, when Treasury Secretary "Hank" Paulson's bailout plan passed the US House of Representatives, the Dow has lost 1,500 points, 14%, of its value; just since September 1, it's off 2,500 points, or just over 21% of its value.

This week marks the first anniversary of the all time high of the Dow, at just under 14,300. Since then, the market has lost 35% of its value, over 5,000 points, or almost US$9 trillion of investor wealth. For those who like their karma extra sweet, it is also the first anniversary of the premiere of the Fox Business Network, specifically established by News Corp chairman Rupert Murdoch and his consigliore Roger Ailes, to tell the story of American business that they believed the rest of the financial media were not telling, namely, that all was right and that the future looked blindingly bright, for the unregulated private sector that was at the core of American capitalism.

But world equity's trials and tribulations are nothing compared to what's going on in the credit and short-term debt markets. This, much more than stocks' travails, was what drove the trembling hands of the central bankers on Wednesday morning.

If you're an American parent of a child past puberty, or maybe if you're just an American with a very good memory, you should remember your experiences at the uniquely American form of young adult socialization called the first boy/girl dance.

In a brightly lit and decorated middle school gymnasium, you would find the entirety of that year's class of 11- or 12-year-olds. On one side of the court would be the boys, all itchy and pimply and fidgety in their first woollen sports coat, long-sleeve dress-shirt buttoned up to the adam's apple, and a striped tie, whether real or clip on, around their necks. On the other side of the court would be the girls, anxious and nervous in their own right, in their first pair of heels and hose, wearing a party dress, trimmed with frilly lace, that they were under strict orders not to get dirty.

The adults, parents and teachers, prod the two sides to get together. That was usually accomplished by means of some brave little fellow crossing the no-man's land of mid-court to ask a girl to dance. Others follow, and with that the process of inter-gender acculturation that will culminate in marriage and family has commenced.

What's going today in the financial markets is like watching a tape of a boy/girl dance in reverse. Substitute boys for borrowers and girls for lenders, or vice versa. When the dance is in full flower, the boys/lenders are interacting with the girls/borrowers, and everybody's happy. However, run the dance backwards, and the results are a lot more problematical. Gradually you'll see fewer and fewer dancers on the floor, fewer and fewer interactions between borrowers and lenders. At the end of the backward-run tape, you see the two sides completely separate and alienated from each other - exactly the way the short-term credit markets are today.

From the sunup in Asia to sundown in New York of every business day, a multi-trillion dollar dance is conducted of short-term borrowing and lending, a key component of which is called the commercial paper market.

Say an aircraft manufacturer is receiving payment for a new aircraft delivery, but does not have to make payments for payroll or for raw materials for new aircraft until next week. In the system that was fully functioning until about 10 days ago, the company, acting through an investment bank, could invest, could "buy�, short-term interest-bearing debt of other banks called commercial paper. A company that had a similar short-term funding need could issue, could "sell" commercial paper for the duration of its shortage.

In essence, this process cuts out the role of the commercial banks, since the buyers of commercial paper receive a higher interest rate in this market than they would from the banks, and the sellers borrow more cheaply than what the banks would charge.

So when short-term instruments such as commercial paper can't get sold, it's like the air that the real economy depends on to breathe is getting sucked out. Even in the face of now sometimes daily multi-hundred billion dollar world central bank infusions in the short-term money markets, banks are hoarding what short-term reserves they have - it's not going back out into the commercial paper market.

This explains the incredible drop in yield of short-term interest rates, sometimes to under 0.25%, on US government guaranteed one-month Treasury bills. Even for a loan whose term may only be a few days or less, the brevity of the loan matters little if the borrower is not around, has declared bankruptcy, when the paper is due to be repaid.

Conversely, the demand for short-term still funding exists, even as the potential supply evaporates. The demand for money raises its price; interest rates are the price of money. The various interest rates that determine the health of the short term money market, namely, the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and the Federal Funds Market Rate (as opposed to the rate at which the Fed wants these transactions to occur at, the Target Rate) are all trading well above where their historical relationships with other market rates say they should be. LIBOR, in particular, on grim days now sometimes trades higher than it was last year, although the US Fed has cut rates, including today, 3.75% since then.

Since late April, the Federal Funds Target rate has been at 2%, but on many days during the month-long financial pandemonium we know call September, 2008, it traded significantly above that rate, past 4% or more. Getting that rate down has been the core goal of the massive fire hose of liquidity, probably now closing in on $1 trillion by now, that the Fed and other central banks have poured on the money markets these past few weeks.

But if they could barely keep the Funds Rate at 2% after putting a trillion dollars in the fight, how much less likely is it that they're now going to be able to keep it even lower, at 1.5%?

Matter of confidence
But what Wednesday's co-ordinated rate cuts could do is to restore a bit of confidence in the markets. Don't knock that; when Bernanke and Co had a chance to do that in mid-September they took a pass, and a whole lot of the world financial system's pain can be traced to events that soon followed that decision, the decision they reversed today.

In September, following the no-cut decision of the previous day, I noted how Bernanke's decision had seemed to ignore the developing crisis of confidence and solvency in the financial markets (see Ben first, economy second, Asia Times Online, September 18, 2008).

"A Fed rate cut might not have done much; it might have only bolstered confidence a bit, but, to paraphrase Jackie DeShannon's 1965 pop song 'what the world needs now is love', what the financial system needs now is confidence, sweet confidence - it's the only thing that there's just too little of ... "

But on that day the Fed said no. Then came the Paulson Plan, the 12-day legislative kerfuffle over its passage, at the end of  which the financial system emerged in a far more dire state than it was in during mid-September. There's no guarantee that a cut back then would have staved off the current world catastrophe, but, with federal funds now trading so far above the target rate, Bernanke seems to think he can instill the confidence now, with the financial system much more fragile, that he didn't think all that necessary just over three weeks ago.

But it's a lot harder getting confidence back once its gone than to just maintain it. The markets are not at all certain the rate cuts will resuscitate the short-term credit markets-thus, the aggressively underwhelming response in the equity markets following the cuts.

If the markets are now saying that the Paulson Plan is too little (even at $700 billion) and too late, and the rate cuts are like

 

spitting on a forest fire, what's left? Amazingly, the solution may involve some manner or form of government nationalization of the financial sector, and that may be coming a lot faster than previously expected.

Last week, I speculated that all the various rescue proposals being tried and then failing might not be designed to ultimately save the system, just to keep it afloat until the inauguration of the next US president on January 20. (See Crisis control fit for the TV age, Asia Times Online, October 3, 2008). Now it is possible that the required time horizons for all these band-aids and palliatives is not January, but just four weeks away - until the day after the US elections.

What is that solution? Amazingly enough, and now almost 30 years after Margaret Thatcher commenced the capitalist revolution by selling off Britain's proudest heritage of socialism, its state-owned industries, talk is returning to the prospect of a partial, or nearly complete, nationalization of the financial system - the so called "Swedish solution".

Two weeks ago, University of California at Berkeley economics Professor Brad DeLong laid out this possible solution to the crisis.
Nationalization has the best chance of avoiding large losses and possibly even making money for the taxpayer. And it is the best way to deal with the moral hazard problem ... Congress grants the Federal Reserve Board the power to take any financial firm whatsoever with liabilities and capital of more than $25 billion that is not well capitalized into conservatorship ... requires the Federal Reserve Board to liquidate any financial firm in its conservatorship when it judges that the firm is insolvent.
Now it is revealed that the Paulson bailout plan passed last Friday has in its small print provisions giving the US Treasury Secretary the right to do just that, to "take" equity positions or warrants in the stock of financial companies.

And where can you hear sympathy for this Commie pinko Berkeley subversion? Believe it or not, it's on the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal. Give this to them; they're not starting small, like proposing a partial nationalization of some small farm bank in Iowa or something. They're going for the gusto, with their eyes on the nation's largest financial institution - Citigroup.
If the feds want to prevent a full-scale rescue of Citigroup, now might be a good time to take Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson's new powers out for a spin. If Citi needs to raise capital, let the Treasury inject some, along with appropriate housecleaning on the management side and upside for taxpayers.
The Wall Street Journal advocating increased government intervention? What's next, pork sandwich recipes in the Jerusalem Post?

This approach is already under way in Britain, under the leadership of Prime Minister Gordon Brown's Chancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling. The question then becomes, if the US and/or UK governments take a small ownership stake in the financial system, say 5%, and that is seen as a failure, wouldn't the natural tendency of government be then not to stop and reassess the policy, but to double down and go at it harder, say to 10%, 20 , or, finally, to 50%+1 - in other words, full control?

George Santayana once said that a fanatic is someone who redoubles his efforts as he loses sight of his goals, and, as George W Bush proved when initiating the Iraq surge, no animal on earth is as fanatical as a politician looking for alternatives to having to admit he was wrong.

In an editorial in the Wall Street Journal, Robert Pozen of MFS Investment Management suggested that, since the problem now seems to be centered in the commercial paper market, a solution specific to that sector's travails should be initiated, in that the US Treasury or Federal Reserve could guarantee transactions just in that sector.

The problem with this proposal is that it would either have to be authorized by the US Congress, which is in no way eager to take upon itself even more public displeasure with another move seen as a banker "bailout", or through another one of the Federal Reserve's remarkable unilateral interpretations and expansions of its authority.

The Fed has been doing so many of these this year, starting with Bear Stearns in March, then to the rescues of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and AIG, that one must wonder if Bernanke worries just how much firepower, both in terms of monetary reserves and credibility, he really has left.

Also, since the commercial paper market stretches across the globe, is the US Fed really going to backstop transactions between, say, an Icelandic bank and an Indian steel company? That's a tall order, indeed. Still, this could be a short-term strategy employed from now until the US election, after which, it is hoped, the adults might be in charge.

When the history books start to write of what has just happened in the world financial markets, I hope plenty of space is reserved for that cockeyed cowpuncher of capitalism, Mr All Hat and No Cattle himself, Dallas Federal Reserve Board president Richard Fisher.

All year long, Fisher has been warning that inflation was a bigger threat to the world economy than recession and unemployment, a contention that has now been proved spectacularly wrong. Up until very recently, he had been advocating higher, not lower, short-term interest rates, a policy recommendation that, had it been followed, and knowing what we know now about just how weak the economy actually is, would have been spectacularly harmful.

It was in September that Bernanke, evidently hoping to get Fisher back into his flock and stop his habitual dissents from the post-meeting Fed statements, agreed to the interest rate hold, when a cut could have provided far more benefit than the one we just saw.
Fisher joined in the majority with Wednesday's cut, proving, once again, that the best way to make a person see the light is to have him feel the heat. For many American senior citizens who had hoped to be able to live out their golden years gently drawing down their hard-earned stock wealth, these days they're doing both, feeling the heat and seeing the light. The heat is from the sizzling griddle at their new part-time job at a Florida McDonald's, and the light is what they see flicking off when the next basket of French fries in boiling oil is ready to be served.

Julian Delasantellis is a management consultant, private investor and educator in international business in the US state of Washington. He can be reached at [email protected]



Title: Paulson/Bernanke explaining why Bankers are justified in stealing your money
Post by: Dig on October 14, 2008, 07:52:00 am
These guys are beyond surreal.

Check out the criminals in living color blabbing as they reem the next 10 generations out of all remnants of liberty.
Title: Re: Paulson/Bernanke explaining why Bankers are justified in stealing your money
Post by: Kilika on October 14, 2008, 08:04:48 am
Forget something? ;)
Title: Re: Paulson/Bernanke explaining why Bankers are justified in stealing your money
Post by: Dig on October 14, 2008, 08:09:20 am
Forget something? ;)

Well Bush also spoke earlier and so did FDIC rep Blair.

In addition, the pundits are also assisting in this grand theft.
Title: Re: Paulson/Bernanke explaining why Bankers are justified in stealing your money
Post by: Kilika on October 14, 2008, 08:12:27 am
I thought maybe you intended to provide a link to something.
Title: Re: Paulson/Bernanke explaining why Bankers are justified in stealing your money
Post by: tritonman on October 14, 2008, 08:14:02 am
paulson was on c-span. That is what he was talking about.. You should be able to catch a rebroadcast later in the day several times.
Title: Re: Paulson/Bernanke explaining why Bankers are justified in stealing your money
Post by: Dig on October 14, 2008, 08:16:46 am
I thought maybe you intended to provide a link to something.

sorry, it was live.

Can anyone post the transcript or rebroadcast link?

(Am I the only one watching CSPAN/CNBC 24/7? ;))
Title: Bernanke: Quick economic rebound not in cards
Post by: DCUBED on October 15, 2008, 12:01:40 pm
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081015/ap_on_bi_ge/bernanke

Bernanke: Quick economic rebound not in cards

 WASHINGTON - The country's economic health won't snap back quickly even if badly needed confidence in the U.S. financial system returns and roiled markets finally calm, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke cautioned Wednesday.

"Stabilization of the financial markets is a critical first step, but even if they stabilize as we hope they will, broader economic recovery will not happen right away," Bernanke said in a speech to the Economic Club of New York.

The government's new powers under the $700 billion financial bailout package signed into law two weeks ago should help reduce risks to the economy, Bernanke said.

Tapping that new authority, the Treasury Department announced Tuesday that it will inject up to $250 billion in U.S. banks in return for partial ownership. It is hoped that banks will use the cash infusion to rebuild their reserves and lend money more freely to businesses and consumers.

The government also plans to buy rotten mortgages and other bad debts held by banks, another new power granted by the bailout package.

The rationale behind capital injections and buying bad debts is to unclog credit. That should help financial markets function more normally again and — in time — help the wobbly economy get back on stronger footing.

"We now have the tools we need to respond with the necessary force to these challenges," Bernanke told the group. Still, he warned, "I am not suggesting the way forward will be easy."

In his speech, Bernanke did not give a fresh clue about the Fed's next move on interest rates.

In a coordinated assault on the global financial crisis last week, the Fed and other major central banks ordered hefty rate reductions. The Fed dropped its key rate to 1.50 percent, from 2 percent, in an emergency move.

Many economists said the Fed might cut rates again at its regularly scheduled meeting later this month, or may be later this year.

Bernanke said it is likely economic activity will "fall short of potential for a time."

A growing number of analysts predict the economy will actually shrink in the final three months of this year and the first three months of next year, meeting the classic definition of a recession.

"Ultimately, the trajectory of economic activity beyond the next few quarters will depend greatly on the extent to which financial and credit markets return to more normal functioning," Bernanke said.

Even with a flurry of radical steps recently taken by the Fed, the U.S. government and others around the world, "credit markets will take some time to unfreeze," Bernanke said.

The economy had been losing traction even before the financial crisis intensified last month. Fallout from the housing market's collapse continues to be the primary source of weakness for the economy and for financial markets.

All the problems have led to employers cutting jobs and other investments. Nervous consumers have hunkered down. Slowdowns overseas is sapping export growth, which had been a key source keeping the economy afloat.

"These restraining influences on economic activity, however, will be offset somewhat by the favorable effects of lower prices for oil and other commodities on household purchasing power," Bernanke said.

With the economy slowing, inflation should moderate, he added.

As with financial crises in the past, the root of the current debacle is a loss of confidence by investors and the public in the strength of key financial institutions and the overall financial markets.

"The crisis will end when comprehensive responses by political and financial leaders restore that trust, bringing investors back into the market and allowing the normal business of extending credit to households and firms to resume," Bernanke said.

Besides cutting rates, the Fed has, among other things, repeatedly tapped its Depression-era emergency lending powers to keep money flowing to squeezed institutions. It also has created new programs to provide cash loans to banks and has agreed to supply an unlimited amount of U.S. dollars to some major central banks to reduce pressures in key credit and funding markets.

The Fed also will begin buying vast amounts of short-term debt on Oct. 27. Specifically, the Fed will buy commercial paper — a crucial short-term funding that many companies rely on to pay their workers and buy supplies.

Bernanke pledged to use all available tools and will refine strategies as the Fed adapts "to new developments and the inevitable setbacks."
Title: Re: Bernanke: Quick economic rebound not in cards
Post by: hellcatjr on October 15, 2008, 12:17:54 pm
Look how nice of a meal they we were awarded for being criminals.(CNBC)... mmm I bet people in America dream of some meals such as that... what a joke! This country is now another Mexico! GG
Title: Re: Bernanke: Quick economic rebound not in cards
Post by: hellcatjr on October 15, 2008, 12:22:59 pm
Breaking News CNBC

'I liked when the two economists who questioned Bernanke,they were from two completely separate fields of strategies"

Right... a globalist is a globalist man... bankers = crooks!!

USURY WAS OUTLAWED BY GOD IN THE BIBLE! So why have we become pray to this device?
Title: Bernanke Hints At Another Rate Cut
Post by: larsonstdoc on October 20, 2008, 11:40:48 am
Bernanke is almost out of bullets.  Soon he will be shooting blanks!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081020/ap_on_bi_ge/financial_meltdown

Bush, Bernanke say time is right for new stimulus

By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer


AP – House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. John Spratt, Jr., D-S.C., and the committee's ranking Republican, …
WASHINGTON – Momentum increased Monday for a new economic stimulus package to help cash-strapped Americans as President Bush and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke threw their weight behind an idea they earlier opposed.
Press secretary Dana Perino told reporters on Air Force One as the president flew to Louisiana on Monday for an economic event that the White House will have to see what kind of package Congress crafts. Perino says the administration has concerns that what has been put forward so far by Democratic leaders in Congress would not actually stimulate the economy.
Earlier Monday, Bernanke told the House Budget Committee that country's economic weakness could last for some time and it was the right time for Congress to consider a new package. Earlier this year, most individuals and couples received tax rebate checks of $600-$1,200 through the $168 billion stimulus package enacted in February.
"With the economy likely to be weak for several quarters, and with some risk of a protracted slowdown, consideration of a fiscal package by the Congress at this juncture seems appropriate," Bernanke said in prepared testimony to the panel.
Bernanke's remarks before the House Budget Committee marked his first endorsement of another round of government stimulus. Democrats on Capitol Hill have been pushing for another stimulus plan, but the Bush administration has been cool to the idea as the federal budget deficit explodes.
Bernake also appeared to open the door for further interest rate cuts. Wall Street stocks rose on the news and on signals that the important credit markets were loosening further.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi chimed in on the stimulus idea. "I call on President Bush and congressional Republicans to once again heed Chairman Bernanke's advice and as they did in January, work with Democrats in Congress to enact a targeted, timely and fiscally responsible economic recovery and job creation package," Pelosi said in a statement Monday.
Pelosi has said an economic recovery bill could be as large as $150 billion. Economists have told leading Democrats the plan should be twice the size.
Bernanke suggested that Congress design the stimulus package so that it will be timely, well targeted and would limit the longer-term affects on the government's budget deficit, which hit a record high in the recently ended budget year.
The economy has been beaten down by housing, credit and financial crises. Its woes are likely to drag into next year, leaving more people out of work and more businesses wary of making big investments.
U.S. stocks surged in midday trading Monday. The Dow Jones industrials rose almost 2 percent and the Standard & Poor's 500 index jumped 2.1 percent.
Interbank lending rates fell for a sixth straight day Monday. The London interbank offered rate, or Libor, for three-month dollar loans fell 0.36 percent to 4.06 percent, the biggest daily drop since January.
Bernanke said the package also should include provisions that would help break through the stubborn credit clog that is playing a major role in the economy's slowdown.
"If the Congress proceeds with a fiscal package, it should consider including measures to help improve access to credit by consumers, home buyers, businesses and other borrowers," Bernanke said. "Such actions might be particularly effective at promoting economic growth and job creation," he added.
The Fed and the world's other major central banks recently joined forces to slice interest rates, the first coordinated action of that kind in the Fed's history. The central bank meets next on Oct. 28-29 and many economists believe Fed policymakers will again lower its key rate — now at 1.50 percent — to brace the wobbly economy.
Over time, "stimulus provided by monetary policy" along with the eventual stabilization in housing markets and improvements in credit markets will help the economy get back on firm footing, Bernanke said.
Dropping rates might induce consumers and businesses to boost their spending, an important ingredient to energize overall economic activity.
So far, though, a string of drastic actions by the Fed and the Bush administration has yet to turn around a bunker mentality. Banks fear lending money to each other and to their customers. Businesses are reluctant to hire and boost capital investments. Consumers have hunkered down. All the economy's problems are feeding off each other, creating a vicious cycle that Washington policymakers are finding difficult to break.
One-third of Americans are worried about losing their jobs, half fret they will be unable to keep up with mortgage and credit card payments, and seven in 10 are anxious that their stocks and retirement investments are losing value, according to an Associated Press-Yahoo News poll of likely voters released Monday.
Unemployment could hit 7.5 percent or higher by next year. Many analysts predict the economy will shrink later this year and early next year, meeting the classic definition of a recession. Some believe the economy already jolted into reverse during the July-to-September quarter.
Last week, the Treasury Department announced it would inject up to $250 billion in U.S. banks in return for partial ownership, something that hasn't been done since the Great Depression. The government hopes banks will use the capital infusions to rebuild their reserves and bolster lending to customers.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Monday that government purchases of stock in banks represent an investment that should eventually make money for the taxpayer.
So far this year, 15 banks have failed, including the largest U.S. bank failure in history, compared with three last year. And Wall Street's five biggest investment firms were swallowed by other companies, filed bankruptcy or converted themselves into commercial banks to weather the financial storm.
In other efforts to stem the crisis, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. is temporarily guaranteeing new issues of bank debt — fully protecting the money even if the institution fails.
The FDIC also said it would provide unlimited deposit insurance for non-interest bearing accounts, which small businesses often use to cover payrolls and other expenses. Frequently, these accounts exceed the current $250,000 insurance limit, so the expanded insurance should discourage nervous companies from pulling their money out.
The United States and other top economic powers also have adopted a five-point action plan and pledge to do all they can to provide relief.
__
Associated Press writers Pan Pylas in London, Tom Raum and Marting Crutsinger in Washington contributed to this report.
Title: Re: Bernanke Hints At Another Rate Cut
Post by: scoffer on October 20, 2008, 12:09:20 pm
Another interest rate cut? Bernanke's tool belt is getting pretty empty; he's not going to be able to do very much with two thumb tacks and a printing press.

It was my understanding that a significant portion of Pelosi's next proposed "stimulus package" would be used to extend unemployment benefits and augment food stamp availability. In that case wouldn't it be more appropriate to call it a "life boat" package?
Title: Re: Bernanke Hints At Another Rate Cut
Post by: 7D7 on October 20, 2008, 05:53:18 pm
http://moneyhelicopters.ytmnd.com/
Title: $2 Trillion Handed out by Paulson and Bernanke, But Who Got It, Nobody Knows
Post by: bigron on November 17, 2008, 04:32:25 am
$2 Trillion Handed out by Paulson and Bernanke, But Who Got It, Nobody Knows

We have no idea who got this money or the conditions or collateral put up in return for the loans.


By Nicholas von Hoffman, The Nation
Posted on November 17, 2008, Printed on November 17, 2008
http://www.alternet.org/story/107340/

With his latest policy switch to buying stock in banks and other companies, Henry Paulson has more zigs and zags to his credit than a fox trying to escape a pack of hounds.

 

The fox and the hounds, of course, have a clear idea of what they want to do and how they want to do it, which is more than you can say of Paulson. Sums of incalculable size are being spent or pledged by Paulson and his playmate, Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, and nobody outside their organizations, or maybe inside them either, knows who got what, how much they got, and under what conditions they got it.

 

In the past couple of months Bernanke has loaned out $2 trillion to unnamed companies under eleven different programs and all but three of them were slapped together in the past fifteen months of financial crisis.

 

To repeat, we do not know who got this money or what collateral was put up in return for the loans or what conditions were attached to them.

 

The sums involved are almost three times as large as Paulson's $700 billion muddled bailout efforts that Congress voted for last month. Bernanke does have the legal authority to pass out these trillions without Congressional authorization and without explanation, but secrecy breeds suspicion and loss of confidence.

 

These officials preface every speech by talking about "transparency," their favorite word, at the same time they are handing off $2 trillion and they won't say to whom, and leading Bloomberg News to file suit under the Freedom of Information Act.

 

Paulson has made off with $50 billion to give to AIG for the purpose of setting up a special entity by which the company's lousiest loans are to be kept off the books and the unknown debtors protected. When asked about this by the <i>New York Times<i>, Lynn E. Turner, who sits on the Treasury Department's Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession, complained that "We've had way too many things here that nobody knows anything about…. That's why no one has faith in the capital markets."

 

Paulson appears to have given away, invested, loaned or lost about $300 billion of the first $700 billion Congress gave him. But he has lost more than money: Nobody believes him or Bernanke anymore.

 

Every day another company steps forward with its hand out -- American Express, Chrysler, GE Financial -- and every day it appears Paulson and Bernanke are prepared to accommodate these corporate mendicants.

 

Paulson left his job as CEO of Goldman Sachs to become treasury secretary, and by now it may be dawning on him that CEO-ship is no substitute for an apprenticeship in public service that might have given him the political skills he lacks. The same may be said of Bernanke, who spent much of his life as a harmless Princeton professor of economics.

 

Both of these men are convinced, doctrinaire free-marketeers. They hate supervising this intervention into American business. Paulson repeatedly bemoans what he is doing.

 

Hence, both the principals are trying to devise and carry out programs that they do not believe in. They cannot have spent any time thinking about how government might regulate and intervene successfully. It's as though one were to ask a couple of pro-life physicians to conduct a series of abortions. Should we be surprised they do not do it well?

 

With President Bush <i>hors de combat</i> and having rendered himself a nullity, we are reduced to Paulson and Bernanke to show us the way in this maelstrom. That may explain why criticism of their work has been so muted.

 

Two female officials, however, have conducted their offices with distinction. Sheila Bair, chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, has moved heaven and earth to get Paulson and Bernanke to embrace a massive program to stop the housing foreclosures and take the first step toward ending the chaos. To say that she has had mixed success with the men is an understatement.

 

Less well known is Brooksley Born, who will be a major figure when the history of this Great Debacle is written. Born was the chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission from 1996 to 1999. She foresaw the calamity that runaway use of credit default swaps and other derivatives would cause, and battled to impose regulation on them. She was stopped by Alan Greenspan, Arthur Levitt and Robert Rubin, the major economic figures in the Clinton administration.

 

After a distinguished career in law, Brooksley Born has retired to watch birds and play with her grandchildren. Sheila Bair battles on against the dunderheads, and we are left helpless, waiting.



Nicholas von Hoffman writes regularly for The Nation. He is the author ofthirteen books, including Citizen Cohn, and he is a columnist for the New YorkObserver.

© 2008 The Nation All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/107340/
Title: Re: $2 Trillion Handed out by Paulson and Bernanke, But Who Got It, Nobody Knows
Post by: chris jones on November 17, 2008, 06:06:26 am

Hi Biggs, isn't there a congressional oversight committe digging into this?
Title: Re: $2 Trillion Handed out by Paulson and Bernanke, But Who Got It, Nobody Knows
Post by: bigron on November 17, 2008, 06:27:34 am
Hi Chris

Apparently not.......

This whole mess is serrounded by Mistery

Title: Re: $2 Trillion Handed out by Paulson and Bernanke, But Who Got It, Nobody Knows
Post by: releasethebonds on November 17, 2008, 02:32:53 pm
I'm not saying how much Bernanke gave me.
Title: Re: $2 Trillion Handed out by Paulson and Bernanke, But Who Got It, Nobody Knows
Post by: larsonstdoc on November 17, 2008, 02:39:18 pm



   I know the answer!  THEIR FRIENDS!
Title: Bernanke, Paulson set for grilling on $700 billion financial bailout Tuesday
Post by: Catalina on November 18, 2008, 01:26:57 am
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081118/financial_meltdown.html

The two top salesmen for a $700 billion financial bailout are in for a grilling by Capitol Hill lawmakers just one week after the administration officially ditched the original strategy behind the rescue.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson are expected to provide greater insights into the shift when they testify Tuesday before the House Financial Services Committee.

Paulson, who is overseeing the bailout program for the Bush administration, changed course and announced last week that the government would not use any of the money to buy rotten mortgages and other bad assets from banks. That had been the centerpiece of the plan when Paulson and Bernanke originally pitched it to lawmakers.

"Our assessment ... is that this is not the most effective way" to use the bailout money, Paulson said at that time.

Instead, Paulson said the department would focus on rolling out a capital injection program to pour $250 billion into banks in return for partial ownership stakes in them.

It would also search for new ways to boost the availability of auto loans, student loans and credit cards, which have been become harder to get due to the credit crisis, he said.

Specifically, the department, along with the Federal Reserve, is exploring using some of the bailout money to bankroll a new loan facility. The aim: helping companies that issue credit cards, make student loans and finance car purchases.

The idea behind the capital injection program is for banks to use the money to rebuild reserves and lend more freely to customers. However, banks do have the leeway to use the money for other things, such as buying other banks or paying dividends to investors. That has touched a nerve with some lawmakers.

Locked-up lending is a prime reason why the United States is suffering through the worst financial crisis since the 1930s. All the fallout from the housing, credit and financial crises have badly hurt the economy, which is almost certainly in recession, analysts say.

In an interview published Tuesday in The Washington Post, Paulson said he was also working on a proposal that would allow the government to take over a wide range of financial institutions -- not just banks -- that are in danger of collapse.

The administration, however, has remained opposed to using some of the bailout money to help troubled U.S. automakers or to provide guarantees for mortgages at risk of falling into foreclosure, another huge source of distress for the economy.

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the panel, has been tapped by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to draft an aid package for Detroit. The auto companies are seeking $25 billion for emergency loans.

In a break with the administration stance, Sheila Bair, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., who also will testify Tuesday, recently proposed using $24 billion of the bailout money to help some American households avoid foreclosure.

So far, Treasury Department has pledged $250 billion for banks and has agreed to devote $40 billion to troubled insurer American International Group-- its first slice of funds going to a company other than a bank. That leaves just $60 billion available from Congress' first bailout installment of $350 billion.

Congressional officials said Paulson indicated he is unlikely to tap the remaining $350 billion before the administration leaves office on Jan. 20. That would mean the incoming Obama administration would decide whether and how the money should be spent. The congressional officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to disclose the developments.
Title: Bernanke to Congress: WE NEED MORE
Post by: deconstructmyhouse on November 18, 2008, 11:35:12 am
un
real

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/business/economy/19bailout.html?hp (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/business/economy/19bailout.html?hp)


Top financial officials warned Congress on Tuesday that the economy continued to need urgent attention, with the credit markets remaining tight, millions of homeowners sliding toward foreclosure and the government’s relief payments unlikely to flow into the markets for a few more months.
 
Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, described signs of only modest improvement in the credit markets, warning that “overall, credit conditions are still far from normal, with risk spreads remaining very elevated.”

And, in a statement prepared for a hearing Tuesday morning before the House Committee on Financial Services, he strongly urged banks to improve the flow of loans to their most creditworthy borrowers.

“There are some signs that credit markets, while still quite strained, are improving,” Mr. Bernanke said. He pointed to some technical improvements: banks were charging one another less for short-term lending; money market mutual funds and the commercial paper market were stabilizing.

But now that banks’ access to capital had improved, he said, they must ease their grip on lending. “It is imperative that all banking organizations and their regulators work together to ensure that the needs of creditworthy borrowers are met in a manner consistent with safety and soundness,” Mr. Bernanke said.

At the same hearing, Sheila C. Bair, chairwoman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, said she planned to continue her campaign to get relief into the hands of troubled homeowners.

She said a program that her agency had proposed to the Treasury Department would modify mortgages and ease repayment terms, which could prevent “as many as 1.5 million avoidable foreclosures by the end of 2009.”

But, in her statement, she also projected a gloomy picture for foreclosures, saying that over the next two years, four million to five million mortgage loans will enter foreclosure if nothing is done.

That means that even with the approach she advocates, delinquencies would continue at about the same rate as in the last year or two.

Appearing along with Ms. Bair and Mr. Bernanke, Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. said in his prepared testimony that the Bush administration decided this week to defer reaching much more deeply into the $700 billion in bailout funds approved by Congress in October until the next administration takes over Jan. 20.

“If we have learned anything throughout this year,” Mr. Paulson said, “we have learned that this financial crisis is unpredictable and difficult to counteract.”

Having spent most of the money provided by Congress, which split the October package into two equal parts and told the Treasury to come back for renewed permission to spend the second half, Mr. Paulson said it would be “only prudent” to reserve the remainder until next year, in the interest of maintaining “not only our flexibility but that of the next administration.

Some lawmakers have suggested that some money might be diverted to the auto industry, an idea that Mr. Paulson has not supported.
Title: Re: Bernanke to Congress: WE NEED MORE
Post by: larsonstdoc on November 18, 2008, 11:38:43 am



  This is unbelievable.  You would think all these RAT BASTARDS would all get together to get their story straight.  DEATH TO THE FED, THE NWO, THE IMF, AND THE WORLD BANK!
Title: Re: Bernanke to Congress: WE NEED MORE
Post by: plantop14 on November 18, 2008, 11:42:02 am


  This is unbelievable.  You would think all these RAT BASTARDS would all get together to get their story straight.  DEATH TO THE FED, THE NWO, THE IMF, AND THE WORLD BANK!
Yep, un-f--king believeable! >:( There is no amount that will be enough or sufficient for these shithead scum bags!
Title: Re: Bernanke to Congress: WE NEED MORE
Post by: NWOSCUM on November 18, 2008, 12:11:52 pm
These scum aren't gonna be done until we are milked DRY!  And I don't mean the good way............... ;D
Title: Economic situation assistance needet Bernanke pushes for more money
Post by: oyk152 on December 02, 2008, 02:52:16 am
In the USA the demands increase themselves after further economic situation assistance. Central bank head Ben Bernanke demanded decided measures for the protection of the fastened U.S. economy. “Our national economic policy must concern seriously the substantial risks for financial stability and the economic growth”, said Bernanke. Minister of Finance Henry Paulson announced to promote the granting of credit with further aid programmes.
 
Bernanke said, a further reduction of the rate of interest under a per cent was “surely possible”. Analysts expect that the Fed in the middle of will lower Decembers the interest on 0,5 per cent. In addition, unorthodox methods are conceivable, in order to seize the economy under the arms, said Bernanke. So the Fed securities could buy, which the Treasury spends, in order to affect net yields and stimulate the demand. The economy of the country is further at considerable pressure. The statements Bernankes accelerated on Monday driving downhill at the Wall Street: The Dow-Jones index of the default values closed 7.7 per cent in the minus.
 
Billions for renewable energies
 
Also Minister of Finance Paulson sees need for further assistance. One works on further programs, in order to set the granting of credit in motion, said Paulson. “If these programs are ready for application, we them with the congress and the next government will discuss.” Banks would have to assign again credits, independently of whether they would have received something from the 150 billion dollar, which had been pumped to the financial system demanded Paulson. It did not call details of the programs.
 
To an advisor of the democrats in the house of representatives according to the delegates of the party want to bring an economic situation package in January over presumably approximately 500 billion dollar on the way. The package is to contain the reduction of taxes for the middle class, aimed at by the future president Barack Obama, explained the advisor.
 
Besides billions should be spent on infrastructure programs and for the promotion of renewable energies. The U.S. economy is according to official data already since a whole year in the recession. How the responsible “national office explained OF Economic Research” (NBER), a approximately six-year upswing of the world largest national economy went to end in December 2007.

http://www.n-tv.de/1062200.html (http://www.n-tv.de/1062200.html)
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.n-tv.de%2F1062200.html&lp=de_en&btnTrUrl=Translate (http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.n-tv.de%2F1062200.html&lp=de_en&btnTrUrl=Translate)
Title: Re: Economic situation assistance needet Bernanke pushes for more money
Post by: strgzr on December 02, 2008, 04:45:25 am
Billions? More like trillions. Will the Federal Reserve banker-thief that steals the last nickle turn out the lights. We won't be able to pay the utility bill.
Title: Re: Economic situation assistance needet Bernanke pushes for more money
Post by: chris jones on December 02, 2008, 05:19:07 am
Billions? More like trillions. Will the Federal Reserve banker-thief that steals the last nickle turn out the lights. We won't be able to pay the utility bill.
Hi Gus
They have allready seen to that. imagine the power they weild of over the citizens of this nation.
Their gang needs a few trillion, no problem, the feds got the printing presses, we simply pay for it.
Then there are those who continue to say we are a the USA, the Republic of the the United States of America, the light of righteousnes to the world, the torch of liberty will not weaken. All men are created equal, they still push this on us Gus. The truly sad part is that many of our citizens continue to beleive this.
Keep up the wood pile. no matter what the price of oil.
 CJ
Title: Bernanke Opposes Auto Aid Without Congressional Action
Post by: larsonstdoc on December 09, 2008, 10:36:27 am
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aTWTFX.9IPWc&refer=home


Dec. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said the central bank opposes lending to U.S. automakers without congressional action to aid the companies, and suggested options including a bankruptcy reorganization.

“The Federal Reserve would be extremely reluctant to extend credit where Congress has actively considered providing assistance but, after due consideration, has decided not to act,” Bernanke said in a Dec. 5 letter to Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd.

While the Fed has used emergency-lending authority over the past year to aid financial firms, short-term debt markets and mutual funds, those decisions were aimed at financial stability and the broader economy, Bernanke said. By contrast, Congress is “best suited” to determine whether to assist a specific U.S. industry, he said.

“Even if the companies have sufficient collateral, lending to an auto manufacturing company would represent a marked departure from that policy, and would take us into distinctly new realms of policymaking,” Bernanke said. “In particular, it would raise the question as to whether the Federal Reserve should be involved in industrial policy, which has traditionally been outside the range of our responsibilities.”

The letter, a copy of which was forwarded by the Senate banking panel, represents Bernanke’s first public comments on whether the Fed would extend credit to the beleaguered car industry.

General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC have asked U.S. lawmakers for as much as $34 billion in aid. Congress is discussing a $15 billion rescue proposal where the Treasury would get warrants for stock equivalent to 20 percent of any government loans.

The Fed chief said Congress should also consider a “range of possible policy actions” besides direct aid, including a government-assisted “orderly bankruptcy r
Title: Bernanke ‘War Powers’ Undermine Fed Bank Presidents (Update1)
Post by: Volitzar on December 12, 2008, 05:16:47 pm
Bernanke ‘War Powers’ Undermine Fed Bank Presidents (Update1)
Email | Print | A A A

By Craig Torres and Steve Matthews

Dec. 9 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve’s interest-rate target is getting close to zero, and so is the power of the Fed’s regional bank presidents.

The district chiefs’ authority over borrowing costs has been marginalized in the past two months as Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and the Fed Board of Governors in Washington made their own decisions on emergency measures to flood the economy with cash.

“The Board has usurped authority,” said William Poole, former president of the St. Louis Fed and now a senior fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. “This dramatic change in policy direction has not been announced or even acknowledged.”

Bernanke must now try to bring the Federal Open Market Committee, which includes district presidents and Fed governors, along as he turns to more radical strategies, such as buying Treasuries to drive down long-term rates. A lack of consensus at next week’s FOMC meeting could result in muddled communication that confuses investors and undermines confidence.

“Whatever our communications problems are now, they are going to be magnified in this new world we are going to be in,” James Bullard, Poole’s successor at the St. Louis Fed, said in an interview. “We have a bunch of analysis in the works right now. Frankly, I am mulling it over myself.”

Yields on 10-year Treasuries this month slid to the lowest level since at least 1962, in anticipation of Fed purchases and weaker growth. The notes yielded 2.73 percent at 10:32 a.m. in New York, compared with an average of 4.70 percent in the past decade.

Forgoing a Vote

A conference call last month showed how little say the central bank’s 12 regional presidents now have in some of the Fed’s biggest decisions.

The regional bank chiefs were invited to listen as officials in Washington outlined their decision on a new $600 billion program to help the housing market. The presidents weren’t asked to vote on the initiative, even though it aimed at cutting borrowing costs, something they vote on in regular FOMC meetings.

“If I am a regional Fed bank president, I have had my power diminished a lot,” said Ethan Harris, co-head of U.S. economic research at Barclays Capital Inc. in New York, who used to work at the New York Fed. “I think of it as war powers for the Board of Governors.”

Many of the new facilities have been studied and recommended by the New York Fed, whose president, Timothy Geithner, is the vice chairman of the FOMC. Geithner, President-elect Barack Obama’s nominee to be Treasury secretary, is leaving the FOMC and will be replaced at the Dec. 15-16 meeting by Christine Cumming, the New York Fed’s first vice president.

Emergency Powers

Regional bank presidents don’t have a vote when the Board uses emergency powers to lend to firms other than banks in “unusual and exigent circumstances,” as it’s done repeatedly this year.

The district-bank chiefs by design are supposed to offer a counterbalance to the Board, and in the past haven’t been shy about challenging chairmen. In February 1994, former chairman Alan Greenspan had to argue against four presidents who wanted to raise rates at least a half percentage point, compared with his own preference for a quarter-point move.

Greenspan worried about the effect on markets of an abrupt move, transcripts of FOMC discussions showed. He said he “also would be concerned if this committee were not in concert. If we are perceived to be split on an issue as significant as this, I think we’re risking some very serious problems in this organization.”

Fed’s Strategies

The Fed has deployed two main strategies during the current credit crisis. The FOMC, which currently includes five governors and five presidents, has lowered its benchmark federal funds rate target by 4.25 percentage points since September 2007.

Acting separately, the Board of Governors has provided emergency funding to gridlocked markets and troubled institutions such as American International Group Inc. that were on the brink of failure. Those actions have made the key rate less relevant as a tool of policy, because they’ve driven down the overnight lending rate between banks below the target set by the FOMC.

While the target is 1 percent, the effective federal funds rate averaged 0.33 percentage point in the past week.

“The federal funds rate is trading persistently below target,” said Poole, who is a contributor to Bloomberg News. “That can’t be an accident.”

With its new $600 billion program, the Fed has stepped out of its traditional role of backstop liquidity provider, making a direct effort to manipulate long-term mortgage rates. Some presidents are wary of any strategy that appears to subsidize debtors by pushing rates below yields set by the market.

Allocating Credit

“Central bank lending policies should avoid straying into the realm of allocating credit across firms or sectors of the economy,” Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser said Dec. 2.

Richmond Fed President Jeffrey Lacker warned last week that officials should avoid any plan that would have the central bank pay for a fiscal stimulus. Obama has put an economic recovery program at the top of his agenda when he takes office Jan. 20. Lawmakers in Congress have suggested that the size of such a program may be between $500 billion and $700 billion.

“I personally do not believe the Fed should tie asset purchases to any specific fiscal programs, whatever their merits,” Lacker said after a speech in Charlotte, North Carolina, Dec. 3. At the same time, he said he was open to purchasing U.S. government debt for the purpose of fighting the danger of deflation.

FOMC Meeting

At next week’s meeting, Board officials will likely propose ways to lower longer-term interest rates so mortgage and corporate borrowers can borrow more cheaply. Bernanke said in a Dec. 1 speech the Fed could purchase Treasury or agency securities in “substantial quantities.” District presidents may simply be asked to support and expand on what the Board has already done.

“The Board’s importance has grown at the expense of the FOMC,” said Dino Kos, former markets director at the New York Fed and now managing director of research firm Portales Partners LLC. “The FOMC meeting itself is going to become a very uncomfortable place if people don’t know what they are there for. Institutional issues are at stake.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Craig Torres in Washington at [email protected]; Steve Matthews in Atlanta at 1310 or [email protected]

Last Updated: December 9, 2008 10:34 EST

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aKba9P9q0Pgc&refer=home
Title: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: headwest on December 15, 2008, 09:36:02 pm
A new report from financial consulting firm Celent argues that there is no credit crisis, and that the publicly available data from the Federal Reserve Bank directly contradicts the doom-and-gloom public statements made by its chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/2008/12/15/are-paulson-and-bernanke-lying-to-us (http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/2008/12/15/are-paulson-and-bernanke-lying-to-us)
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: larsonstdoc on December 15, 2008, 09:47:17 pm




  Only when they are in front of a camera and their lips are moving.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Real Truth on December 15, 2008, 09:48:25 pm



  Only when they are in front of a camera and their lips are moving.
or whenever they quote "this is from a good source"
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: OldSchool on December 15, 2008, 11:01:00 pm
They pull publicity stunts like this to tell the sheep exactly whats going on, while they're 'sleeping'.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: user111 on December 16, 2008, 12:04:11 am
And again I say,,,,The only reason either of them are in thier present employment is because both were turned down at 7-11 because they failed the basic math and change counting pre employment tests.
So where do ya go when ya can't get a job anywhere else?,,,The Feds,,hell,,they'll hire anyone.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Revolt426 on December 16, 2008, 12:22:01 am
ok let me lay this out there. there is NO CREDIT crisis. there is a DERIVATIVE crisis. There is a 1.5 Quadrillion dollar derivative bubble and no banks no the other banks Derivative balance sheets because they are private so they refuse to lend to each other. Other than that, a consumer or anyone other than an acual bank CAN get loans, this is all BS to bail out part of the Derivative bubble, then let it implode and allow the biggest banks to eat / consolidate the smaller ones. Remember, this is a Derivative Blowout, has nothing to do with credit crunches or idiotic lending processes. it is 100% derivatives that are eating the banks balance sheets.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Dig on December 16, 2008, 12:34:37 am
Does a bear shit in the woods?
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: cinsana88 on December 16, 2008, 12:38:26 am
ok let me lay this out there. there is NO CREDIT crisis. there is a DERIVATIVE crisis.

sorry for being ignorant but what is a derivative in the first place?  I hear it all the time on the AJ show and from webster tarpley.  the other time i hear it is in calculus but i'm sure its a different type of derivative.

Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Revolt426 on December 16, 2008, 12:41:22 am
sorry for being ignorant but what is a derivative in the first place?  I hear it all the time on the AJ show and from webster tarpley.  the other time i hear it is in calculus but i'm sure its a different type of derivative.


A Derivative is a lump of subprime mortgages that are packaged up together, called an asset, stamped Triple AAA By the regulators and sold over and over again at interest. The idea is that the Derivative will keep generating money only if the housing market continues to go up, and housing prices have collapsed so the Derivatives are worthless. Then there are Credit Default Swaps, which are insurance derivatives that guard you against a company that defaults. There are 1.5 Quadrillion, (1500 trillion) of these in circulation and they are 100% unregulated. the housing derivatives are known as CDO's (Collaterized Debt Obligations)
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: deconstructmyhouse on December 16, 2008, 12:42:15 am
wiki:
Derivatives are financial contracts, or financial instruments, whose values are derived from the value of something else (known as the underlying). The underlying on which a derivative is based can be an asset (e.g., commodities, equities (stocks), residential mortgages, commercial real estate, loans, bonds), an index (e.g., interest rates, exchange rates, stock market indices, consumer price index (CPI) — see inflation derivatives), or other items (e.g., weather conditions, or other derivatives). Credit derivatives are based on loans, bonds or other forms of credit.

The main types of derivatives are: forwards (which if traded on an exchange are known as futures); options; and swaps.

Derivatives can be used to mitigate the risk of economic loss arising from changes in the value of the underlying. This activity is known as hedging. Alternatively, derivatives can be used by investors to increase the profit arising if the value of the underlying moves in the direction they expect. This activity is known as speculation.

Because the value of a derivative is contingent on the value of the underlying, the notional value of derivatives is recorded off the balance sheet of an institution, although the market value of derivatives is recorded on the balance sheet.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Revolt426 on December 16, 2008, 12:43:49 am
That is a text book explanation, for the current situation my explanation of derivatives are accurate. Techniquilly a derivative is anything of value derived from something else obviously but we are talking CDO's and CDS' that are wrecking the economy and financial system.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: deconstructmyhouse on December 16, 2008, 01:33:02 am
Yeah, thanks, I posted the wiki definition before i saw yours.  yours is much more relevant and i finally understood more.

Sooooo, can you help me with backwardation and condango?
two relevant terms I'm struggling to understand at the moment, as they relate to gold.

I know we experienced a gold backwardation event on Dec 2, and I know it was hugely significant. 
I like to read Fekete, but I am working on groundlevel comprehension here.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Revolt426 on December 16, 2008, 01:35:38 am
I dont know those terms, but Gold and Silver bulls just resumed yesterday. Be prepared once gold hits 850 for a rally that will break the previous 1000+ high before it ends. 850 is the pshycological 1980's high barrier and when it breaks again it proves to investors that the Gold Bull isn't finished, by any means. That is when inflationairy panic starts, and by chance the dollar dropped about a whopping 150 some odd basis points today!.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: deconstructmyhouse on December 16, 2008, 01:38:20 am
if you are interested, the backwardation article is a short scroll down...

Fekete is an amazing economist...

http://www.professorfekete.com/ (http://www.professorfekete.com/)
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Revolt426 on December 16, 2008, 01:41:34 am
thx ill check it out in a bit, but the reason for the Precious Metal correction was actually JP Morgan Chase and some other investment firms. Bear Stearns had tens of  THOUSANDS of Short contracts on gold/silver when JP morgan acquired it. They've been naked shorting it every day since June but they cannot do it forever. Eventually the deflation will turn to inflation ( may be happening as i type) beacuse of the attempt by Bernanke and Paulson to Re-Inflate the bubble for certain firms to consolidate smaller competitors. They needed to supress gold until the major consolidation were done because its easier to do such things when the dollar is strong.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: deconstructmyhouse on December 16, 2008, 01:42:39 am
Do you think they are out maneuvering themselves?
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Revolt426 on December 16, 2008, 01:48:13 am
Do you think they are out maneuvering themselves?
I think they have so many backup plans that if they f**kup they will just go into hiding with their trillions of dollars ..... I dont see everything going perfect for them.. but its obvious since Citi group went down and was rescued that JP Morgan is atop the pyramid and is shorting competitors to death, literally. It's really not the U.S. GOV doing this, JP Morgan is really a British bank if you look into it, his father started that bank as JS morgan in London. They are attacking the U.S. banks , that is appearent. I really dont know what their elaborate plan is going to lead to , no one knows this except the bankers that planned it. I would expect everytime you see a False Flag like Mumbia on a BRIC nation or, Germany or France it would be the Masters telling their puppets to stop rebelling. That was the whole point in the India attack, to prevent BRIC(Brazil, Russia, India,China) from uniting and forming a new Bretton Woods conference  to avoid the globalist agenda.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: El Scampio on December 16, 2008, 01:53:05 am
Yeah, thanks, I posted the wiki definition before i saw yours.  yours is much more relevant and i finally understood more.

Sooooo, can you help me with backwardation and condango?
two relevant terms I'm struggling to understand at the moment, as they relate to gold.

I know we experienced a gold backwardation event on Dec 2, and I know it was hugely significant. 
I like to read Fekete, but I am working on groundlevel comprehension here.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/07/contango_backwardation.asp?viewed=1

The shape of the futures curve is important to commodity hedgers and speculators. Both care about whether commodity futures markets are contango markets or normal backwardation markets. This isn't semantic: in 1993 the German company Metallgesellschaft famously lost more than $1 billion dollars - mostly because management deployed a hedging system that profited from normal backwardation markets but did not anticipate a shift to contango markets. In this article, we'll lay out the difference between contango and backwardation and show you how to avoid serious losses.

Normal and Inverted: Snapshot in Time
A contango market is often confused with a normal futures curve; and a normal backwardation market is confused with an inverted futures curve.

Let's start by getting an understanding of the difference between the two. Start with a static picture of a futures curve. A static picture of the futures curve plots futures prices (y-axis) against contract maturities (i.e., terms to maturity). This is analogous to a plot of the term structure of interest rates: we are looking at prices for many different maturities as they extend into the horizon. The chart below plots a normal market in greenand an inverted market in red:

(http://i.investopedia.com/inv/articles/site/CT-Contango1.gif)
Copyright ã 2007 Investopedia.com
Figure 1

The plot above is a hypothetical plot for crude oil futures. There is no reason to expect a flat line. The current price is called the spot price. In the chart above, the spot price is $60. In the normal (green line) market, a one-year futures contract is priced at $90. Therefore, if you take a long position in the one-year contract, you promise to purchase one contract for $90 in one year. Our long position is not an option in the future - it is an obligation in the future. (To learn more, read Futures Fundamentals.)

Supply/Demand Determines the Shape
The red line in Figure 1, on the other hand, depicts an inverted market. In an inverted market, the futures price for faraway deliveries is less than the spot price. Why would a futures curve invert? Because, in the case of a physical asset, there may be some benefit to owning the asset (called the convenience yield) or, in the case of a financial asset, ownership may confer a dividend to the owner. (For related reading, see The Importance Of Dividends, The Power Of Dividend Growth and How Dividends Work For Investors.)

A few fundamental factors (i.e., the cost to carry a physical asset or finance a financial asset) inform supply/demand for the commodity, which ultimately determines the shape of the futures curve. If we really want to be precise, we could say that fundamentals like storage cost, financing cost (cost to carry) and convenience yield inform supply and demand. Supply meets demand where market participants are willing to agree about the expected future spot price. Their consensus view sets the futures price. And that's why a futures price changes over time: market participants update their views about the future expected spot price. (For related reading, see the Economics Basics tutorial.)

The traditional crude oil futures curve, for example, is typically humped: it is normal in the short-term but gives way to an inverted market for longer maturities.

Contango and Normal Backwardation: Patterns over Time
We have established that a futures market is normal if futures prices are higher at longer maturities and inverted if futures prices are lower at distant maturities.

This is where the concept gets a little tricky, so we'll start with two key ideas:

    * As we approach contract maturity (we might be long or short the futures contract, it doesn't matter), the futures price must converge toward the spot price. The difference is called the basis. That's because, on the maturity date, the futures price must equal the spot price. If they don't converge on maturity, anybody could make free money with an easy arbitrage. (For more insight, see Why do futures' prices converge upon spot prices during the delivery month?)
    * The most rational futures price is the expected future spot price. For example, if you and your counterparty both could foresee that the spot price in crude oil would be $80 in one year, you would rationally settle on an $80 futures price. Anything above or below would represent a loss for one of you!

Now we can define contango and normal backwardation. The difference is that normal/inverted refers to the shape of the curve as we take a snapshot in time. Contango and normal backwardation refer to the pattern of prices over time. Specifically, is the price of our contract rising or falling?

Suppose we enter into a Dec 2008 futures contract, today, for $100. Now go forward one month. The same Dec 2008 future contract could still be $100. But it might also have increased to $110 (this implies normal backwardation) or it might have decreased to $90 (implies contango). The definitions are as follows:

    * Contango is when the futures price is above the expected future spot price. Because the futures price must converge on the expected future spot price, contango implies that futures prices are falling over time as new information brings them into line with the expected future spot price.
    * Normal backwardation is when the futures price is below the expected future spot price. This is desirable for speculators who are "net long" in their positions: they want the futures price to increase. So, normal backwardation is when the futures prices are increasing.

Consider a futures contract that we purchase today, due in exactly one year. Assume the expected future spot price is $60 (see the blue flat line in Figure 2 below). If today's cost for the one-year futures contract is $90 (the red line), the futures price is above the expected future spot price. This is a contango scenario. Unless the expected future spot price changes, the contract price must drop. If we go forward in time one month, note that we will be referring to an 11-month contract; in six months, it will be a six-month contract.
 
(http://i.investopedia.com/inv/articles/site/CT-Contango2.gif)
Copyright ã 2007 Investopedia.com
Figure 2

Sorting Out the Confusion
Clearly, it is more precise to say that in contango, futures prices for a given maturity date are falling. In normal backwardation, futures are rising. This is not exactly the same as the shape of the futures curve because futures prices are constantly adjusting to consensus expectations about the expected future spot price.

Finally, consider a distinction that seems to exist only to confuse. Normal backwardation is not quite the same as backwardation. (For more insight on this, pick up a copy of "Futures, Options And Swaps" (2007) by Robert Kolb and James Overdahl). Backwardation is the same as inverted when futures prices are lower than spot prices. But in many cases, it's better to stick with inverted and drop backwardation altogether. 
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: deconstructmyhouse on December 16, 2008, 02:05:48 am
"White (at bretton woods conference)  managed to ensure the US had special veto powers over any major decision made by the IMF or the World Bank, meaning effectively that their "conditionalities" in the way of strict institutional reforms are never imposed. Furthermore, the IMF insists that the foreign exchange reserves maintained by other nations are held in the form of dollars, so no matter how much debt the US accumulates, its economy will not collapse."

Re: Bretton woods: Is the global collapse perhaps engineered/designed in part to reverse this requirement that the FE Reserves are held in the form of dollars, thereby finally allowing the collapse of the US economy and allowing their goal of formation of the American union?
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Revolt426 on December 16, 2008, 02:14:02 am
we have been the British Empires Arch Nemesis since 1776. They have tried to chop our country up numerous times, almost every war in U.S. history was triggered by the British. If you look at history, such as what Lord Palmerston did when suppporting the Confederacy and shipping slaves to the U.S. to try and cut us in half........ and numerous other events such as the assassination of Lincoln and McKinnley, it always had the British Empire involved. Now our CIA has been consumed by traitors so people are quick to blame the U.S. For everything, but in actuality it is generally British Intelligence that triggers the wars. I would say yes, the Financiers in London and Royal families want the U.S. to no longer be a soverign nation because this country is the largest threat to the British empires economic system there ever was. They base their economy on free trade, they dont really produce anything. Its more like Britain is held up by its Financial institutions and Free Trade agreements, where as we are Hurt by these things, especially free trade since it has outsourced millions of jobs to slave labor countries.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Revolt426 on December 16, 2008, 02:16:00 am
During the Bretton Woods conference the U.S. was the military might of the world. Britain had John Mayrd Keynes argue for a one world currency, while FDR opposed him and demanded the currencies remain soverign with a fixed exchange rate system, anchored by the U.S. Dollar backed by Gold. The Fixed rate system allowed the system to be free of currency speculators for a while, and Nixon /Kissinger collapsed Bretton Woods in 1971.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Anti_Illuminati on December 16, 2008, 10:58:25 pm
ok let me lay this out there. there is NO CREDIT crisis. there is a DERIVATIVE crisis. There is a 1.5 Quadrillion dollar derivative bubble and no banks no the other banks Derivative balance sheets because they are private so they refuse to lend to each other. Other than that, a consumer or anyone other than an acual bank CAN get loans, this is all BS to bail out part of the Derivative bubble, then let it implode and allow the biggest banks to eat / consolidate the smaller ones. Remember, this is a Derivative Blowout, has nothing to do with credit crunches or idiotic lending processes. it is 100% derivatives that are eating the banks balance sheets.

How would you respond to something like this: "There is a credit crunch because of the banks are basically insolvent
they are insolvent because the major banks made leveraged bets (derivatives) against loans, made with idiotic lending, on the largest asset class in the world."

Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: heavyhebrew on December 16, 2008, 11:07:35 pm
And again I say,,,,The only reason either of them are in thier present employment is because both were turned down at 7-11 because they failed the basic math and change counting pre employment tests.
So where do ya go when ya can't get a job anywhere else?,,,The Feds,,hell,,they'll hire anyone.

More like drank/smoke/snorted/whored their way through an elite Ivy League school and made the right friends in the right places. - Paulson

Or just went and became an accounting troll and write books on what you would have done last Depression and when actually confronted with an incipient collapse you twittle your fingers until it is obvious to even the most brain damaged moron that something is direly wrong then you do everything opposite of what you wrote about doing in the first place. - Bernanke

Paulson & Bernanke born bereft of their station in life at the beginning wouldn't be working at 7-11. They would be robbing it. And they would botch even that.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: jaycee on December 17, 2008, 04:04:02 am
The credit default swap explained:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6148243398619214446&hl=en

The name swap is used because if called insurance regulations must be followed.
Title: Re: Are Paulson and Bernanke Lying to Us?
Post by: Anti_Illuminati on December 17, 2008, 03:16:19 pm
Can someone answer this please?

How would you respond to something like this: "There is a credit crunch because of the banks are basically insolvent
they are insolvent because the major banks made leveraged bets (derivatives) against loans, made with idiotic lending, on the largest asset class in the world."
Title: Re: Bernanke ‘War Powers’ Undermine Fed Bank Presidents (Update1)
Post by: mr anderson on January 03, 2009, 01:15:41 am
Bump.

This should be moved to the financial crisis forum or some thread covering the US / World Economy.
Title: Re: Bernanke ‘War Powers’ Undermine Fed Bank Presidents (Update1)
Post by: Revolt426 on January 03, 2009, 03:10:12 am
This is what happens with the Anglo Dutch Monetary system, in which money is simply printed and loaned at interest from private mints instead of Governments issueing credit and spending it into the economy. The different is, monetized credit directly spent into the economy on valuable infrastructure has intrinsic value and money simply printed and loaned does not.
Title: Re: Bernanke ‘War Powers’ Undermine Fed Bank Presidents (Update1)
Post by: Nailer on January 03, 2009, 07:16:30 am
he is a liar.



http://bankimplode.com/

Writedown-Rundown & General Distress:Name - ($) Pain Factor (writedowns and charge-offs + capital raised + loan loss reserves growth + level III growth)

Citigroup - $601.2B (TARP-$25+$20B)

Bank of America - $72.1B

Goldman Sachs - $161.2B

JP Morgan Chase - $20.1B

BNP Paribas - $10.4B

UBS - $225B

Commerzbank - $32.1B

Fifth Third Bancorp - $3.6B

Mizuho MFG - $5.5B

Mitsubishi Financial Group - $760M



Bank Implode Blog Exclusives:
Peter Schiff: Government Makes it Worse

Dreams Die

Taxpayers Tab for Gov’t Bailouts

From The Grave

The D–Word

Christmas Bailout

Show Me the Money

Train Robbery or Rescue?

Goldman Sachs Bribed Senate To Pass Bailout Bill

Morgan Stanley a Loser Again

Morgan Stanley

Let The Great Ripoff Begin

Goldman: Strike Three in Q4

Corruption in the Bailout Plan

AIG-In Too Much Debt to Fail

(More B-I blog posts...)
Title: Bernanke gives BS speech at London School of Economics
Post by: Revolt426 on January 14, 2009, 12:07:26 am
http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2009/01/13/bernanke-gives-foolish-speech-fantasy-island.html

Bernanke Gives Foolish Speech On Fantasy Island

January 13, 2009 (LPAC)--Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke is a fool, and anyone who doubts it has but to review the speech he gave today at the London School of Economics. The LSE is a breeding ground for incompetence, and based upon Bernanke's performance today, they just might award him an honorary degree.

Bernanke's speech had a certain psychosis to it, alternating between all the good things the Fed had done to save the economy, and all the bad things that happened afterward, with a chorus of "think how bad it would be had we not acted." It never seemed to enter his mind, that his actions were themselves contributing to the disaster which has unfolded on his watch.

Even so, he was well received in the British Isles, where the fantasy of eternal imperial power has been under assault by reality in ways even the British are beginning to understand. Economic cannibalism, it turns out, is not a long-term solution.

Ben--perhaps we should call him "Bernie"--Bernanke went through the multitude of bailout programs the Fed and the Treasury have begun, claiming at one point to have saved the world from a "global financial meltdown," and yet despite all these trillions of dollars of injections, concluded that more stimulus and more bailouts were necessary to save the day. At which point a little boy cried out, "But Mommy, the Chairman is naked!"

While bragging about this hyperinflationary frenzy, nudist Bernanke dismissed worries that his actions might be inflationary, claiming that inflation would actually "moderate." Besides, he insisted, the banks aren't lending out the money we give them anyway, so it never gets into the real economy.

We can just hear him now, as the whole edifice collapses in a hyperinflationary explosion, and the world sinks into a new Dark Age. "Think how bad it would have been if it wasn't for us!"
Title: Re: Bernanke gives BS speech at London School of Economics
Post by: Letsbereal on January 14, 2009, 12:18:12 am
Bernanke calls for banking clean-up
By Krishna Guha in Washington and Paul J Davies in London
Published: January 13 2009 14:36 | Last updated: January 14 2009 00:05

"Ben Bernanke called for fresh efforts to clean up the US banking system on Tuesday, warning that fiscal stimulus measures alone would not be enough to overcome the economic crisis."


"But raising the possibility that the Obama Treasury might “decide to supplement injections of capital by removing troubled assets from institutions’ balance sheets”, he gave three options.

1- One would be public purchases of troubled assets – as proposed by Mr Paulson.

2- A second would be for the government to provide asset guarantees in return for warrants.

3- The third would be to “set up and capitalise so-called bad banks, which would purchase assets from financial institutions in exchange for cash and equity in the bad bank”."

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/615f1f72-e17e-11dd-afa0-0000779fd2ac.html


equity=

3 a: a right, claim, or interest existing or valid in equity


Funny how "Treasury Bonds" suddenly become "Warrants".

And "Bank Takeover" becomes "equity"

And very very bad, bad banks!

And the "Public" are "Troubled" they got that right.

Also nice use of the word "guaranty" but some dates have not been checked!

Some of those brotherhood papers 1912

(http://www.dhm.de/lemo/objekte/pict/99004635/index.jpg)
Title: Re: Bernanke gives BS speech at London School of Economics
Post by: HellBoy on January 14, 2009, 12:19:59 am
http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2009/01/13/bernanke-gives-foolish-speech-fantasy-island.html

Bernanke Gives Foolish Speech On Fantasy Island

January 13, 2009 (LPAC)--Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke is a fool, and anyone who doubts it has but to review the speech he gave today at the London School of Economics. The LSE is a breeding ground for incompetence, and based upon Bernanke's performance today, they just might award him an honorary degree.

Bernanke's speech had a certain psychosis to it, alternating between all the good things the Fed had done to save the economy, and all the bad things that happened afterward, with a chorus of "think how bad it would be had we not acted." It never seemed to enter his mind, that his actions were themselves contributing to the disaster which has unfolded on his watch.

Even so, he was well received in the British Isles, where the fantasy of eternal imperial power has been under assault by reality in ways even the British are beginning to understand. Economic cannibalism, it turns out, is not a long-term solution.

Ben--perhaps we should call him "Bernie"--Bernanke went through the multitude of bailout programs the Fed and the Treasury have begun, claiming at one point to have saved the world from a "global financial meltdown," and yet despite all these trillions of dollars of injections, concluded that more stimulus and more bailouts were necessary to save the day. At which point a little boy cried out, "But Mommy, the Chairman is naked!"

While bragging about this hyperinflationary frenzy, nudist Bernanke dismissed worries that his actions might be inflationary, claiming that inflation would actually "moderate." Besides, he insisted, the banks aren't lending out the money we give them anyway, so it never gets into the real economy.

We can just hear him now, as the whole edifice collapses in a hyperinflationary explosion, and the world sinks into a new Dark Age. "Think how bad it would have been if it wasn't for us!"


He is one of the most arrogant scum.

You can see amusement in his eyes as he was being questioned
by the congressional puppets.

Bernanke thinks this is all just one big piece of hilarious theater.
They have already committed the crime but they get to put on
this big act for the television cameras.

I'll bet that rotten S.O.B. laughs his ass off when he goes home
and rolls around in his pile of taxpayer cash that he will take to
Israel when America falls.

Title: Re: Bernanke gives BS speech at London School of Economics
Post by: heavyhebrew on January 14, 2009, 12:21:52 am
I could suggest one move that would clean up troubled debts, currency inflationary pressure AND solve the recurring theme of bubbles/busts.

Get rid of the Federal Reserve and make it a constitutional amendment that never will the United States have a central private bank in control of the Peoples Treasury.
Title: Re: Bernanke gives BS speech at London School of Economics
Post by: Revolt426 on January 14, 2009, 12:22:25 am
I could suggest one move that would clean up troubled debts, currency inflationary pressure AND solve the recurring theme of bubbles/busts.

Get rid of the Federal Reserve and make it a constitutional amendment that never will the United States have a central private bank in control of the Peoples Treasury.
And ban derivatives
Title: Re: Bernanke gives BS speech at London School of Economics
Post by: heavyhebrew on January 14, 2009, 12:25:11 am
And ban derivatives

No Fed, no problem!
Title: Re: Bernanke gives BS speech at London School of Economics
Post by: larsonstdoc on January 14, 2009, 12:26:45 am


One of his puke assistants probably wrote the speech.  He probably sleeps in the fetal position.  We'll probably never know how much Paulson and he looted from the Federal Reserve of Israel based in Washington DC.  It is ironic that he made the speech at an econmics school.  I bet the students were learning how not to do things.
Title: Re: Bernanke gives BS speech at London School of Economics
Post by: Letsbereal on January 14, 2009, 12:31:37 am
Does anybody know where this 911 gold was delivered?
Title: Re: Bernanke gives BS speech at London School of Economics
Post by: Revolt426 on January 14, 2009, 12:33:07 am
probably dubai
Title: Re: Bernanke gives BS speech at London School of Economics
Post by: Letsbereal on January 14, 2009, 12:39:20 am
Well if they wonna make some gold-backed currency they have to tell people whereitsat otherwise  ???

Or maybe they just say watch Goldfinger again and just believe it's there  :-\

Maybe they ask Hollywood for a remake 

and Dubai has some very good Pirate scenes locations too ;D

Or maybe the don't want to  :-[
Title: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: Mber on February 24, 2009, 01:16:18 pm
Don't worry guys, it's gonna be over soon!

haha..

It's funny how they're STILL calling it a recession. Once the MSM starts using the "D" word, the end is near.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Bernanke-Recession-may-end-in-apf-14453719.html (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Bernanke-Recession-may-end-in-apf-14453719.html)
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: Raincheck on February 24, 2009, 01:24:49 pm
Well, it's a lead pipe cinch that the markets are going to tank. That was the Bernanke curse.
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: J. Croft on February 24, 2009, 01:36:37 pm
And Santa Klaus is gonna hook me up this year!
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: vcif on February 24, 2009, 01:41:52 pm
This is as ridiculous as the "rumors" that the counterfeiters were considering raising interest rates last October.
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: hal 9000 on February 24, 2009, 01:54:15 pm
Will these people ever, EVER stop lying to us?
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: iamc on February 24, 2009, 02:03:19 pm
REAL WORLD BOX SCORE:

GOLD + 1 :)
SILVER +1 ;)
STORABLE FOOD +1 8)
WATER FILLTERS + 1 ;D

stocks and government lies = 0 ??? 000000   :o (0000    :'(
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: Geolibertarian on February 24, 2009, 02:05:38 pm
Will these people ever, EVER stop lying to us?

No, because if they tell us just how badly we're being economically raped by international bankers (http://infowars-shop.stores.yahoo.net/momadvd.html), rioting will break out, and the criminal parasites pulling their strings want to delay that until they've finished stealing everything from us and fled to their "getaway" havens.
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: Joseon on February 24, 2009, 02:09:30 pm
I don't know what to make of this assanine notion from Bernanke. I mean will the Bankers finally put the liquidity back into the banks? Will they return the money that they stole from us  ?
1. Housing bubble
2. Dot Com Bubble
3. Derivative death star?

No, Bernanke I don't believe one one word of your poisonous words.
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: America2 on February 24, 2009, 02:12:57 pm
Will these people ever, EVER stop lying to us?

Funny how no matter if the people in power in DC are either conservative or liberal, the status quo will remain the same.

Just wait until '12 when the American public will get fed up with "liberal" Obama, and will be drooling over "conservative" Jindal. They're going to be in for a rude awakening.
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: Vipercat on February 24, 2009, 02:14:30 pm
I tend to look at reality. Where are the sound fundamentals? Is anyone really buying the garbage except the government? Is it in demand? Is it naturally occuring with supply and demand? Is anyone rewarding success and punishing failure? Every bailout has lost money and required more bailouts, the government has paid $5 and $10 a share for a stock worth $1 a share and is fundamentally worthless. Why not let bad business go bankrupt? Why not let prices go down so real people can afford to buy things like houses and cars? Why not immediately put people in prison and not let them out, and give them the same hard treatment any of us would get if we did not pay our bills, taxes, or commited fraud? There is no sound fundamentals on the corporate side at all. There is also no sound fundamentals on the monetary side, our currencies are just layers of worthless garbage backed by nothing. You cannot ignore the reality that this will either have to be taxed heavily on real people, or printed at record paces, either effect will be horrible. I would love to paint everything pink with unicorns and pull a sunshine out of my buttocks, but the only way to do that is to ignore facts, reality, and lie to ourselves... Doing more of the same bad thing to solve the previous bad thing will not work. Repeating the same thing expecting different results is the definition of insanity.
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: TheHouseMan on February 24, 2009, 02:17:30 pm
So, since they speak in opposites.. what this means is:

The US will die in 09.
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: Mber on February 24, 2009, 02:18:14 pm
So, since they speak in opposites.. what this means is:

The US will die in 09.

lol yea
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: Dolphin on February 24, 2009, 02:20:21 pm
Recession >may< end in '09

You have to wonder if that's a month.
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: iamc on February 24, 2009, 02:35:03 pm
Recession >may< end in '09

You have to wonder if that's a month.
...you MAY be correct my friend as May has always been a month of war in the northern lands of earth...Russia always has parades of military might in may and the day is MAY 1st...
nice thought Dolphin.. and yes i concur...my friend.... ;)
( this is not the end of the world: but it MAY be the end of the west, this will only stop when the people of freedom stand up and stop the MAY DAY!!!!!)
Title: Re: Bernanke: Recession may end in '09 - Stocks climb
Post by: Monkeypox on February 24, 2009, 03:19:47 pm
What a joke.  All he said that it MAY end in 2009, and stocks climb.

Of course it MAY end in 2009 - or it MAY get worse, or the world MAY end.
Title: Bernanke : Don't Nationalize Banks, just Nationalize their Toxic Assets
Post by: Revolt426 on February 25, 2009, 02:18:06 am
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/banking/2009-02-24-bank-rescue-plan-bernanke_N.htm
 
   Bernanke reveals 3-step plan to fix, not nationalize, banks
 
Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, testifies before the Senate Banking Committee in Washington on Tuesday. 
 
By John Waggoner and Barbara Hagenbaugh, USA TODAY
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Tuesday the government did not plan to nationalize major U.S. banks, describing instead a "public-private partnership" under which the government would recapitalize ailing institutions to bolster the financial sector, a crucial step for the economic recovery.
Bernanke, amplifying comments this month by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, says the plan doesn't mean nationalizing the nation's biggest banks. But others aren't so sure that the government hasn't already moved in that direction.

"It's a form of creeping nationalization," says Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn.

That might not be such a bad idea, others say.

"You have to go in there, take over giant institutions that are in trouble, and clean them up," says Paul Miller of FBR Capital Markets.

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner
A big part of the discussion depends on what "nationalization" means. In the strictest sense, the government routinely nationalizes banks when they fail, as it did with IndyMac Bank last year, which cost the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. $8.9 billion. And if the government chooses to take common stock in repayment for its bailout money, it also would get voting rights as a shareholder. In some cases, the government could be the majority shareholder — in effect, controlling the company.

To date, the Treasury has spent $196 billion to buy preferred bank stock in its Troubled Asset Relief Program, while spending billions more for American International Group and auto lenders. The Federal Reserve has vastly increased its lending facilities, including the Term Auction Facility, which offers $150 billion in secured loans to banks per auction.

The stock market — and bank stocks particularly — rallied sharply on Bernanke's description, with the Dow Jones industrial average gaining 236 points Tuesday.

The plan entails close scrutiny of the nation's 19 largest financial institutions, propping them up, and hoping to recoup taxpayer money when they return to health. It's a big, complex undertaking, and the health of the financial system depends on it.

"If we don't stabilize the financial system, we're going to founder for some time," Bernanke said Tuesday.

Completing the rescue will likely take more than the $700 billion that Congress set aside last year, President Obama warned in his speech Tuesday night.

"I can assure you that the cost of inaction will be far greater, for it could result in an economy that sputters along for not months or years, but perhaps a decade. That would be worse for our deficit, worse for business, worse for you, and worse for the next generation. And I refuse to let that happen," Obama said.

The plan

How will the government stabilize the banking system? Normally, when a bank fails, the government has two options.

In most cases, it arranges a merger with a healthy bank, sometimes taking the bank's worst loans and riskiest assets to make the merger more attractive. Sometimes, however, the government liquidates the bank outright, wiping out shareholders and paying off insured depositors. So far this year, 14 banks have failed, but only one has been an outright liquidation.

Many of the banks currently under scrutiny, however, have huge deposit bases, so an outright liquidation would be far too costly for the government. And few institutions are in the market to buy vast, troubled banks. These 19 banks have more than $5 trillion in assets combined, according to Institutional Risk Analytics, and any failures could have serious economic consequences.

The government's plan for the largest, most troubled institutions has three major steps:

•Stress test. Although the Treasury has yet to reveal the details of its stress test, it's clear that the government will take a hard look at the financial health of the 19 largest banks to see if they can survive a severe economic downturn. Bernanke said that when regulators begin conducting stress tests today, the goal won't be to issue a pass-or-fail grade. Instead, regulators will determine how much capital each bank needs from the government, if any, to give them a cushion while they restructure.

•Recapitalization. In many cases, the Treasury will get preferred or convertible preferred stock for the money it gives to banks. These shares typically don't have voting rights, possibly to give more of a hands-off appearance to the government, says Jerry Webman, chief economist for Oppenheimer Funds. In addition, preferred stock is a bit safer than common stock. Typically, common stock gets wiped out before preferred stock does, so this would give the government — and taxpayers — more protection in case of a meltdown.

•Exit. Eventually, when troubled banks are strong enough to operate without help, they can repay the government and raise private capital. "That's the end game," Bernanke said. "When private money will start coming back in. And I'm sure it will happen. The sooner, the better." There's no guarantee, but in a best-case scenario, the government could make money on its investments.

Is this nationalization?

Critics of the government's plan charge that it will, in essence, nationalize the banking system — or at least take a big step toward doing so. Bernanke went to great lengths to assure lawmakers that the Fed wasn't, in fact, planning on doing that.

"It's not nationalization, because the banks would not be wholly owned or probably not even majority owned by the government," he told the Senate Banking Committee. "The government will be a shareholder along with private shareholders."

Furthermore, Bernanke said, the government has plenty of regulatory powers over banks without exercising a vote in corporate meetings.

Skeptics abound.

Sen. Corker, for example, doesn't think that the Fed should say that liquidation is not an option. "There are lots of unintended consequences when you say upfront that the public will provide any and all capital necessary to keep them afloat," he says. "It's difficult to imagine a scenario where private-sector money returns to those institutions."

And Miller thinks that more forceful action might be needed. One proposal is a good bank/bad bank plan, in which the government would take over a bank, retain its toxic assets for later disposal, and sell off the good parts of the bank. Under that scenario, however, taxpayers would get very little return on their money, if any. "The people would end up with the bad bank," he says.

Outright nationalization might not be the worst thing for the most stressed banks, some say. Christian Menegatti, a managing editor at the economics blog RGE Monitor, calls bank takeovers the "most efficient way of cleaning up the mess in the credit markets."

And despite the government's hesitance to nationalize banks, if it ends up holding a majority stake in Citigroup, for example, it will effectively have taken over the bank, Menegatti adds.

Citigroup, the third-largest bank by assets, is in talks with the government about increasing its stake in the bank. The government already holds $45 billion of preferred shares and has agreed to share losses on $301 billion of troubled bank assets.

But one option now being discussed involves converting some of the government's preferred shares in Citigroup to common stock. This action would boost a key measure of Citigroup's financial health and could give the government the largest single stake in the bank.

At least for now, the government's caution seems to be appreciated on Wall Street. Stocks of major banks soared Tuesday. Citigroup was up 21.5%, or 46 cents, to $2.60.

Depositors' confidence is crucial and so far, the government's actions have prevented another run on the bank, as when IndyMac collapsed.

After all, the world doesn't end with Citigroup stock below $5 a share. "The real meltdown is when depositors won't keep money in the bank," Webman says.
 
Title: Re: Bernanke : Don't Nationalize Banks, just Nationalize their Toxic Assets
Post by: Revolt426 on February 25, 2009, 02:19:24 am
BTW the above is equivalent to Mouslini Corperatism aka Fascist Economics.
Title: Re: Bernanke : Don't Nationalize Banks, just Nationalize their Toxic Assets
Post by: Revolt426 on February 25, 2009, 02:21:23 am
http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2009/02/24/we-dont-need-mussolini-response-banking-breakdown.html

We Don't Need A Mussolini Response To The Banking Breakdown!

Feb. 24, 2009 (LPAC)--Will we nationalize the banks, or won't we? That is the debate dominating much of the financial discussion these days, and like most financial discussions, it is a fraud. Nationalization, the way it is being presented, is just another form of bailout, so the "will we or won't we" discussion is really a debate over what form the escalation of the bailout should take. Do we shoot ourselves in the head, or do we take a fatal dose of poison?

Either way, the bailout process will lead inevitably to fascism, because only under a fascist police state can the austerity measures which will result from the combination of soaring tax demands and collapsing income, be implemented. Think about it. The government, first under Bush and now under Obama, is spending trillions of dollars to bail out speculators, and sticking the taxpayers with the bill. That means, inevitably, higher tax bills, as well as cuts in government services, at all levels of government. We are already facing record Federal deficits, as well as soaring deficits at state and local governments, as the combined effects of the drops in real estate values, slowdowns in business activity, cuts in employment and declines in income work their way through the economy. The results are already beginning to be seen, with cuts in the social safety net, cuts in protective services, cuts in education, health care and other essentials. As our economy collapses, we will be faced with a series of Hobbesian choices: who do we save, and who do we abandon? Who do we protect, and who do we sacrifice? Who lives, and who dies?

The financiers have already made their choice clear, preferring to sacrifice the people in order to save themselves, putting their filthy lucre ahead of humanity. They have experience in this, and in fact developed a political system which uses the mechanism of the state to enforce rule by private financial interests and their corporate cartels. That political system is called corporatism, or fascism, and was imposed by the Anglo-Dutch Liberal financial oligarchy upon Italy in the 1920s, through the person of Benito Mussolini, and then again in Germany in the 1930s under Adolf Hitler. Now this same oligarchy wants to impose fascism in the U.S., under the guise of solving our financial crisis.

The bailout itself is a fascist, corporatist policy, protecting a small group of rich parasites while condemning the general population to a brutal existence. The creatures of the Brutish Empire know the people will eventually rebel against such measures, which is why they have been so busy in recent years pushing the creation of a Big Brother-style police-state and surveillance society. They want to be able to quickly identify and remove the leaders who might spur the population into a rebellion to restore the Constitution, and keep the rest of the population cowed. The target is not terrorism--the target of this police state apparatus is the American people.

We can stop all of this immediately, though the adoption of the principles laid out by Lyndon LaRouche, beginning with putting the parasites themselves through bankruptcy, and taking steps to protect the general population while re rebuild our economy. The parasites created this mess, and we should let them take the hit. We don't need another Mussolini, We need another FDR.
Title: Re: Bernanke : Don't Nationalize Banks, just Nationalize their Toxic Assets
Post by: Revolt426 on February 25, 2009, 03:08:43 am
Screw the banks, take the invisible hand out the market and let em crash.
Take the Governmnet hand and put them into Bankruptcy because they are insolvent
Title: Re: Bernanke : Don't Nationalize Banks, just Nationalize their Toxic Assets
Post by: user111 on February 25, 2009, 03:39:11 am
Just watched Bernanke say the economy will rebound by 2010 and then the news guy said later that stocks had risen because of his comments.
Surely the sheeple and the markets are smarter than that.
Hell,the only reason I can see that Bernanke even has the job he presently has is because he's not qualified to work at (Wall) Chinamart as a night stocker.
Title: Re: Bernanke : Don't Nationalize Banks, just Nationalize their Toxic Assets
Post by: Revolt426 on February 25, 2009, 03:41:01 am
Same shit different asshole:


“I see nothing in the present situation that is either menacing or warrants pessimism… I have every confidence that there will be a revival of activity in the spring, and that during this coming year the country will make steady progress.”
- Andrew W. Mellon, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury December 31, 1929
Title: Bernanke Rejects Bank Nationalization in Favor of Fascism
Post by: Revolt426 on February 25, 2009, 04:55:25 pm
This is essetially the definition of Corporatism:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ag90BlBRlQ68&refer=home

Bernanke Rejects ‘Anything Like’ Bank Nationalization (Update4)

By Craig Torres and Bradley Keoun

Feb. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said while the U.S. government may take “substantial” stakes in Citigroup Inc. and other banks, it doesn’t plan a full- scale nationalization that wipes out stockholders.

Nationalization is when the government “seizes” a company, “zeroes out the shareholders and begins to manage and run the bank, and we don’t plan anything like that,” Bernanke told lawmakers in Washington today.

The Fed chief’s remarks were more specific than yesterday, when he spurned outright federal control of banks in favor of a public-private partnership that the government would eventually exit. Bank stocks have fallen this month amid concern among some investors that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s financial- rescue plan could lead to nationalization of some lenders.

Bernanke, at a House Financial Services Committee hearing today, continued to draw a distinction between nationalization and a government minority interest with strict oversight and supervision.

Some banks won’t need new injections of government funds after regulators complete stress tests to determine if they have enough capital to weather a deeper economic slump, Bernanke also said today.

Bernanke told the committee that a $200 billion joint Fed- Treasury program designed to jumpstart consumer lending is likely to provide “substantial support” to auto lending, and the central bank may revisit terms of the program if needed.

‘Layers of Seniority’

While the Fed is restricting its Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility to supporting AAA rated securities, Bernanke said such securities “can be a senior tranche of a security which has different layers of seniority.”

The chairman was responding to questions from Representative Thaddeus McCotter, a Michigan Republican, who asked Bernanke to “assuage” his fears that the TALF would fail to help auto dealers get financing for cars.

Regulators set a six-month deadline for the biggest 19 U.S. banks to raise any new capital deemed necessary after a review of their balance sheets. The regulators will complete their so- called stress tests by the end of next month, the Treasury said today in a statement in Washington.

The Treasury said banks will have a choice of raising private capital or accepting taxpayer funds from the Treasury. Any new government money will come in the form of convertible preferred securities, which would acquire voting rights if converted into common stock.

Substantial Share

In the case of Citigroup Inc., the government may end up with a “substantial” share of the lender’s stock, he said. Oversight of the company would be accomplished through regulators and by exerting “shareholder rights,” Bernanke said.

“It may be the case that the government will have a substantial minority share in Citi or other banks, but again we have the tools between supervisory oversight, shareholder rights, and other tools to make sure that we get the good results we want in terms of improved performance,” he said.

Such a path might avoid “all the negative impacts of going through a bankruptcy process or some kind of seizure, which would be I think disruptive to the markets,” Bernanke said.

Bernanke said regulators can exert significant influence on banks even if they have minority stakes.

“If we had a 40 percent position of a bank, we would obviously have a great deal of influence on management, on the board, on policies, on capital structure, all of those elements,” Bernanke told Representative Michael Capuano, a Massachusetts Democrat. “It will not be a case of giving the money and going away.”

Diluting Value

Officials in recent days have been grappling with how much more help they can provide Citigroup without diluting the value of shares held by investors too much, a person familiar with their deliberations said earlier this week.

The Treasury Department, Federal Reserve and other banking regulators said in a joint statement on Feb. 23 that they stood ready to pump more capital into banks, or convert some of the government’s outstanding preferred shares into common, to prevent their failures. The stress tests are scheduled to begin today, according to that statement.

“We will see how their test works out, and we will see what evolves,” Bernanke said. “If in fact they have to convert even the existing preferred into common, then there could be a more substantial share of ownership of Citi by the U.S. government.”

Plunging Price

Citigroup had to sell $52 billion of preferred stock to the government after the bank’s plunging stock price fed concerns that its failure might trigger a market collapse. Bank of America Corp. also had to get $45 billion of bailout funds.

Some members of the House and Senate congressional leadership, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, say they don’t want the government to be a long-term owner of banks.

Senator Charles Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Democratic leader and a member of the Senate Banking Committee, said today that a “federal takeover of the banks should be avoided at all costs.”

“No one intends, ever, to have the government running these banks or insurance companies for a long period of time,” Schumer told reporters. “To come in, clean them out, take out the bad assets, put in new management -- that’s what’s in mind.”

The scenario that Bernanke describes, where the government is a shareholder and closely supervises management, might not be inviting to private investors, analysts said.

Investors will be confident to buy bank stocks only when “fairly convinced that the government’s embrace is going to end,” said Andrew Laperriere, managing director at International Strategy and Investment Group in Washington. Most investors “would have reluctance with the government making strategic decisions for big companies.”
Title: US banks may need more bail-outs, says Ben Bernanke
Post by: DCUBED on March 03, 2009, 05:58:35 pm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/4934220/US-banks-may-need-more-bail-outs-says-Ben-Bernanke.html

US banks may need more bail-outs, says Ben Bernanke

Stock markets across the world suffered a second day of turbulence as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve warned that the US Government may have to pour even more cash into the twin bail-outs of its financial and economic systems.

Ben Bernanke said the White House would have to consider increasing the scope of its $750bn banking rescue package, as well as readying further aggressive measures to shore up the world's biggest economy. His warning to Congress came as shares in London slid to a new six-year low amid disquiet about the stability of Britain's banks following Monday's cash calls from HSBC and AIG.

The Fed Chairman also remarked that although the government had little choice but to rescue AIG with a further $30bn cash injection, the episode had made him "more angry" than any other episode in the past 18 months.

Until the financial system had been repaired the economy would not recover, he said, adding: "Without a reasonable degree of financial stability, a sustainable recovery will not occur. Although progress has been made on the financial front since last fall, more needs to be done."

The comments indicate that the US Treasury, which has put its weight behind a asset insurance scheme for bad assets much like the UK's asset protection scheme, will have to spend more than originally anticipated on rescuing the banks. The Obama administration has slated for up to $750bn in new support to be spent on the banking bail-out in its first budget.

"We are better off moving aggressively today to solve our economic problems; the alternative could be a prolonged episode of stagnation," he said.

The comments saw the benchmark Dow Jones index of leading US stocks to drop 30 points, having dropped beneath the 7,000 mark on Monday for the first time in 12 years. It finished the day down 37.27 points, or 0.55pc, at 6726.02.

The FTSE 100 index closed down 113.74 points, or 3.14pc, at 3512.09.

A CBI study nevertheless showed that British companies were slightly more optimistic about their ability to obtain credit over the next three months in February. Their ability to place corporate paper also improved.
Title: Regional FED Cheifs break with Bernanke and warn of Inflation / Contraction
Post by: Revolt426 on March 04, 2009, 09:54:49 pm
The Guardian has added alot of spin to this but the Regional FED Cheifs obviously do not share the same optimistic views of Bernanke

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/8387009

MIAMI, March 4 (Reuters) - The battered U.S. economy will continue to weaken over the coming months, with unemployment rising, top Federal Reserve officials said on Wednesday, though they remain confident that forceful policy action will help end the more than year-long recession.

Dennis Lockhart, president of the Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank, said it was hard to "be upbeat about the immediate future."

Richard Fisher, president of the Dallas Fed, said indicators show the economy to be on track for a decline in the first quarter roughly equal to the 6.2 percent annual rate of contraction seen in the 2008 fourth quarter.

Fisher, who characterized himself as the most pessimistic of all of his colleagues on the Fed's policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), said he fears the country might suffer two years of recession.


The current recession started in December 2007.

Lockhart, however, said he still expects the economy to begin a modest recovery in the second half of the year.
That said, Lockhart painted a gloomy picture near-term.
"Looking broadly at the national economy, the recent numbers have been discouraging," Lockhart told the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce.
"Other incoming data give little reason to be upbeat about the immediate future. Unemployment continues to rise," said Lockhart, who is a voting member of the Federal Open Market Committee this year.

He later said he was apprehensive about the government's February jobs report, which is due on Friday.
"I'm concerned that this, too, will show some job destruction, substantial job destruction and the unemployment rate will rise,"
Lockhart told public television's "Nightly Business Report."
Analysts polled by Reuters expect a loss of 648,000 jobs last month, compared with a 598,000 loss in January, with the U.S. unemployment rate rising to 7.9 percent from 7.6 percent.

OUTLOOK UNCLEAR
Lockhart said the outlook was more unclear than usual and deteriorating financing conditions for the commercial real estate sector could add to the strain on battered banks.
"Problems in residential real estate are well known. But, with continued economic weakness, I'm increasingly paying attention to commercial real estate," he said.
"Declining commercial real estate markets could put further pressure on already strained financial institutions and markets. And overcoming problems in the financial sector is central to achieving economic recovery," he said.

Fisher, speaking in Fort Worth, Texas, called 2008 "an annus horribilis -- a truly horrible year that only a sadist could look back upon with pleasure.
"We might call this the Godzilla economy -- it presents a monstrous challenge," said Fisher, who is not a voting member of the FOMC this year.
Noting the economy's decline at a 6.2 percent annual rate in the fourth quarter, he said: "All indicators thus far point to our economy being on track for a decline of roughly the same magnitude in the first quarter of 2009."
The Fed has cut interest rates to almost zero and more than doubled the size of its balance sheet to around $2 trillion through programs to support private lending in a bid to prevent the downturn from steepening.

Lockhart stressed that Fed moves to steady the ability of households to tap credit markets have gained traction and said the Fed would do what it takes to restore U.S. growth.
"I want to assure you that the Fed has the capacity to act, even with the federal funds rate near zero, with the aim of returning the country as quickly as possible to its enormous potential for growth and prosperity," Lockhart said.

Fisher also found notes of optimism in discussing the potential impact of the Fed's new Term Asset-Backed Loan Facility, which is designed to revive lending to consumers and small businesses. He said there is already an improved "tone" to many of the asset-backed securities markets that will reside under the TALF umbrella.
Some economists, however, worry that the hefty expansion of the U.S. monetary base will be inflationary at some point, and this concern is shared by hawks on the Fed's top policy committee.

Kansas City Fed President Thomas Hoenig cautioned the massive stimulus would require the Fed to tighten monetary policy well before the next economic expansion was fully under way, to prevent a powerful inflation from taking root.
Waiting until a recovery is obvious would mean that the monetary policy reaction was already lagging.
"Once you know there's a recovery -- you're convinced of it -- it's probably too late to really avoid the future inflationary or whatever speculative bubble might be coming our way," Hoenig, a voting member of the Fed's policy committee next year, told Market News International.However, most economists see the debate about raising Fed rates as a luxury that can wait until next year at the earliest, and the Fed has stressed it will hold its overnight funds rate benchmark near zero for "some time".

Indeed, U.S. economic conditions worsened in January and February and businesses do not expect improvement until late this year or early 2010, the Fed said in its Beige Book economic summary gathered from districts around the country.

The rapid decline in U.S. growth is already the worst since the early 1980s and there is no recovery yet at hand. (Additional reporting by Ros Krasny in Fort Worth, Texas and Mark Felsenthal in Washington; Editing by Leslie Adler)
Title: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: DCUBED on March 08, 2009, 12:49:12 am
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=avh2kzovFhBc&refer=home

Bernanke Says Fed to ‘Deploy All Tools’ for Economic Revival

 March 7 (Bloomberg) -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said the central bank will “forcefully” use every resource to restore financial-market stability and revive U.S. economic growth.

“We will continue to forcefully deploy all the tools at our disposal as long as necessary to support the restoration of financial stability and the resumption of healthy economic growth,” Bernanke said in prepared remarks for an event today in Dillon, South Carolina. The Fed chief returned to his hometown to attend a ceremony naming a highway interchange after him.

Bernanke didn’t comment on specific Fed policies in his remarks. He said he was aware Dillon now “faces challenges” with the economy in a recession.

“I learned how very hard people in small towns like Dillon, and in communities large and small all across the United States, have to work to support themselves and their families and to offer opportunities to their children,” the Fed chairman said.

Bernanke, 55, was born in Augusta, Georgia, in December 1953 and grew up in Dillon, a textile-and-farm town in a poor part of one of the nation’s poorest states. His father, Philip, owned a drugstore, Jay Bee Drugs, with his uncle. His mother, Edna, was a schoolteacher.

He recalled in his speech how worked at the family’s pharmacy, spent a summer as a construction worker building the Saint Eugene Hospital and waited on tables at South of the Border, a restaurant and amusement park off Interstate 95.

The unemployment rate in Dillon County in December was 14.2 percent, compared with 9.5 percent for South Carolina, according to the state’s Employment Security Commission. The U.S. unemployment rate jumped in February to 8.1 percent, the highest level in more than a quarter century, the government reported yesterday.
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Revolt426 on March 08, 2009, 01:03:51 am
The new FED Term Asset facility is leaning cheap currency to speculators to buy toxic assets and if the assets lose value the government is liable.
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 08, 2009, 01:44:19 am
Is there not one person in our government with the authority to have these assholes arrested and tried for fraud/theft/treason/gopherbeards?
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: America2 on March 08, 2009, 01:45:27 am
Is there not one person in our government with the authority to have these assholes arrested and tried for fraud/theft/treason/gopherbeards?

But en yet, it's a CRIME to be *anti-government*(or whatever that means). >:(
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 08, 2009, 01:47:01 am
But en yet, it's a CRIME to be *anti-government*(or whatever that means). >:(

Only in an Orwellian Society will "anti-government" be considered a BAD thing.
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Revolt426 on March 08, 2009, 01:48:08 am
Dont forget the FED is a private bank owned by the most powerful international speculators in the world.


They've assassinated politicians many times.
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: America2 on March 08, 2009, 01:55:27 am
Dont forget the FED is a private bank owned by the most powerful international speculators in the world.

I tried to tell my dad this the other day, and even tried to show him a video of Dennis Kucinich criticizing it as well...his response was, "Why do you even waste your time with these conspiracy theories?", and being pretty upset.

Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Womanizer on March 08, 2009, 01:58:13 am
Is there not one person in our government with the authority to have these assholes arrested and tried for fraud/theft/treason/gopherbeards?

There is not. Not one. In the whole damn government. Truth.
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 08, 2009, 03:20:02 am
Maybe if we threw a friggin' baseball cap on Bernanke will they then threaten jailtime............
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Ford Falcon on March 08, 2009, 03:42:37 am
It's like people who work for big oil companies. They make so much money, their morals are long gone. Money may not be the root of all evil, but it sure is a good excuse.
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 08, 2009, 04:57:47 am
It's like people who work for big oil companies. They make so much money, their morals are long gone. Money may not be the root of all evil, but it sure is a good excuse.


It's certainly the fertilizer of all evil......
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 08, 2009, 05:05:02 am
I tried to tell my dad this the other day, and even tried to show him a video of Dennis Kucinich criticizing it as well...his response was, "Why do you even waste your time with these conspiracy theories?", and being pretty upset.



I talked to my Dad the other day (I'm 40, he's about 66....lost count years ago...) and he used to be a Fox News brainwashee, but now he's waking up pretty quickly (Finally! THankfully! WHew!). He told me "Kevin (my younger brother, 3 yrs my junior) told me that you had been going on constantly about all this conspiracy stuff for years and he said 'Dad....He was RIGHT! It's all coming true right before our eyes'". So, I'm relieved my Dad is finally getting it. Sad it took a voucher from my younger brother, but whatever works, I don't care (I've always been the Black Sheep, so my Dad-cred isn't very high......oh it is NOW, but it wasn't before). So, persist, because it's important. And my Dad is full blood Korean, and you just don't change a Korean man's mind. It's just not that easy. Trust me.


Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Monkeypox on March 08, 2009, 05:18:16 am
Is there not one person in our government with the authority to have these assholes arrested and tried for fraud/theft/treason/gopherbeards?

Nope.
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Monkeypox on March 08, 2009, 05:19:48 am
But en yet, it's a CRIME to be *anti-government*(or whatever that means). >:(

Our forefathers gave us the right, actually the DUTY, to overthrow a government that became tyrannical. 
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Kilika on March 08, 2009, 09:19:54 am

It's certainly the fertilizer of all evil......

Well, actually the origin of that statement is...

"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." 1 Timothy 6:10 (KJV)
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: DireWolf on March 08, 2009, 09:40:47 am
Bernanke`s statement is a warning to the likes of you and me that they will not tolerate any interference in their bid to achieve global banking and thus creating the NWO that has been sought for so long. "To forcefully deploy apply the tools necessary" includes any and all military options. It would appear this is their big push and should we fail to respond in a manner sufficient to derail them we will find ourselves in a sorrowful state indeed.
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Dig on March 08, 2009, 10:31:00 am
Bernanke can go f**k himself!

Golman Saches ass-clown piece of shit!

STOP STEALING OUR GRANDCHILDREN'S WEALTH YOU TURD!

Tell your Rothschild/Rockefeller masters that we know what is going on you occupying treasonous feudalistic greedy psycopaths!
Title: Re: Bernanke will "forcefully" use every resource of the Fed
Post by: Kilika on March 08, 2009, 10:40:14 am
Quote
Bernanke`s statement is a warning to the likes of you and me that they will not tolerate any interference in their bid to achieve global banking

Exactly. The names and faces may change, but their plan WILL be implemented, by force, if necessary. Just don't look for any complete total collapse as they need something left to feed their lusts for worldly pleasures. It'll get alot worse regardless. These thugs will make sure of that.
Title: Bernanke Speaks to CFR
Post by: jflack on March 10, 2009, 10:49:37 am
Maybe some of you can pick this apart better than I.  Let me just point out the following from his speech.

1.  He equates the Federal Reserve as "authorities"
2.  He admits that the Federal Reserve is a central bank  (I've never heard him or Greenspan admit that before)
3.  He says that the Federal Reserve was established by the Congress in 1913 largely as a means of
addressing the problem of recurring financial panics.  (He's joking right?  We all know the truth on that one.  Why would he say that to the CFR?)

Here's the PDF of the speech

http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/031009_CFR.pdf


Here's the news story

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200903101121DOWJONESDJONLINE000511_FORTUNE5.htm

THE FED: Big Banks Will Not Be Allowed To Fail, Bernanke Says
 
March 10, 2009: 11:21 AM ET


WASHINGTON (Dow Jones) -- Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke stressed Tuesday that major financial institutions would not be allowed to fail given the fragile state of financial markets and the global economy.

In a speech in Washington, Bernanke repeated that a sustainable economic recovery will "remain out of reach" until the banking sector is stabilized.

A recovery later this year is not out of the question, Bernanke said.

If efforts by the Fed and the Obama administration can get the banks back to being reasonably stable, "then I think there is a good chance the recession will end later this year and 2010 will be a period of growth," he said.

In the end, the economy is bound to recover, he said. The only question is how quick.

The central bank is not anticipating deflation, he said.

But Bernanke zeroed in on the question of big banks, the fate of which has been hovering over financial markets.

The continued viability of systemically-important financial institutions is " vital" to the recovery, Bernanke said in a speech to the Council of Foreign Relations.

"We have reiterated the U.S. government's determination to ensure that systemically important financial institutions continue to be able to meet their commitments," Bernanke said.

Some senior Republican members of Congress, including 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain, and even one president of a regional Fed bank, have recently called for the government to pull back from assisting large financial institutions.

They are worried that the government is throwing good money after bad in propping up these troubled institutions, including Citigroup and American International Group (AIG).

"Close them down, get them out of business. We've got to bury some big ones and send a strong message to the market," Sen. Richard Shelby, the ranking Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, said on ABC News over the weekend.

Bernanke's comments could be viewed as a forceful rebuttal to Shelby and McCain, analysts said.

Bernanke said he hopes the view that the market can handle the failure of a systemically important firm is "no longer seriously maintained" given the power of the financial crisis in the wake of the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac last September.

"It was the...collapse of banks and other institutions in late 1930 and early 1931 that made the Great Depression great," he said.

Increasing the oversight

The Treasury and Fed are not sitting still, but instead are stepping up oversight of critical firms, Bernanke said.

"We are already beginning significant work in terms of strengthening the systemically-critical firms," Bernanke said.

There was a sense of regret from Bernanke that some firms have become too interconnected to fail but also a sense that the government had no choice.

The money that has gone into banks has already had "beneficial results," Bernanke said.

Bernanke met with President Obama and his top economic advisors on Monday behind closed doors to discuss the economic outlook and the financial market crisis. The Obama team has yet to spell out important details of how a public- private partnership will remove toxic assets, primarily mortgage securities, off the balance sheets of banks.

Administration officials said the details could come within a few weeks.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Obama is pleased with the coordination between Treasury and the Fed in response to the crisis. Bernanke said he didn't expect any "major disagreements" with Treasury over the repair of the financial system.

The bulk of Bernanke's address included a summary of his thinking about how to improve the regulation of financial markets. He spent some time describing the idea of one systemic regulator to oversee the entire financial market looking for signs of stress.

Many members of Congress want the Fed to take that new role but Bernanke played it coy and said the issue would have to be solved down the road and depended on what Congress had in mind.

Bernanke said the U.S. regulators failed in their duty to maintain a stable financial system leading up to the crisis, but added that the "details of the story are complex."

Bernanke said Congress should give the Fed authority over critical Wall Street payment-and-settlement systems.

The Fed chairman suggested that regulators need to examine mark-to-market accounting during financial crises, but rejected calls for immediate suspension of the rules.

Mark-to-market requires banks to set their holdings at market prices. Critics argue that this is impossible when some markets dry up.

In general, it is a good idea for banks to use mark-to-market, he said. However, in periods of crisis, this accounting treatment can be misleading, he said.
Title: Bernanke To CFR: New Financial Authority Is Needed
Post by: DCUBED on March 10, 2009, 04:25:14 pm
http://www.infowars.net/articles/march2009/100309Bernanke.htm

Bernanke To CFR: New Financial Authority Is Needed

Reform of financial regulation and supervision should be coordinated internationally to the greatest extent possible."

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has told an elite gathering that a new overarching financial authority should be created by the government and empowered with sweeping new regulatory responsibilities.

Bernanke also coyly indicted to the renowned globalist group that he believes a new international order could be fomented out of the crisis.

"We must have a strategy that regulates the financial system as a whole, in a holistic way, not just its individual components," Bernanke said in a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations.

"We should consider whether the creation of an authority specifically charged with monitoring and addressing systemic risks would help protect the system from financial crises like the one we are currently experiencing." he added.

Large firms will require “especially close” oversight in the future, Bernanke noted, adding that regulators need the authority to seize such firms.

"Some of the policies I propose can be implemented and developed under the existing authorities of financial regulators, indeed we are in the process now of doing just that. But in other cases, Congressional action will be necessary to create the requisite authorities and responsibilities." Bernanke said.

While he didn't specify which regulator should take that job, he noted that the Fed was first formed to address banking panics and said the initiative would “require” some role for the central bank.

"Effectively identifying and addressing systemic risks would seem to require the involvement of the Federal Reserve in some capacity, even if not in the lead role," Bernanke said.

“Given how important robust payment and settlement systems are to financial stability, a good case can be made for granting the Federal Reserve explicit oversight authority for systemically important payment and settlement systems,” he added.

Essentially Bernanke suggested that even more power be granted to the Federal Reserve, a private banking institution that has already failed as a regulatory body and led us into the current crisis through it's engineered inflation of the credit bubble under Alan Greenspan.

Bernanke's suggestions echo those of Paul Volcker, an Obama adviser and former Fed chairman, who called for a similar regulatory crackdown in January, along with other members of the elite Group of Thirty.

Much to the delight of globalist CFR members, Bernanke also spoke of the international implications of the economic crisis during his speech.

"I also will not say much about the international dimensions of the issue but will take as self-evident that, in light of the global nature of financial institutions and markets, the reform of financial regulation and supervision should be coordinated internationally to the greatest extent possible." he said.

Bernanke expanded on these comments in a revealing question-and-answer session after the speech.

Commenting on the upcoming meeting of financial heads of the G20 in London, Bernanke stated:

"From the perspective of the G20, the focus should be on the International aspects, obviously, of this crisis. I talked today primarily of what the United States can do and I left implicit, perhaps I shouldn't have in front of the Council On Foreign Relations, the fact that this is very much an international problem, and it requires international solutions."

"We need to begin to establish a framework... The better goal for a meeting of leaders would be as much as possible to establish some principles that would guide reforms around the world... they need to work for institutions and for markets that cross borders. We have banks and insurance companies that have subsidiaries in 100 or 120 countries, and there are so many jurisdictions, that dealing with problems in one of those companies is extraordinarily complicated. In order to do that successfully, we need to have agreements, conventions, that will help us work across jurisdictions in an effective and cooperative way."

The CFR was keen to highlight these comments in it's write up of Bernanke's visit.

Watch video of the question and answer session:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2U1H_EOQNA&eurl=http://www.infowars.net/articles/march2009/100309Bernanke.htm
Title: Bernanke calls for powerful regulator -- world bank here we come !!
Post by: CaptainFreedom09 on March 10, 2009, 11:59:28 pm
By Alan Beattie and Sarah O’Connor in Washington

Published: March 10 2009 13:30 | Last updated: March 10 2009 22:49

The US needs an overarching regulatory authority to prevent a repeat of risks building up unchecked across the financial system and exploding into economic crisis, Ben Bernanke said on Tuesday.

In remarks that echo calls on Capitol Hill for a powerful co-ordinating regulator in the US, the Federal Reserve chairman said the central bank would need to be involved in such a body, if not take the lead role itself.

EDITOR’S CHOICE
Bernanke speech: Full text - Mar-10Summers backs state action - Mar-08Obama urged to let banks fail - Mar-08In depth: US downturn - Feb-24He said the financial crisis, which had seen huge risks building up in lightly regulated institutions, had revealed the weakness of fragmented regulation.

“This crisis has revealed some rather shocking gaps,” he said. “Who was overseeing the subprime lenders, for example? Who was overseeing AIG? There simply wasn’t enough adequate oversight in those cases.”

Mr Bernanke said a range of fixes were being ­proposed or implemented, including consolidated supervision for financial holding companies, tighter restrictions on the investments made by money ­market mutual funds and reviewing capital adequacy standards for banks to moderate their incentives to lend too much in booms and too little in recessions. The US also needed a new way to resolve crises in large non-bank financial institutions rather than threatening the whole system by forcing them into bankruptcy, such as a government agency taking temporary control.

But Mr Bernanke said that a broader approach was also needed. “We must have a strategy that regulates the financial system as a whole, in a holistic way, not just its individual components,” he said. “In particular, strong and effective regulation and supervision of banking institutions, although necessary for reducing systemic risk, are not sufficient by themselves to achieve this aim.”
He called for a more explicitly “macroprudential” approach, which took into account the risks to the financial system as a whole. “One way would be for the Congress to direct and empower a governmental authority to monitor, assess and, if necessary, address potential systemic risks.”

The question of who would exercise this authority has been contentious on Capitol Hill. Barney Frank, chairman of the House of Representatives financial services committee, has called for the Fed itself to take the role. Chris Dodd, his counterpart on the Senate banking committee, has been more sceptical. Officials say that while Mr Dodd has ruled no one out for a systemic risk regulator, he has expressed reservations about giving the Fed additional authority given the amount of responsibilities already on its plate and the need to maintain the independence of its monetary policy function.

But Mr Frank recently told the Financial Times there was a growing consensus that the Fed was the only body with the reach and knowledge. “There’s no other institution that can do it, and you couldn’t possibly think we could create a new institution to do this.”

Mr Bernanke said that the Fed would almost certainly have to be involved, but that the authority to act on its warnings would remain with individual regulators and Congress.

A stream of bad economic data including a rise in the unemployment rate to 8.1 per cent, the highest for a quarter of a century, has increased pressure on policymakers. Mr Bernanke said that an unemployment rate averaging more than 10 per cent – part of a more pessimistic economic scenario with which the US Treasury is “stress-testing” the balance sheets of the big banks – was “certainly well within the realm of possibility”.

Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House of Representatives, on Tuesday held out the prospect of a second stimulus package to follow the $787bn emergency fiscal stimulus signed into law by Barack Obama last month. “I don’t think we’re done,” she said after meeting economists. “I think we’re going to need more efforts to shore up the job market, the financial system and the housing market. And to do that, let me see, I think we need to be extraordinarily bold.”

Title: Re: Bernanke calls for powerful regulator -- world bank here we come !!
Post by: JonTheSavage on March 11, 2009, 12:16:53 am
Heh. I call for Bernake to be sent over to China in a crate without food and water on a Chicom-Mart boat.
Title: Ron Lewis calls Bernanke's office at the Fed,and gives 'em hell..MP3- Must hear!
Post by: Infoninja on March 11, 2009, 02:31:08 am
An instant classic!

This guy is one of the fine folks at WeAreChangeColorado.

Also see he has a new book coming out soon called "Stick It To The Man".

Hear it for yourself.

http://ronaldlewis.com/federal-reserve-ignores-plea-for-transparency-during-recent-call/

 
 
 
 
Title: Re: Ron Lewis calls Bernanke's office at the Fed,and gives 'em hell..MP3- Must hear!
Post by: Infoninja on March 11, 2009, 10:29:08 am
bump!
Title: Re: Ron Lewis calls Bernanke's office at the Fed,and gives 'em hell..MP3- Must hear!
Post by: Matt Hatter on March 11, 2009, 11:49:03 am
Awesome!
Title: Re: Ron Lewis calls Bernanke's office at the Fed,and gives 'em hell..MP3- Must hear!
Post by: plantop14 on March 11, 2009, 12:02:47 pm
Great stuff!!!!!! :) They'll never fess up though, they are damn criminals!!!! >:(
Title: Bernanke going TV's 60 Minutes
Post by: Gruntled Employee on March 12, 2009, 07:39:24 pm
http://ctv2.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090312.wBernankeTV0312/business/Business/businessBN/ctv-business (http://ctv2.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090312.wBernankeTV0312/business/Business/businessBN/ctv-business)


 
Ben Bernanke
 
Bernanke turns to TV to get message out
JEANNINE AVERSA,  The Associated Press


 

WASHINGTON — With the financial crisis deepening and public anger about bailouts growing, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is taking a rare step to get his message out: a TV interview.

Mr. Bernanke, in a taped interview with CBS' 60 Minutes, will discuss the financial crisis, the recession and what the Fed is doing to help fix them. The segment will air Sunday. It's rare for a sitting Fed chief to grant an interview — whether for broadcast or in print.

Earlier this week, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner appeared on PBS' “The Charlie Rose Show,” where he talked about the financial crisis and the Obama administration's efforts to provide relief.

The government has put billions of taxpayers' dollars at risk with bailouts of financial institutions. Those that have been thrown lifelines include American International Group Inc., Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corp., mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and others.

In Congress, the Fed has come under fire by both Republicans and Democrats for not being more open about its rescue operations, which are usually decided in closed-door deliberations.

Some lawmakers have demanded that the Fed, among other things, identify the companies drawing emergency Fed loans or other assistance. Mr. Bernanke has resisted, saying such public information could cause a run on the financial institution or erode confidence in it, defeating the purpose of the Fed's programs.

In the past few weeks, Mr. Bernanke has warned, in appearances on Capitol Hill and in speeches, that financial markets need to be bolstered before any economic recovery will take hold.

And Mr. Bernanke said this week that the nation's financial rule book must be rewritten to prevent a repeat of the economic crisis gripping the United States and other countries.

He offered new details on how to bolster mutual funds and a program that insures bank deposits. He also stressed the need for regulators to make sure financial companies have a sufficient capital cushion against potential losses.

And he called on Congress to set up a system to handle the collapse of a major financial institution, to minimize any financial damage.


This might be of interest.
Title: Re: Bernanke going TV's 60 Minutes
Post by: Overcast on March 12, 2009, 07:40:54 pm
Wonder if his first name is Benedict?
Title: Ben Bernanke Interview w/ 60 Minutes
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 15, 2009, 06:07:50 pm
LYING F**KIN! LIAR!!!! LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ARRRGGGHH!!!!
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke Interview w/ 60 Minutes
Post by: Travinyle1 on March 15, 2009, 06:10:41 pm
yeah i wonder if he will ask him the simple question of who you answer to.

not that anyone will care its noone
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke Interview w/ 60 Minutes
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 15, 2009, 06:13:19 pm
Hey, can we get this segment put on "Lie To Me".....jeesh, Ben's sweatin' because this of this corporate puffball?? Yeah, let Dr. Paul interview him for ya. Now THAT'S good television!




He just said "we NEED to print money".....

Oh crap, they just made up a whole fiction on how the Fed pays for itself, but actually PUTS MONEY BACK INTO THE TREASURY..........


LYING f**kIN' LIARRRRRRRRRRSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke Interview w/ 60 Minutes
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 15, 2009, 06:33:53 pm
New NLP buzzword: "Green Chutes". (as in Economy-Saving Money Parachutes for banks and "businesses").
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke Interview w/ 60 Minutes
Post by: Travinyle1 on March 15, 2009, 06:37:30 pm
"were becoming much more transparent" Bernanke REALLY?

Does anyone else find it interesting this aired TONIGHT on 60 minutes.

An interview with the chairman of the FED on the same weekend Obama Deception airs.

He also said the chairman of the FED "never does interviews"

Interesting stuff i smell damage control
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke Interview w/ 60 Minutes
Post by: Dig on March 15, 2009, 06:40:13 pm
"were becoming much more transparent" Bernanke REALLY?

Does anyone else find it interesting this aired TONIGHT on 60 minutes.

An interview with the chairman of the FED on the same weekend Obama Deception airs.

He also said the chairman of the FED "never does interviews"

Interesting stuff i smell damage control

yup, looks like they are not going to be able to ignore TOD forever.
Title: Bernanke: recession could end in '09 - (Go Back To Sleep!)
Post by: Matt Hatter on March 15, 2009, 10:27:44 pm
Bernake is the biggest TOOL alive!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090316/ap_on_bi_ge/bernanke60_minutes;_ylt=AucYoQDD0akQ.dwV4qjC.1us0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJjYTNoa3U5BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwMzE2L2Jlcm5hbmtlNjBfbWludXRlcwRwb3MDMwRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNmdWxsbmJzcHN0b3I-



WASHINGTON – America's recession "probably" will end this year if the government succeeds in bolstering the banking system, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Sunday in a rare television interview.

In carefully hedged remarks in a taped interview with CBS' "60 Minutes," Bernanke seemed to express a bit more optimism that this could be done.

Still, Bernanke stressed — as he did to Congress last month — that the prospects for the recession ending this year and a recovery taking root next year hinge on a difficult task: getting banks to lend more freely again and getting the financial markets to work more normally.

"We've seen some progress in the financial markets, absolutely," Bernanke said. "But until we get that stabilized and working normally, we're not going to see recovery.

"But we do have a plan. We're working on it. And, I do think that we will get it stabilized, and we'll see the recession coming to an end probably this year."

Even if the recession, which began in December 2007, ends this year, the unemployment rate will keep climbing past the current quarter-century high of 8.1 percent, Bernanke said.

A growing number of economists think the jobless rate will hit 10 percent by the end of this year.

Asked about the biggest potential dangers now, Bernanke suggested a lack of "political will" to solve the financial crisis.

He said, though, that the United States has averted the risk of plunging into a depression.

"I think we've gotten past that," he said.

It's rare for a sitting Fed chief to grant an interview, whether for broadcast or print. Bernanke said he chose to do so because it's an "extraordinary time" for the country, and it gave him a chance to speak directly to the American public. (A transcript of the interview was provided in advance of the broadcast.)

Bernanke spoke at a time of rising public anger over financial bailouts using taxpayer money. Battling the worst financial crisis since the 1930s, the government has put hundreds of billions of those dollars at risk to prop up troubled institutions and stabilize the banking system.

Institutions that have been thrown lifelines include American International Group Inc., Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corp., mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and others.

Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill have questioned the effectiveness of the rescue efforts and have demanded more information about how taxpayers' money is being used.

Bernanke's TV interview seemed to be part of a government public relations offensive. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner appeared on PBS' "The Charlie Rose Show" last week, discussing the financial crisis and the Obama's administration's relief efforts.

The Fed chief on Sunday's broadcast repeated his ire over the AIG bailout, saying that over the past 18 months, that was the case that angered him the most. He says he "slammed the phone more than a few times on discussing AIG."

The government's four efforts to save the troubled insurance giant total more than $170 billion. A collapse of AIG would have wreaked havoc on the global economy, the Fed has said.

AIG ignited fresh outrage over the weekend with news that it's making $165 million in bonus payments to executives on Sunday, most of them in the unit that sold risky financial contracts that caused huge losses for AIG.

When the financial crisis intensified last fall, Bernanke and President George W. Bush's Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson rushed to Capitol Hill for help. That led to the swift enactment of a $700 billion bailout package in October. Since then, banks have received billions in capital injections in return for government ownership stakes in them.

Looking back, Bernanke said the world came close to a financial meltdown. Asked how close, Bernanke responded: "It was very close."

Bernanke admitted that the Fed could have done a better job of overseeing banks. Critics say lax regulatory oversight contributed to the crisis.

Bernanke said he believes all the big banks the Fed regulates are solvent. Big banks won't fail under his watch, Bernanke said — though, if necessary, the government should try to "wind it down in a safe way."
Title: Re: Bernanke: recession could end in '09 - (Go Back To Sleep!)
Post by: Revolt426 on March 15, 2009, 10:30:20 pm
He's telling the truth, the Recession could end in 09 and the MELTDOWN will continue until all central banks implode and the system is forced to be overhauled, that is when the real arguements will begin.

Bernanke would do himself good to resign before he is blamed for everything. Greenspan doesn't even come to the United States anymore, he is busy orchestrating the bailouts in the UK.
Title: Re: Bernanke: recession could end in '09 - (Go Back To Sleep!)
Post by: valkator on March 15, 2009, 10:47:01 pm
The very simple reality is that these scum do not really control anything and, as everything picks up speed, are coming face to face with their own demise. The only way that they have been able to keep their herd in line is by changing the configuration of the feeding chute to keep the cattle passive and calm - grazing peacefully and blind. That there are many who are now deciding NOT to be cattle is causing these vile 'shepherds' to try to calm the herd is not suprising. Yet, these shepherds are now starting to realize that they, too, are nothing more than the cattle they have been trying to rule and feed upon - and are set for slaughter just the same. They aren't in control, never were, and they are all starting to face this fact. It will be entertaining and educational to watch as beasts like Bernanke cut off their own ear as they go down with the ship...
Title: Re: Bernanke: recession could end in '09 - (Go Back To Sleep!)
Post by: Matt Hatter on March 16, 2009, 09:49:57 am
This is perfect timing for the next stock market sucker rally being orcherstrated right now by the Hedge Funds. If anyone has anything left in the stock market get out NOW! I am telling everyone at my work Ford, to sell this stock as it is up about 20% from a week ago. They all bought in thinking it was going to double and they were going to make a quick buck..are all going to take a loss but it will be much worse if they keep waiting.
Title: Financial Times of London applauds Bernanke for doing a great job
Post by: Revolt426 on March 20, 2009, 07:55:42 pm
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e4187cca-14ef-11de-8cd1-0000779fd2ac.html

Bold Bernanke leads by example
Published: March 20 2009 02:00 | Last updated: March 20 2009 02:00

Ben Bernanke is playing his part. The chairman of the Federal Reserve is making sure that monetary policy is doing all it can to stem the crisis. This week, he announced that the US would begin old-fashioned Japanese-style quantitative easing. The Fed, however, will need help from the rest of the US government. The current financial and stimulus packages are not yet up to the task.

As the crisis has deepened, the Fed aggressively loosened conventional monetary policy, expanded the monetary base, provided large-scale liquidity support and backed lending directly with "credit easing". This week, as well as increasing the size of some of these ongoing programmes, Mr Bernanke adopted the reflationary quantitative easing measures deployed in Japan between 2001 and 2006.

In addition to pledging to keep interest rates low for a longer time, the central bank will buy up $300bn of Treasuries. Like most of the Fed's measures, this move aims to reduce the cost of lending and to prevent deflation with large injections of newly created money into the monetary base. The policy may have been inspired by the example of the UK, which successfully cut gilt yields by this method.

This is prudent boldness. US households and businesses already creak under the weight of their debts. Falling prices would make their already crippling burdens even heavier. There are serious risks. Some are avoidable; the Fed's unsignalled move stunned investors. Some are inevitable; managing inflation when growth returns will require luck and judgment. But the Fed still inspires confidence. Although the dollar fell after the announcement, it is still strong.

There is a striking contrast between the Fed's activism and the timidity in government and Congress. First, the fiscal stimulus package is too slow and too paltry - particularly on measures such as state budgetary aid. A second stimulus, preferably one with fasteracting measures, would be helpful.

Second, as the International Monetary Fund has argued, a credible financial rescue plan has still not emerged from the Treasury, let alone been put into action. It will not be cheap. A successful scheme which is fair to taxpayers and does not involve off-balance sheet wheezes or hidden contingent liabilities will require funds up-front.

During this crisis, politics has come before policy in Congress. But the US needs another stimulus and the Treasury needs the funds for a serious bank rescue. Lawmakers should not let outrage over bonuses stand in the way of essential action.
Title: Re: Financial Times of London applauds Bernanke for doing a great job
Post by: endof on March 20, 2009, 07:59:11 pm
" The Fed, however, will need help from the rest of the US government."
(oh so, its part of the US government now is it? Financial times?)

that lie just ...stuck out more to me than most.

not many people trust the mainstream media anymore.

certainly not here anyway.
Title: Re: Financial Times of London applauds Bernanke for doing a great job
Post by: Revolt426 on March 20, 2009, 07:59:38 pm
LaRouche: Latest Fed Money Pumping a "Treasonous Operation To Sink U.S."

March 20, 2009 (LPAC) -- In response to a report on the latest measures implemented by Federal Reserve Chairman "Helicopter Ben" Bernanke to "restore financial stability," economist Lyndon LaRouche had the following comments: "These actions put us on the edge of a hyperinflationary takeoff, like that of Weimar Germany in 1923. The pumping of money by Bernanke is part of a British operation to sink the United States. Anyone who continues this thing is a traitor to our nation, whether they are witting, or not."

LaRouche was responding to a report, from a well-placed source, that there was growing concern among Federal Reserve officials over the danger that the present course of money pumping would replace the present deflationary course of the economy, with a hyperinflationary one. The latest concern comes from actions taken by the Fed yesterday, to add $1.15 trillion to the ongoing bailout. This includes a direct purchase, by the Fed, of $300 billion in long-term treasuries; the printing of funds to purchase up to $750 billion of Mortgage-Backed Securities (which will be purchased at rates far above their actual, present value); and an additional $100 billion, for special contingencies not presently determined!

This means that the total funds allocated by the Fed and the Treasury since the acceleration of the crisis into high gear in mid-September 2008 is $11.4 trillion.  While "only" $2.8 trillion has been spent so far, this first tranche spent is believed to have contributed to the .4% official increase in inflation reported for February. In a speech given last week, Dallas Federal Reserve President Richard Fisher -- who repeatedly voted against the consistent lowering of the Federal Funds rate in FOMC meetings -- said that the Fed is aware that inflation "could be driven higher" by the increase in its balance sheet, but added that we "will do everything we can to prevent it," and that the Fed will "unwind that stimulus [from the increased allocation of funds] at the right time." When the source was asked how the Fed will determine "the right time," and what measures the Fed would take, he said he doesn't know how they will know exactly when, but that their only tool would be a sharp ratchet upwards of interest rates.

On the sharp, precise comments issued this week by former New York Gov. Elliot Spitzer on the AIG mega-scandal, LaRouche said, "Spitzer is exposing the naked truth about the swindlers."
Title: Re: Financial Times of London applauds Bernanke for doing a great job
Post by: Revolt426 on March 20, 2009, 08:00:01 pm
" The Fed, however, will need help from the rest of the US government."

that lie just ...stuck out more to me than most.

not many people trust the mainstream media anymore.

certainly not here anyway.
What they really mean is , the FED will need assistance from the Government to destroy the country.
Title: Re: Financial Times of London applauds Bernanke for doing a great job
Post by: wembley87 on March 20, 2009, 08:03:59 pm
It is so f***ing sad , all the main stream media praising these , what i would class as rapists . I remember a caller earlier in the week on the Jones show saying he came across Bernanke , and he had never had the feeling of being so close to evil in his life .
Title: Re: Financial Times of London applauds Bernanke for doing a great job
Post by: Mber on March 20, 2009, 08:28:15 pm
old-fashioned Japanese-style quantitative easing.

Don't you love how they talk to the children?
Title: Re: Financial Times of London applauds Bernanke for doing a great job
Post by: endof on March 20, 2009, 08:31:24 pm
Don't you love how they talk to the children?

i just love the fact they talk about it as though it were a good thing..

more and more simply dont trust the MSM.
they are seeing through the BS.
because the BS is so freaking obvious.
Title: C-SPAN3 AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing w/RP
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 09:28:40 am
Geithner: "AIG (now AIU) employs one out of 3 American citizens"

Did this guy just have a fricking labotomy?

How many people out there get a paycheck from AIG (Now AIU)?
Title: Re: LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 09:31:08 am
now Bernanke is talking, just pure lie after lie after lie
Title: Re: LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 09:33:14 am
Barney Frank had to stop the hearing twice so far:

"Ifffshth youse peoples do nothhth sthop this sillinethssss I will have to shthstop thththtissssss hearing"
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 09:34:22 am
http://c-span.org
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Optimus on March 24, 2009, 09:44:37 am
Is the hearing about this Sane?

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=95049.0
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 09:47:46 am
Dudley is on now spewing bullshit.

Using the rage over the AIG to ramrod more federalization of companies.

AIG = Millions

Total money stolen = Trillions.

My God, we're inept as a people.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 09:48:25 am
Alan Grayson Questions CEO Edward Liddy on AIG Cover-up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HYq6kdseV8
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 09:49:14 am
Is the hearing about this Sane?

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=95049.0

looks like it

Geithner to Ask Congress for Broad Power to Seize Firms
Goal Is to Limit Risk to Broader Economy
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/24/AR2009032400847.html?hpid=topnews
By Binyamin Appelbaum, David Cho and Debbi Wilgoren
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, March 24, 2009; 9:39 AM

The Obama administration will ask Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said this morning.

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner is set to argue for the new powers at a hearing today on Capitol Hill that was scheduled to address the furor over bonuses paid to executives at American International Group, which the government has propped up with about $180 billion in federal aid. Administration officials say the proposed authority would have allowed them to seize AIG last fall and wind down its operations at less cost to taxpayers.

The government at present has the authority to seize only banks.

Giving the Treasury secretary the power to seize a broader range of companies would mark a significant shift from the existing model of financial regulation, which relies on independent agencies that are shielded from the political process. The Treasury secretary, a member of the president's Cabinet, would exercise the new powers in consultation with the White House, the Federal Reserve and other regulators, according to an internal administration document.

The administration plans to send legislation to Capitol Hill this week. Sources cautioned yesterday that the details, including the Treasury's role, are still in flux.

"We need resolution authority to go in and be able to change contracts, be able to change the business model, unwind what doesn't work," Gibbs said on CNN in one of several morning television interviews aimed at promoting the administration proposal. " . . . This is the exact type of authority that will allow us to deal with the problems in AIG . . . that will address the systemic risk without having to put [a failing firm] in bankruptcy."

Geithner will testify alongside Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. The hearing before the House Financial Services Committee follows last week's revelation that AIG paid more than $165 million in retention bonuses to employees at its Financial Products division, the same unit whose complex derivatives largely precipitated the company's downfall. AIG chairman Edward M. Liddy testified before the same House committee last week, but Chairman  Barney Frank (D-Mass) vowed to hold a second hearing "to more thoroughly examine the oversight of the federal government's intervention" at AIG.

Last week, the House overwhelmingly passed legislation that would tax 90 percent of the retention payments. Yesterday, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo announced that the majority of executives at AIG Financial Products had indicated their willingness to return the retention payments they had received, and Senate leaders said they will put off consideration of their version of the tax bill.

The administration's proposal contains two pieces. First, it would empower a government agency to take on the new role of systemic risk regulator with broad oversight of any and all financial firms whose failure could disrupt the broader economy. The Federal Reserve is widely considered to be the leading candidate for this assignment. But some critics warn that this could conflict with the Fed's other responsibilities, particularly its control over monetary policy.

The government also would assume the authority to seize such firms if they totter toward failure.

Besides seizing a company outright, the document states, the Treasury Secretary could use a range of tools to prevent its collapse, such as guaranteeing losses, buying assets or taking a partial ownership stake. Such authority also would allow the government to break contracts, such as the agreements to pay $165 million in bonuses to employees of AIG's most troubled unit.

The Treasury secretary could act only after consulting with the president and getting a recommendation from two-thirds of the Federal Reserve Board, according to the plan.

"This is common sense. This isn't anything crazy," Gibbs told CNN. " . . . If the Treasury had resolution authority on AIG, you wouldn't have to put it in bankruptcy to change executive compensation, you could do that automatically."

Geithner plans to lay out the administration's broader strategy for overhauling financial regulation at another hearing on Thursday.

The authority to seize non-bank financial firms has emerged as a priority for the administration after the failure of investment house Lehman Brothers, which was not a traditional bank, and the troubled rescue of AIG.

"We're very late in doing this, but we've got to move quickly to try and do this because, again, it's a necessary thing for any government to have a broader range of tools for dealing with these kinds of things, so you can protect the economy from the kind of risks posed by institutions that get to the point where they're systemic," Geithner said last night at a forum held by the Wall Street Journal.

The powers would parallel the government's existing authority over banks, which are exercised by banking regulatory agencies in conjunction with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Geithner has cited that structure as the model for the government's plans.


Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 09:51:45 am
i think rp is on this committee
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Bash Riprock on March 24, 2009, 09:55:38 am
I wish this was instead a criminal hearing for the People vs. Geithner/Bernanke.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: AlphaM on March 24, 2009, 09:55:48 am
And while on the subject of Benny and Timmeh, will someone have the guts to call them out on this?

Lawlessness Begets Lawlessness (http://market-ticker.org/archives/895-Lawlessness-Begets-Lawlessness.html)

Quote
Nice 7% rally yesterday eh?

A few minutes after the close, we got this:

    WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The Treasury and the Federal Reserve released a joint statement Monday that spells out the different responsibilities of the two agencies in dealing with the financial crisis. In the most noteworthy part of the agreement, Treasury said it would take over the Fed's holding of assets of Bear Stearns and American International Group. Treasury did not say how it would pay for these programs and said it would only make the move "in the longer term and as its authorities permit." The Fed's investments in the three funds, known as Maiden Lane, totaled $72.21 billion in the latest week, according to Fed statistics.

Yes, those three "Maiden Lane" equity investments that The Fed is not authorized to make at all, and which Ben Bernanke assured us as recently as January would not lose money.

The truth?

    - Note: Maiden Lane fund hold Bear Stears and AIG assets. Additionally on 1/20, the WSJ noted that at the end of Sept, Maiden Lane had a value of $27B and the same article noted that analysts expect the value of the Maiden Lane assets to have dropped more in Q4. Furthermore on 3/17, it was disclosed that Maiden Lane III paid $62B to buy CDOs and thus settle derivative transactions for AIG with 16 investment banks in return for securities worth less than $30B.

Uh, the very same Fed that took an intentional $30 billion loss without appropriating the funds via The House (Congress) as required by The Constitution and now intends to pass that $30 billion loss directly to the Treasury (and the taxpayer), just a couple of months after telling us that they'd take no loss?

The Fed put this ditty out to go along with it:

.....

    2. The Federal Reserve to avoid credit risk and credit allocation
    The Federal Reserve's lender-of-last-resort responsibilities involve lending against collateral, secured to the satisfaction of the responsible Federal Reserve Bank.  Actions taken by the Federal Reserve should also aim to improve financial or credit conditions broadly, not to allocate credit to narrowly-defined sectors or classes of borrowers.  Government decisions to influence the allocation of credit are the province of the fiscal authorities.

This, of course, is why they entirely ignored that charter and took three separate equity positions including one of them in which they took an intentional loss while Ben Bernanke appears to have lied to Congress and The American People, stating that there had been and would not be, in his best judgment, any loss at all?

How do you square that with taking an intentional loss by overpaying for CDS on purpose that at the time of acquisition have less than half of the value you spend in dollars?

Lying to Congress is already punishable, but we must go much further.

We need a special prosecutor - now - to investigate this and see if there are criminal sanctions that can be brought against Bernanke and the rest of The Federal Reserve Board, and while we're at it, Congress needs to revoke The Fed's charter or rewrite The Federal Reserve Act so as to provide for specific severe criminal penalties for actions that clearly exceed The Fed's charter.

Enough is enough.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:00:31 am
I wish this was instead a criminal hearing for the People vs. Geithner/Bernanke.

The people definitely see who the criminals are and they are on both sides of the carpet.

I mean this is more of a show trial/hearing than Nuerenberg.

WTF?
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:19:41 am
Geithner: "I trhink it is unfair to suggest that we do not have the best interest of the American people at hand".

Really?

Unfair?

Like stealing $5.7 Trillion unfair?

That kind of unfair?
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 10:20:33 am
Does anyone else notice that it's all basically just lipservice to the Federal Reserve? I haven't seen any hard hitting questions asked yet. It's like an endless circle jerk.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:23:02 am
Does anyone else notice that it's all basically just lipservice to the Federal Reserve? I haven't seen any hard hitting questions asked yet. It's like an endless circle jerk.

and the taxpayer does not even get a reach around
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:30:37 am
hahahahahahahaha


no authority under constitution!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




hahahahahaha



YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


BOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Irobot on March 24, 2009, 10:31:43 am
Rep. Mazine Waters nailed Timmy on the Goldman Sachs connections to all this BS. Indeed , all does point at these SOB's.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:31:59 am
Rep Michele Bachmann


ONE WORLD CURRENCY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





PUBLICLY RENOUNCING ONE WORLD CURRENCY ON RECORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Double BOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:32:56 am
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



No knowledge of where the money goes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


SHE KICKS ASS!!!

WHO IS SHE?
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: IridiumKEPfactor on March 24, 2009, 10:33:21 am
Michele Bachmann just asked Bernake about the 10 TRILLION

Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 10:35:10 am
Awww. the poor banks, Bernanke says, would be disadvantaged by people not wanting to come to them if we knew they were being propped up by the public.

Now Frank won't let an answer happen. He went into a 30 minute diatribe about extra time, when an answer from Bernanke would have taken 10 seconds or less.

It's a total bullshit puppet trial.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:35:19 am
Barney Frank cut her off before Bernanke could answer!

On record with a BS excure!

She is a cool, calm operator.  She is a surgeon that cuts right to the core of the issue, wow.

YOUTUBE NEEDED!!!!

A young ron paul! [UPDATE: her record exposes that she ain't no ron paul and has been duped by all sorts of nonsense, but use their weapons against them and this 5 minutes was pretty awesome]
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: IridiumKEPfactor on March 24, 2009, 10:35:24 am
THIS IS A FARSE!!! Barney Frank refuses TO ALLOW TIME for the question to be answered!!!

Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 10:36:27 am
and the taxpayer does not even get a reach around

Nope. But the taxpayer does get a tossed salad. Without dressing.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: IridiumKEPfactor on March 24, 2009, 10:37:15 am
So This is how it works. The commitee chair persons ALL HAVE HAVE BEEN bought and the honest few congress people have no say.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 10:39:58 am
George Carlin once said: "Hope you continue to enjoy the big red, white and blue dick shoved up your ass..."

Also... "It's called the American Dream. Because you've got to be ASLEEP to believe it."
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:41:39 am
So This is how it works. The commitee chair persons ALL HAVE HAVE BEEN bought and the honest few congress people have no say.

Barney Frank is an agent for the Private Federal Reserve Bank.

The Federal Reserve has more incriminating evidence of Barney Frank than Meyer Lansky had of J Edger Hoover (and he had a picture of J Edgar committing felatio).

Barney Frank is a showman, a bloated actor with no shame, no remorse, and no interest in the american people.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: TelepesT on March 24, 2009, 10:42:58 am


"JUST GIVE US MORE MONEY" - Bernake

Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:44:33 am
Preface:  George Carlin + Microphone = Not Safe for Work

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b8/Carlin_does_Trenton.jpg/180px-Carlin_does_Trenton.jpg)

If you tried to put all the problems you read about on this website into one speech, it would a momumental task.

George Carlin does exactly this in 3minutes, and 36seconds...listen to this, really LISTEN and then share it with someone who does not yet see "Who Owns America".

Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m92kcoz0vDU&NR=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m92kcoz0vDU&NR=1)
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:45:42 am
hahahaha

mel watt... "why not make the fed chairmanship a political appointee?"

hahahaha

yeah, rockefeller and rothschild are going to allow that.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:47:42 am
ron paul is there!!!!!!!!!!!!!


he is going to talk!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


wait for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:52:18 am
Rep Castle (R): Can't we all get along?
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 10:54:36 am
ron paul is there!!!!!!!!!!!!!


he is going to talk!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


wait for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get ready for an industrial ass-reaming. You just KNOW helicopter Ben HATES RP.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:54:55 am
Rep Ackerman (D-NY): "Real problem is greed assisted by innovation. Gimmicks are not financial products and credit default swaps are not insurance. Are we going to stop pretending that this is insurance and get back into reality?"
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 10:55:36 am
Get ready for an industrial ass-reaming. You just KNOW helicopter Ben HATES RP.

Ben is already starting to squirm, looks like hemmoroids are acting up.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: TelepesT on March 24, 2009, 10:56:31 am
ron paul is there!!!!!!!!!!!!!


he is going to talk!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


wait for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can only see the CNN version - I dont get CSPAN3

I will let you know if they cut to the CNN talking heads when Ron P is up to speak
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Irobot on March 24, 2009, 10:57:01 am
Quicktime video capture of Rep.'s  Waters and Bachman

mw

http://infowars.ning.com/forum/attachment/download?id=1184261%3AUploadedFi58%3A1863

mb
http://infowars.ning.com/forum/attachment/download?id=1184261%3AUploadedFi58%3A1861
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:00:08 am
I can only see the CNN version - I dont get CSPAN3

I will let you know if they cut to the CNN talking heads when Ron P is up to speak

http://c-span.org

go to cspan3 video/audio
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Irobot on March 24, 2009, 11:00:49 am
for cspan 3 paste this address in to your windows type player
mms://rx-wes-sea67.rbn.com/farm/pull/tx-rbn-sea007:1459/wmtencoder/cspan/cspan/wmlive/cspan3v.asf
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:00:52 am
Quicktime video capture of Rep.'s  Waters and Bachman

mw

http://infowars.ning.com/forum/attachment/download?id=1184261%3AUploadedFi58%3A1863

mb
http://infowars.ning.com/forum/attachment/download?id=1184261%3AUploadedFi58%3A1861

nice!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: 911aware on March 24, 2009, 11:01:22 am
waiting for ron
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:02:15 am
Sherman!

He blew the whistle concerning the martial law threats.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:05:25 am
Sherman!

He blew the whistle concerning the martial law threats.

WTF sherman, they will never list where the money went, it is all hidden

Geithner: "I will reflect on the suggestion you made. I will think carefully about your proposal"

hahahaha

what a fricking joke
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:07:20 am
WTF sherman, they will never list where the money went, it is all hidden

Geithner: "I will reflect on the suggestion you made. I will think carefully about your proposal"

hahahaha

what a fricking joke

sherman, stop talking about bonuses, find out about the billions not the millions!

where are the billions?

but he does have geithner on the fricking ropes

UPDATE: Hey how come Bernanke allowed him to finish answering after time expired?
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 11:11:56 am

UPDATE: Hey how come Bernanke allowed him to finish answering after time expired?

Because it's BULLSHIT, and it's BAD for ya!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:12:00 am
geithner cannot even explain this plan of troubled assetts.  it is so f-d up even though lucas is acting like it is a potentially good deal.

here is the deal...

you put in $10K

govt matches with $10K

govt gives additional $100k in insurance


THIS IS JUST ANOTHER CREDIT DEFAULT SWAP BUT NOW IT IS SPONSORED BY TAXPAYERS

How can they be so brazen?

the gov just created a new ponzi scheme and that is why the market went up 500 pts
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: URpwneddude on March 24, 2009, 11:13:04 am
My professional liability insurance carrier is AIG.  The company that normally prepares my business owner's, workman's comp. and liability insurance is still pushing this company and they told me that AIG is still A rated.  I told them that I wanted a different carrier and they said that they only work with one carrier at this time for liability, AIG, now AIU.  I told them that they just lost my business because I wasn't going to contribute my premiums to a business that obviously doesn't understand fiscally responsible behavior.  When I was finished, my agent said that he personally agreed with my actions.

All insureds need to realize that this company may not be around to help you if you get sued.

Dump them.  Before they dump on you.

Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:16:56 am
RON PAUL ON NOW!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 24, 2009, 11:17:06 am
Ron's on.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 24, 2009, 11:17:58 am
Diggin' the Lisa Loeb glasses, Dr. Paul....
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: TelepesT on March 24, 2009, 11:20:29 am
CNN IS CUTTING OUT RON PAUL _ SHOWING HIM IN THE CORNER - BUT TALKING ABOUT OTHER BS


CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 24, 2009, 11:21:16 am
Fox Business Channel


Dr. Paul's got Bernanke's voice quivering like no one I've ever seen............yeah!!!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 24, 2009, 11:23:30 am
Hopefully there's another round of questioning. I heard the Chairman say "this round" so..........'cause, Ron was just getting his motor warmed up.....
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:23:36 am
Bernanke: "Time has expired"

Paul: "Your the chairman"

yeah like WTF?  is he just a fricking stopwatch or is he interested in the American People having their questions answered?
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 11:23:38 am
Bernanke hates Ron Paul. But he respects him as a worthy foe. He also knows RP is right.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 11:25:09 am
I'd like to see 30 minutes of Ron Paul questioning Bernanke and get some REAL answers.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:25:15 am
Bernanke hates Ron Paul. But he respects him as a worthy foe. He also knows RP is right.

they all know RP is right.

It is almost like they are in a prison cell screeming "help me" or Linda Blair with "save me" etched out on her stomach.

I mean they really look so controlled like there is a microchip bomb in their cerebral cortex and Jay Rockefeller has the remote.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Noel Degrassi on March 24, 2009, 11:28:48 am
they all know RP is right.

It is almost like they are in a prison cell screeming "help me" or Linda Blair with "save me" etched out on her stomach.

I mean they really look so controlled like there is a microchip bomb in their cerebral cortex and Jay Rockefeller has the remote.


I know. When Bernanke was attempting to explain to Dr. Paul who stole all of the cookies out of the jar, you can see Geithner patting his hand on the table, nodding his head like "Yep. Yep. That's what happened. What he said. Yep. Good talking point Benny..."

Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:29:13 am
wow, holding bernanke's feet to the fire!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:33:49 am
Capuano - $50 Trillion in exposure not $1 Trillion

this is awesome!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Irobot on March 24, 2009, 11:35:06 am
Diggin' the Lisa Loeb glasses, Dr. Paul....

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_fd8XFNPdDks/SckKzXWPIuI/AAAAAAAAAFE/vCrbWXnxKa4/s320/RPPP.jpg)
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:36:09 am
"I think you are dead wrong on this one"
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:36:36 am
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_fd8XFNPdDks/SckKzXWPIuI/AAAAAAAAAFE/vCrbWXnxKa4/s320/RPPP.jpg)

saaaasssy! very GQ! Should be in the new Axe commercial.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: ConcordeWarrior on March 24, 2009, 11:36:46 am
Thanks for posting the link to this debate.
Tim Gheitner looks so totally embarrassed he doesn't even know what to answer.
Even the Dems are after him!  ;D
Title: Congress is embarrassing itself
Post by: Satyagraha on March 24, 2009, 11:37:17 am
Watching the hearings... I find it painful to see these know-nothing congressmen and women asking questions of Geithner and Bernanke.   With a very very few exceptions, they do nothing to inspire confidence in their leadership - in fact, they expose their utter lack of expertise in how the fed and treasury work.  But they don't really care - they are just looking for a grandstanding platform to show their outrage..
Indeed, they doth protest too much.  They have been on an extended vacation for years, and being obnoxious in congress because they have an audience isn't going to even come close to making up for their lack of attention to their jobs in congress for the past 8 years.

My God. We are really deep in the shit. 
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 11:37:18 am
I don't know who grilled them on losing 60% of American's retirement funds, (I was just listening to the audio) but that was awesome. Who was that?
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:37:55 am
Thanks for posting the link to this debate.
Tim Gheitner looks so totally embarrassed he doesn't even know what to answer.
Even the Dems are after him!  ;D

these plans are so f-d up it makes absolutely no sense (unless you watch the Obama Deception)
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:38:20 am
I don't know who grilled them on losing 60% of American's retirement funds, (I was just listening to the audio) but that was awesome. Who was that?

capuano
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 11:39:32 am
Oh look, they need to hire more people. Isn't that sweet.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Harold on March 24, 2009, 11:40:09 am
An utterly predictable performance by Ron Paul. He at least could have feigned anger as Capuano did.

'I don’t laugh at the people who claim that they understand the connections [of Bilderbergers in Obama's administration], but I’ve never really spent much time tracing that through' - Ron Paul, as quoted in this article last week. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20010.html

It does appear that Ron hasn't spent much time wondering why the whole of the US mainstream media continue to think that Bilderberg 2008, that took place on US soil, remains absolutely unnewsworthy. It also appears that Ron isn't aware of the content of the Logan Act, or, indeed, that he had two Bilderberg 2008 attendees sat right in front of him.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 11:41:02 am
capuano

Why can't these people answer a simple yes or no question? They outright REFUSED. It reminds me of when Bill Clinton was being questioned. The whole "Well it depends on what your definition of 'is', is."

OMFG...
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Irobot on March 24, 2009, 11:41:59 am
Ron Paul  House Financial Services Cmte. hearing  03 24 09
Quicktime Video
http://adap2k.blogspot.com/2009/03/ron-paul-house-financial-services-cmte.html

.
Title: Re: Congress is embarrassing itself
Post by: TelepesT on March 24, 2009, 11:42:05 am
Watching the hearings... I find it painful to see these know-nothing congressmen and women asking questions of Geithner and Bernanke.   With a very very few exceptions, they do nothing to inspire confidence in their leadership - in fact, they expose their utter lack of expertise in how the fed and treasury work.  But they don't really care - they are just looking for a grandstanding platform to show their outrage..
Indeed, they doth protest too much.  They have been on an extended vacation for years, and being obnoxious in congress because they have an audience isn't going to even come close to making up for their lack of attention to their jobs in congress for the past 8 years.

My God. We are really deep in the shit. 

They seem to only care about the 160 million in bonuses
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:45:55 am
An utterly predictable performance by Ron Paul. He at least could have feigned anger as Capuano did.

'I don’t laugh at the people who claim that they understand the connections [of Bilderbergers in Obama's administration], but I’ve never really spent much time tracing that through' - Ron Paul, as quoted in this article last week. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20010.html

It does appear that Ron hasn't spent much time wondering why the whole of the US mainstream media continue to think that Bilderberg 2008, that took place on US soil, remains absolutely unnewsworthy. It also appears that Ron isn't aware of the content of the Logan Act, or, indeed, that he had two Bilderberg 2008 attendees sat right in front of him.

yeah! you tell them!  RP should be focusing all of his attention on Bohemian Grove too!   Why is he only waking up 200 million American citizens by exposing the obvious lies by Bernanke/Geithner?  He should not be as consistent as he has been for over 25 years to prove his overwhelming credibility.  Instead he should follow traps set up for him.

If the American people cannot expose the insanity of Bilderberg and the Logan Act, how is Ron Paul supposed to?  He is not doing enough?  Have you watched the 12 hours of Evidence of Revision? But whatever, I guess the Logan Act is very important and a very good area of discussion.  I just do not buy the insinuations that he is a fraud because he did not bring it up in those 5 minutes.  He has over 100 hours of congressional speeches laying out the problems of the fed, illegal wars, etc. and has over 1,000 hours in interviews, speeches, etc. over the past 25 years stating his stands.  I have never seen him contradict himself nor have I ever seen him not defend the constitution.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Satyagraha on March 24, 2009, 11:46:01 am
Did I miss Ron Paul? Did he already have his 5 minutes?
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Harold on March 24, 2009, 11:52:03 am
yeah! you tell them!  RP should be focusing all of his attention on Bohemian Grove too!   Why is he only waking up 200 million American citizens by exposing the obvious lies by Bernanke/Geithner?  He should not be as consistent as he has been for over 25 years to prove his overwhelming credibility.  Instead he should follow traps set up for him.

If the American people cannot expose the insanity of Bilderberg and the Logan Act, how is Ron Paul supposed to?  He is not doing enough?  Have you watched the 12 hours of Evidence of Revision? But whatever, I guess the Logan Act is very important and a very good area of discussion.  I just do not buy the insinuations that he is a fraud because he did not bring it up in those 5 minutes.  He has over 100 hours of congressional speeches laying out the problems of the fed, illegal wars, etc. and has over 1,000 hours in interviews, speeches, etc. over the past 25 years stating his stands.  I have never seen him contradict himself nor have I ever seen him not defend the constitution.

200 million? Are you sure you didn't mean 20?

20 because that's how many turned up outside the G20 meeting and Bilderberg.

Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: TelepesT on March 24, 2009, 11:54:34 am
Ron Paul  House Financial Services Cmte. hearing  03 24 09
Quicktime Video
http://adap2k.blogspot.com/2009/03/ron-paul-house-financial-services-cmte.html

.

THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 11:55:24 am
200 million? Are you sure you didn't mean 20?

20 because that's how many turned up outside the G20 meeting and Bilderberg.



I have refined my post.

I am saying that your proposal would stop his plan of waking up most of the American people (200 million that he can reach with his focused attack on the fed) by focusing on one issue that the American people can see for themselves.  Once someone follows the path of the private federal reserve, then they will find out much more on their own. This is my opinion-you have yours and I respect that.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Satyagraha on March 24, 2009, 11:56:32 am
That line of questioning about who got the info about Geithner's plan BEFORE it was announced was interesting. I wonder if any of the pre-announcement 'consultants' bought stocks that subsequently showed the nice leap in price yesterday once the announcement was made.  
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Kain on March 24, 2009, 11:58:37 am
Miller was asking a decent inquiry about personal liability for executive officers.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Anti_Illuminati on March 24, 2009, 11:59:57 am
Did you hear Bernanke respond to that one guy (older guy with white/greyish hair):

"I think it's a poorly worded question."

When a video is up you can see what part I'm talking about, and the context of it.

The level of viciously arrogant audacity is un-f**kingbelievably off the charts.

Oh and also when Bernanke was talking about the amount lost amongst the retirement accounts--when he said "The American People".  He had a really subtle shit-eating subdued grin on his face when he said something like: "If it weren't for them bailing out AIG, they would have lost 70%." (in reference to the 40-50% loss that was stated).  The facial queues showed utter, complete contempt for the American People as though we're not even supposed to be alive but 300+ million of us should be in death camps instead.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 12:02:33 pm
Q: "Did you follow through on the plan as it was proposed to congress?"

Geithner: "No, but it did follow the wording of the actual passed legislation"

hahahaha - he admits that they push something through congress through BS and then no one reads it, and then they do the opposite of what they sold the American people.

that was brilliant
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Anti_Illuminati on March 24, 2009, 12:06:20 pm
Q: "Did you follow through on the plan as it was proposed to congress?"

Geithner: "No, but it did follow the wording of the actual passed legislation"

hahahaha - he admits that they push something through congress through BS and then no one reads it, and then they do the opposite of what they sold the American people.

that was brilliant

Geithner must have failed, or not attended Rockefeller's Madison Avenue Psy-Ops training seminars.  He's a poor liar, doesn't even bother to cover things up, hahahaha.

The simple fact that you point out here would be lost on most people because of fluoride and vaccines.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 12:08:42 pm
Bernanke: "I do not know why it happened. It was just a fluke that this issue is continuing despite the trillions being given to us by the US taxpayer"

Q "When was it broken?"

Bernanke: "Problem was with thrifts and protections of the thrifts."

What?
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Satyagraha on March 24, 2009, 12:09:09 pm
Hey - if you see behind Bernanke, I think that's JOE the PLUMBER --- now a cameraman??? ;)
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 12:11:01 pm
Posley: "Now we are going to have son of TARP, grandson of TARP, greatgrandson of TARP"

hahahaha
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Satyagraha on March 24, 2009, 12:12:06 pm
All we need is a nice flow chart... a PLAN.

Excuse me - there's a VERY BIG PLAN... and you'll never find it on a flow chart.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 12:13:17 pm
All we need is a nice flow chart... a PLAN.

Excuse me - there's a VERY BIG PLAN... and you'll never find it on a flow chart.

damn right!  that congressman needs a copy of the Obama Deception.
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 12:14:19 pm
Bernanke: "I think there is a plan"

He does not know?

He thinks?

Is he just given orders for the day?

How is he not operating from a plan?

Someone youtube that please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 12:15:41 pm
Headlines for newspapers should be:

"After $10 Trillion in Taxpayer Bailouts, Federal Reserve Chairman is not Sure There is a Plan"
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 LIVE AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing [Ron Paul up soon]
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 12:18:41 pm
"Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke Does Not Know the Master Plan for Economy"
(http://blogs.chron.com/lorensteffy/bernanke.jpg)
"'THINKS' There is One"
Title: Re: C-SPAN3 AIG (now AIU) Geithner/Bernanke Hearing w/RP
Post by: Satyagraha on March 24, 2009, 12:25:39 pm
Yes. We are definitely screwed.
Title: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 07:41:17 pm
At least they are finally forced to talk about it!

They have been planning it for decades, now the puppets have been forced to anser.

interesting
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: cueball7 on March 24, 2009, 08:25:51 pm

Only time will tell whether Obama is truely as tied to the one worlders as "The Obama Deception" indicates he is. My gut tells me he's not, and I could be completely wrong, only time will tell. If we indeed keep our own currency like he's indicating, that would be the first step towards showing he's not Rothschilds bitch. :-\
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: RodneyHampton on March 24, 2009, 08:28:05 pm
I hope you guys don't actually believe what comes out of their mouths.
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: Dig on March 24, 2009, 08:29:00 pm
Only time will tell whether Obama is truely as tied to the one worlders as "The Obama Deception" indicates he is. My gut tells me he's not, and I could be completely wrong, only time will tell. If we indeed keep our own currency like he's indicating, that would be the first step towards showing he's not Rothschilds bitch. :-\

time has told.  he is.  it is only a matter of how informed the public is to that fact which will dictate what their next moves are.

that is why it is very important to get them on record, let them know that we know.

we know they are pushing for one world currency/gov/army
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: jerickson on March 24, 2009, 08:48:32 pm
time has told.  he is.  it is only a matter of how informed the public is to that fact which will dictate what their next moves are.

that is why it is very important to get them on record, let them know that we know.

we know they are pushing for one world currency/gov/army

...And world religion. Worship is what this battle is ultimately about, IMHO.

I guess we shouldn't be surprised about all the talk about ditching the dollar and moving to a world currency of some sort. We conspiracy kooks always have such wild idea  ::)
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: Lilly Bighorn on March 24, 2009, 08:51:59 pm
hasn't bob chapman said they don't need a single currency, only the power to set interest and exchange rates globally? also, they want an amero-type currency instead of a global one. i wouldn't assume obama was lying, when what he said can be just as dangerous as the truth!
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: jerickson on March 24, 2009, 08:59:55 pm
hasn't bob chapman said they don't need a single currency, only the power to set interest and exchange rates globally? also, they want an amero-type currency instead of a global one. i wouldn't assume obama was lying, when what he said can be just as dangerous as the truth!

Yeah, could be. From what I can gather, however, it seems like they are making their worldwide move now. In my mind, that would include some kind of global currency, but who knows? Maybe it'd be more advantageous for them to do the whole regional currency thing (Amero, Euro, etc).
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: voodo0 on March 24, 2009, 09:11:30 pm
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/reuters/2009/03/24/2009-03-25T005558Z_01_WAT011211_RTRIDST_0_OBAMA-CURRENCY-URGENT.html
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: Mber on March 24, 2009, 09:16:51 pm
I hope you guys don't actually believe what comes out of their mouths.
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: jerickson on March 24, 2009, 09:19:16 pm
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/reuters/2009/03/24/2009-03-25T005558Z_01_WAT011211_RTRIDST_0_OBAMA-CURRENCY-URGENT.html

Well that settles it. We'll have a world currency sooner or later, cuz Obama just said in that article that we wouldn't have one. And, no offense, but we all know he seems pattern of doing opposite whatever he says (thank you, captain obvious, I know).
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: moxiez on March 24, 2009, 09:24:17 pm
BS to them saying this... did you see Bernake's reaction when asked that? That is a typical uncomfortable reaction (moving around a lot and looking down) when you're about to tell a lie. He may have said No, but his body language said Hell Yes!
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: life0repeats on March 24, 2009, 09:39:38 pm
we already have global currency essentially.  can go anywhere in the world just about with a Visa and be golden.
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: Mber on March 24, 2009, 09:51:26 pm
we already have global currency essentially.  can go anywhere in the world just about with a Visa and be golden.

haha so true so true, didn't even think about that.
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: SeasOfEuropa on March 24, 2009, 10:48:12 pm
Right, based on their track record why should I believe what these clowns say?
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: Jeffro on March 24, 2009, 11:03:43 pm
Unfortunatly the rest of the world is screaming for a global currency to replace the dollar.  All they need to do is create the global currency through the rest of the world, combining the European, African, South American, and Asian Unions which will leave the USA 2 choices:  isolation from the world economy or join the world currency. 
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: kevlar442 on March 24, 2009, 11:04:10 pm
Wait a minute, anyone seen this yet? http://chattahbox.com/business/2009/03/17/international-monetary-fund-may-unleash-billions-of-world-wide-super-currency/
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: creat3d on March 24, 2009, 11:07:00 pm
Only time will tell whether Obama is truely as tied to the one worlders as "The Obama Deception" indicates he is. My gut tells me he's not, and I could be completely wrong, only time will tell. If we indeed keep our own currency like he's indicating, that would be the first step towards showing he's not Rothschilds bitch. :-\


Yes, I'm sure his 100% CFR/Trilateral/Bilderberg administration is purely coincidental...
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: pac522 on March 24, 2009, 11:27:51 pm
Stand down, stand down, we're not attacking you. Stand down, stand down, we're not burning your houses to the ground. Stand down, stand down, that's not the sound of gunfire you hear. Stand down, stand down, that's not the screams of your women we're raping. Stand down, stand down...
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: Kilika on March 25, 2009, 08:04:51 am
Whatever! People have been warning of calls for a world currency/government and been called nutjobs and worse as a result. So, are we nutjobs now that the conversations are right out in the open?

Don't bother, as I know the answer!
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: Dig on March 25, 2009, 08:41:41 am
Geithner about to speak to his masters at the Council on Foreign Relations
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: jerickson on March 25, 2009, 02:21:39 pm
Whatever! People have been warning of calls for a world currency/government and been called nutjobs and worse as a result. So, are we nutjobs now that the conversations are right out in the open?

Don't bother, as I know the answer!

"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you." --Unknown  ;)
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: limitgov on March 25, 2009, 02:28:26 pm
I like how he says "There is no need for a single global currency", as if the constitution authorizes him power to set one up and force it upon citizens of this country or any other country.

He is conditioning us to believe he does have this power.
Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: wouldntyouliketoknow on March 25, 2009, 02:29:43 pm
I love the double speak here.....

March 25, 2009
Categories: White House

Geithner 'open' to China proposal

Geithner, at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the U.S. is "open" to a headline-grabbing proposal by the governor of the China's central bank, which was widely reported as being a call for a new global currency to replace the dollar, but which Geithner described as more modest and "evolutionary."

"I haven’t read the governor’s proposal. He’s a very thoughtful, very careful distinguished central banker. I generally find him sensible on every issue," Geithner said, saying that however his interpretation of the proposal was to increase the use of International Monetary Fund's special drawing rights -- shares in the body held by its members -- not creating a new currency in the literal sense.

"We’re actually quite open to that suggestion – you should see it as rather evolutionary rather building on the current architecture rather than moving us to global monetary union," he said.

"The only thing concrete I saw was expanding the use of the [special drawing rights]," Geithner said. "Anything he’s thinking about deserves some consideration."

The continued use of the dollar as a reserve currency, he added, "depends..on how effective we are in the United States...at getting our fiscal system back to the point where people judge it as sustainable over time."

President Obama flatly rejected the notion of a new global currency at last night's press conference.

UPDATE: Evidently sensing a gaffe, moderator Roger Altman told Geithner that it would be "useful" to return to the question, and asked if he foresaw a change in the dollar's centrality.

"I do not," Geithner said, adding several forceful promises, including, "We will do what's necessary to say we're sustaining confidence in our financial markets."

 
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0309/Geithner_open_to_China_proposal.html?showall

Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: wouldntyouliketoknow on March 25, 2009, 02:34:31 pm
more double talk...unbelievable.  Do they think we are stupid? 

White House Open to Global Currency? 
Last night, President Barack Obama expressed confidence in the dollar and declared: "I don't believe that there's a need for a global currency."

Normally, that would settle the issue. But in the past 24 hours two of Obama's top economic advisers have signaled an openness to such a new global currency -- in one form or another. What's going on?

Politico's Ben Smith reports that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said this morning that he was open to a new global currency to replace the dollar, as proposed by a Chinese central banker. Geithner, according to Smith, said that the proposal -- which he has not yet read -- is less transformative that headlines have suggested. "We’re actually quite open to that suggestion – you should see it as rather evolutionary rather building on the current architecture rather than moving us to global monetary union," Geithner said.

Later, the moderator, per Smith "apparently sensing a gaffe," asked Geithner to clarify his remarks. Geithner walked back his earlier comments and said he does not see the dollar being sidelined by a new currency.

But Geithner wasn't the only top Obama adviser who refused to rule out a transition to a global currency. White House economic adviser Austan Goolsbee said much the same thing yesterday afternoon in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer. Although he characterized such a change as "unlikely," Goolsbee twice declined to rule out such a global currency despite being pressed by Blitzer. "I haven't seen the details of the proposal," Goolsbee said. The entire exchange follows:

BLITZER: The Chinese suggesting today, this dollar, U.S. dollar, should be replaced as international currency, because they are beginning to have concerns that you are printing, the U.S. government is simply printing too many of these dollars and will lose its value as an international currency.
What's your reaction?

GOOLSBEE: It strikes me as probably unlikely.

Different people have in the past argued for world currencies or new -- new currencies before. I believe the U.S. at this point is the safest place to invest in the world. And it's likely to remain that the dollar is a critical currency in the years ahead.

BLITZER: So, you -- you don't like some new international currency that some Chinese are proposing?

GOOLSBEE: Well, look...

BLITZER: I assume that's right, right?

GOOLSBEE: I haven't seen the details of what they are proposing.

I mean, the dollar is the dollar. If people don't want to buy it, they don't buy it. But I think you have seen sort of a flight to the dollar in -- in times of trouble.


I don't know enough about monetary policy and currency to analyze the potential benefits and drawbacks of such a change, though several people I've spoken to believe it's an idea that's as undesirable as it is unworkable. But as a matter of instilling confidence in the U.S. economy at a time when such confidence is critical, it seems that Obama's answer was much better than the mixed messages coming from his top economic advisers.

 http://www.weeklystandard.com/Weblogs/TWSFP/TWSFPView.asp#10960

Title: Re: Bernanke, Geithner, Obama on record "No global currency"
Post by: Kilika on March 26, 2009, 06:17:15 am
As I've said before, don't people get it? What these thugs are doing is getting so blatant, it's amazing. The globalists are legislating the US right out from under the publics feet without firing a single shot!
Title: CNBC LIVE - Ben Bernanke telling you that the Fed is justified in raping America
Post by: Dig on April 03, 2009, 11:03:16 am
Wow, this is just too brazen.

"We are not living in normal times, no one predicted, etc."

BULLSHIT!!!!!
Title: Bernanke & Chance the Gardener in "Being There"
Post by: centexan on April 10, 2009, 12:23:33 pm
Don't know if anyone's pointed this out yet, but Bernanke recently talked about the US economy in gardening terms.  I think he's mocking us.  The 1979 movie Being There (starring Peter Sellers) is about a gardener mistaken for a prophet.  Hilarious movie (and book by Jerzy Kosinski).  Below are a couple of links--one to some stories about Bernanke's remarks, and the other to an IMDB page of quotes from Being There.  Bernanke was telling us we're so stupid that we'll accept assinine gardening metaphors from a Hollywood comedy when faced with the collapse of the country.

http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&hl=en&q=bernanke+sprout

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078841/quotes

President "Bobby": Mr. Gardner, do you agree with Ben, or do you think that we can stimulate growth through temporary incentives?

[Long pause]

Chance the Gardener: As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden.

President "Bobby": In the garden.
 
Chance the Gardener: Yes. In the garden, growth has it seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.

President "Bobby": Spring and summer.
 
Chance the Gardener: Yes.
 
President "Bobby": Then fall and winter.
 
Chance the Gardener: Yes.
 
Benjamin Rand: I think what our insightful young friend is saying is that we welcome the inevitable seasons of nature, but we're upset by the seasons of our economy.

Chance the Gardener: Yes! There will be growth in the spring!
 
Benjamin Rand: Hmm!

Chance the Gardener: Hmm!
 
President "Bobby": Hm. Well, Mr. Gardner, I must admit that is one of the most refreshing and optimistic statements I've heard in a very, very long time.

[Benjamin Rand applauds]

President "Bobby": I admire your good, solid sense. That's precisely what we lack on Capitol Hill.
Title: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: Spartacus101 on April 13, 2009, 09:22:07 pm
Hey everybody,

I'm a long time lurker on these forums and, even though I've actually had this account for over a year now, I guess it's only recently I feel like posting.  Anyway, I recently started a required Global Economics course in college and discovered that our textbook was written by Benjamin Bernanke.  It seems like all of the discussion questions in class are about just how much the bailouts and stimulus packages are going to help the economy and how we should get the rest of the world to join in.

When I chime in and tell them the bailouts are a fraud and that the Federal Reserve counterfeits our money, people seem confused that I could possibly believe that the bailouts and the Fed could be anything other than the saving grace of the economy.  They say, "Oh, no we need the Federal Reserve.  They are vital to keeping those greedy banks in line."  Have these false principles been ingrained so deep into academia that people no longer realize that there are economic solutions beside those offered by the central bank?

Anyway, I have been able to get some of my classmates interested in my way of thinking.  I've been recommending America: Freedom to Fascism to people who want to learn the truth about the Fed.  It is just going to suck having to take a class where I simply have to mindlessly regurgitate Keynesian Economic principles I don't believe in from a textbook written by one of the Federal Reserve criminals.

http://images.bookbyte.com/isbn.aspx?isbn=9780073362656
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: 70983 on April 13, 2009, 09:30:15 pm
thats why i am not looking forward to attending a State university.  I will be majoring in economics and i dont want to have to deal with all the mindlessness that seems to be a part of it, but it is my interest and i hope i can make it through.  I guess all we can really do is speak out, speak truth to power and get the information out.  You can lead the people in your class to water, but you cant make them drin and when it comes down to it they are going to be the ones getting raped in a FEMA camp while you are a free man.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: SlaveState on April 13, 2009, 09:45:30 pm
The above is why I dropped out of college and instead started my own business.

If you plan to be an astrophysicist or a patent lawyer then yes, you have to suffer through school. Otherwise it's just a trap to continue the indoctrination, bind you with debt and keep you in a perpetual childhood in the prime of your life. These are not the universities of 100 years ago.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: Wood0173 on April 14, 2009, 11:09:44 am
I am an entrepreneuer myself; oddly enough living more comfortably in this recessesion than in previous years and have no college education.  You don't actually need it unless you want to enter a field in which you need some sort of credibility or certification.  I live in a college town and I tell you...it is becoming an even more dangerous brain-programming location that it has been previously.  I had enough in 2003 when I was actually told by a professor that a child is born addicted to opiates if the mom smokes marijuana while pregnant.  I then gave it another go about a year later and just about lost my cool when the professor informed the class that manmade global warming was inevitable thanks to the K-Curve.  The average state college kid is comparable to a pull-string doll.  The more classes they attend, the worse they become!  (NOTE:  I Realize that not everyone is brainwashed by these types)  They don't understand how one could be ignorant enough to be a Christian but completely understand why one would be a Jew or a Muslim.  They can't comprehend how one would feel that abortion is murder.  The Republican party is all about robbing you; the Democratic party is all about keeping you employed and upping your standard of living!  You are narrow-minded if you aren't 100% for homosexuals getting married.  They are liberals because they don't care who you marry, smoke pot, are pro-choice and don't mind Islam.  One would be amazed with some of the socialist ideas that these "free-thinkers" come up with.  And the jacked-up part is that there is no getting through to them.  They have rebutles for everything.  They find ways to justify every action by the government that may seem a little bit on the totalitarian or fascist side...or just blame Bush, as if these two parties aren't working together.  I really enjoy living in my area but have had enough of these stimulating conversations with these O-Bots that infest the area.  Most recently one told me that people should be taxed on each flush of the toilet so they will be mindful of how much water they are wasting.  So the government is entitled to your money every time you flush the toilet...yeah, makes sense.  Keep attending your human sexuality class!
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: NWOSCUM on April 14, 2009, 11:34:30 am
Sorry you have to read the crap that rat bastard wrote.  This is good informative info to pass to people:  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936)
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: unitedstrokesofamerica on April 14, 2009, 11:54:49 am
I do not normally advocate this, but it sounds like you need a good old fashion book burning.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: Neco on April 14, 2009, 12:22:14 pm
Check out my sig.  Says it all.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: TahoeBlue on April 14, 2009, 01:01:40 pm
Bernanke wrote the books on Inflation and Depression  (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=70891.0)

Now does everyone understand the reason that Bernanke was chosen to preside over this meltdown?

I was telling my friends two years ago it was a terribly bad sign that they had "chosen" an expert "authority" on the "great" depression and inflation.  They needed someone to manage perceptions while the smoke from downtown Rome began to rise. So far no one has really been blamed or gone to jail.

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/bloomberg/2008/03/23/148452/Fed-chair.htm

When Ben Bernanke arrived at the Federal Reserve in February 2006 as the new chairman of the central bank, he had a copy of his 2001 book, “Inflation Targeting: Lessons from the International Experience,” tucked under his arm.

Little did he know that less than two years later he’d be shelving “Inflation Targeting” and turning to “Essays on the Great Depression”, another of his books, for guidance.

Now they are paying attention (too late):
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2008-10-06-bernanke-depression-book_N.htm

The financial crisis has made Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's book Essays on the Great Depression a hot seller — at least by academic standards

He is practicing today what he preached in his book: Flood the system with money to avoid a depression.

The problem is they are creating the money but it doesn't seem to be getting to the money supply or isn't that the plan?

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=70891.msg381276#msg381276
Right!, and the first thing Bernanke did was stop publishing M3!!! Creating the fog of war on the dollar. Money is being created and dumped into a deep dark hole somewhere.
...
Mr. Bernanke has pledged to bring increased transparency to Federal Reserve policymaking, but the recent Fed decision to discontinue compiling and releasing the M3 monetary aggregate figure casts doubt on this promise.  M3 is widely used by economists, policy makers, and investors as the most accurate and reliable true measure of the money supply.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: NWOSCUM on April 14, 2009, 01:03:46 pm
Bernanke wrote the books on Inflation and Depression  (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=70891.0)

Now does everyone understand the reason that Bernanke was chosen to preside over this meltdown?

I was telling my friends two years ago it was a terribly bad sign that they had "chosen" an expert "authority" on the "great" depression and inflation.  They needed someone to manage perceptions while the smoke from downtown Rome began to rise. So far no one has really been blamed or gone to jail.

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/bloomberg/2008/03/23/148452/Fed-chair.htm

When Ben Bernanke arrived at the Federal Reserve in February 2006 as the new chairman of the central bank, he had a copy of his 2001 book, “Inflation Targeting: Lessons from the International Experience,” tucked under his arm.

Little did he know that less than two years later he’d be shelving “Inflation Targeting” and turning to “Essays on the Great Depression”, another of his books, for guidance.

Now they are paying attention (too late):
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2008-10-06-bernanke-depression-book_N.htm

The financial crisis has made Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's book Essays on the Great Depression a hot seller — at least by academic standards

He is practicing today what he preached in his book: Flood the system with money to avoid a depression.

The problem is they are creating the money but it doesn't seem to be getting to the money supply or isn't that the plan?

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=70891.msg381276#msg381276
Right!, and the first thing Bernanke did was stop publishing M3!!! Creating the fog of war on the dollar. Money is being created and dumped into a deep dark hole somewhere.
...
Mr. Bernanke has pledged to bring increased transparency to Federal Reserve policymaking, but the recent Fed decision to discontinue compiling and releasing the M3 monetary aggregate figure casts doubt on this promise.  M3 is widely used by economists, policy makers, and investors as the most accurate and reliable true measure of the money supply.

Said in Alex's most gruff voice, "Shut up that's a conspiracy."  ;D
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: Spartacus101 on April 15, 2009, 02:20:36 pm
I just sent the following email to my professor entitled "Questions of Constitutional Legality":


Mr. (Name Omitted),

While I understand that this is not a class of Constitutional Law, I have some questions concerning the relationship of the country's current monetary policy in regards to the directives laid out by Constitution of the United States of America and I would like to know your opinion.

In Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution it states that the duties of Congress include the following:

"To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;"

Since the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land which can't be overruled without a Constitutional Amendment, if Article I states that only Congress shall have the authority to coin money and regulate its value; and since it gives Congress no authority to outsource its duties to other parties; does that not make the Federal Reserve central bank a criminal organization?

Section 10 of Article I states:

"No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility."

Section 10 states that no state shall make anything but gold and silver legal tender.  Since the dollar was taken off of the gold standard in 1972, doesn't that mean that the U.S. dollar is not legal tender in the United States and that every dollar in circulation is counterfeit money?

If the Federal Reserve has no authority to print money, and prints notes that are not acceptable for payments, is it not an illegal counterfeiting organization that Congress is required to prosecute for felony crimes of counterfeiting as stated in Section 8?


If can we agree that the Federal Reserve conducts illegal activities we must also conclude that they are a criminal organization.  Therefore, we must conclude that those involved in the organization are also conducting criminal activity and are thus criminals.  Since our textbook was written by the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, does that not mean that the information provided was written by the head of a criminal organization and that the validity of its content is at best suspect?


Thank You,

(Name Omitted)
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: TahoeBlue on April 15, 2009, 03:24:38 pm
I started a thread on M3 - shadow statistics that show we are going toward a high inflation economy...

M3 Money Supply - Shadow Stats  (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=99299)

(http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/m2m3_cpi_money_supply.png)

" Finally and to put M3 into proper perspective with inflation (as measured by CPI without lies), the M3 and M2 strong inflation link is virtually unquestionable. The longer term inflation picture is clear, although M2 shows a pause and likely temporary disinflation as of 2008. "
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: thnkfstpal on April 16, 2009, 12:13:02 am
OMG!!

Let me get this straight; you taking an economics class at a major university and the main book they are teaching you out of is written by Ben Bernanke?

:::::faints::::::::
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke wrote my textbook
Post by: thnkfstpal on April 16, 2009, 12:14:02 am
That is truly shocking. I mean no wonder the compatementalized sheep go along with the programming, it's taught directly to those that think they are being educated.

WOWOWOW
Title: Lewis: Paulson and Bernanke urged silence; These men are nothing but liars!
Post by: jofortruth on April 23, 2009, 01:06:05 pm
http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/23/news/companies/BofA_Lewis.reut/index.htm?postversion=2009042308
Title: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 08:39:18 am
"International advisors influence Federal Reserve policy"

"The seven industrial nations represent the supervisory guidance of the Federal Reserve"

I am paraphrasing, he is still on CNBC pleasing that the Federal Reserve is necessary!

Wow, he looks like a scared rat.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 08:45:56 am
He also said that the Federal Reserve proved itself as an economic stability tool after 9/11.

W T F ?

The owners of the fed made billions/trillions off of 9/11.  To this day, the short selling by Buzzy Krongard has not been fully investigated and the national surplus went to a $12 Trillion national Debt ($100 Trillion with Midicare and Social Security issues) because of the Federal Reserve.

He is also mentioning "supervisors", guess that is the illuminated ones.

He mentions risk management systems which AI and LS have totally exposed as elite methods of terror on the individual.

The entire supervisory talk is about nationalization where the federal reserve has all power.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 08:50:07 am
This entire speech definitely requires serious analysis.  He is talking about how the federal reserve will now engage in full command and control over all financial intrerests in the US.

But the Federal Reserve is the cause of the entire economic depression. Now he is explaining that the Fed is getting new powers to investigate, conduct surveillance, supervise all finance in the US.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Satyagraha on May 07, 2009, 08:51:31 am
We need to get video...
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 08:53:24 am
holy shit hundreds of people are watching him on large movie screens.  This is something out of 1984!

(http://s3.amazonaws.com/timsstuff/1984-movie-bb_a1.jpg)
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Satyagraha on May 07, 2009, 08:54:12 am
Macroprudential agenda???
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Satyagraha on May 07, 2009, 08:56:31 am
What Does Macroprudential Analysis Mean? (from investopaedia)
A method of economic analysis that evaluates the health, soundness and vulnerabilities of a financial system. Macroprudential analysis looks at the health of the underlying financial institutions in the system and performs stress tests and scenario analysis to help determine the system's sensitivity to economic shocks. Macroeconomic and market data are also reviewed to determine the health of the current system. The analysis also focuses on qualitative data related to financial institutions' frameworks and the regulatory environment to get an additional sense of the strength and vulnerabilities in the system.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 09:01:47 am
What Does Macroprudential Analysis Mean? (from investopaedia)
A method of economic analysis that evaluates the health, soundness and vulnerabilities of a financial system. Macroprudential analysis looks at the health of the underlying financial institutions in the system and performs stress tests and scenario analysis to help determine the system's sensitivity to economic shocks. Macroeconomic and market data are also reviewed to determine the health of the current system. The analysis also focuses on qualitative data related to financial institutions' frameworks and the regulatory environment to get an additional sense of the strength and vulnerabilities in the system.

Add the Federal Reserve into the analysis and BINGO, all the owners would go directly to jail for grand theft, fraud, treson, and crimes against humanity.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: TheHouseMan on May 07, 2009, 09:03:52 am
Sane, you need to record these things as they're happening.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Satyagraha on May 07, 2009, 09:06:10 am
Translation: Commercial real estate market is toast.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 09:08:15 am
Sane, you need to record these things as they're happening.

Yeah I know.  I need instant streaming of like 10 different channels that I scan throughout the day:

CSPAN1
CSPAN2
CSPAN3
MSNBC
CNN
FOX News
CNBC
CNN Headline
FOX Business
Golf Network

Then when something pops up, whamo I can just throw it on a live stream and comment about it.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 09:09:04 am
Is he on a screen and not in person because they would be throwing rotten tomatoes at his face?
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 09:09:39 am
Look at the attendees, how come there are no brothers on the wall?

You could play spot the minority for hours and still not get past 5 (not including asian-looks like the Chinese are wondering if they will ever get their money back).
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Satyagraha on May 07, 2009, 09:10:16 am
He's in a secret undisclosed location. Cheney gave him the key.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Satyagraha on May 07, 2009, 09:11:43 am
Investopedia explains Macroprudential Analysis
When looking at the health of the underlying financial institutions in the system, macroprudential analysis uses indicators that provide data on the health of these institutions as a whole including capital adequacy, asset quality, management performance, profitability, liquidity and sensitivity to systematic risks. Macroeconomic data used includes gross domestic product (GDP) growth rates, inflation, interest rates, balance of payments, exchange rates, asset prices and the correlation of markets within the system. Finally, macroprudential analysis looks at key components of the financial markets, including prevailing credit ratings and the yields and market prices of financial instruments.

Scenario analysis and stress tests are major component of this analysis. For example, the analysis may look at how the system would cope with a steadily declining currency value and its impact on GDP, interest rates and underlying institution profitability.

Say... just when are we going to get the results of the bank stress tests????
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 09:14:08 am
Investopedia explains Macroprudential Analysis
When looking at the health of the underlying financial institutions in the system, macroprudential analysis uses indicators that provide data on the health of these institutions as a whole including capital adequacy, asset quality, management performance, profitability, liquidity and sensitivity to systematic risks. Macroeconomic data used includes gross domestic product (GDP) growth rates, inflation, interest rates, balance of payments, exchange rates, asset prices and the correlation of markets within the system. Finally, macroprudential analysis looks at key components of the financial markets, including prevailing credit ratings and the yields and market prices of financial instruments.

Scenario analysis and stress tests are major component of this analysis. For example, the analysis may look at how the system would cope with a steadily declining currency value and its impact on GDP, interest rates and underlying institution profitability.

Say... just when are we going to get the results of the bank stress tests????

today I thought, I guess that is why he is speaking.  Trying to subdue the masses before the report comes out. I already heard that the federal reserve ownership banks need another $100 Billion or more to continue keeping the economy strong. What a fricking joke.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 09:18:18 am
How much more controlled can this get?

He is on a screen like in 1984 and Equilibrium and there is a moderator that chooses questions and then phrases the questions in his own words. 

Also after each answer the moderator adds "That is a great answer" as if this is a fricking game show.

Pathetic, the Fed is so fricking exposed even a Bilderberg pandemic cannot hide their crimes!
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 09:19:36 am
BTW, Fox Business is showing the crowd more than CNBC
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 09:21:52 am
5pm EST stress test is released.

He was speaking to a banking group in Chicago.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Satyagraha on May 07, 2009, 09:23:20 am
Does Fox business do a live stream? Can't find one..
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: Dig on May 07, 2009, 09:29:31 am
Does Fox business do a live stream? Can't find one..

not sure, but the speech/BS Q&A is over anyway. FOX Bus sucks in general, not recommended unless Peter Schiff is on.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: gEEk squad on May 07, 2009, 10:27:04 am
not sure, but the speech/BS Q&A is over anyway. FOX Bus sucks in general, not recommended unless Peter Schiff is on.

From the little I watch of CNBC and FOX Business, FOX has always seemed better to me. Since they are behind CNBC and have to compete their analysis seemed to be more realistic and less government cheerleading. Although I must admit I've probably watched an hour of both in the past 5 months in total.
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: gEEk squad on May 07, 2009, 10:30:20 am
I've seen them admit for a long time now that they conspire with foreign central banks. Ron Paul brought that up yesterday and Bernanke agreed that they do.

I distinctly remember a news article a few months ago from the AP talking about how all of the major central banks called each other over the weekend and decided to cut rates together.

But as my friend who is in his 60's says, anything that is not an act of God is a conspiracy.  :)
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: chrsswtzr on May 07, 2009, 10:35:57 am
These stress tests aren't going to tell us much, because they'll spin whatever way they want to spin em' in the end! But yes, I do agree that Bernanke is just trying to subdue the masses until they actually release these tests. Bernanke is almost in gangster form today, what a crock!
Title: Re: Ben Bernanke admits on CNBC that the G7 elites advise the Federal Reserve
Post by: America2 on May 07, 2009, 10:49:43 am
We need to get video...

Could this be it?

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=13351932&ch=4226720&src=news
Title: Did Bernanke and Paulson Commit Bank Fraud? Does a Bear Sh1t in the woods!!
Post by: Ghost in the Machine on May 31, 2009, 10:16:58 pm
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article10991.html

The two companies signed a tentative merger agreement September 15, 2008, but the agreement included a “Material Adverse Change” (MAC) clause that would allow Bank of America (BofA) to escape the merger if BofA financial officers found undisclosed financial information that would hurt BofA while looking at Merrill Lynch’s books. Bank of America shareholders approved the agreement with the MAC clause December 5, 2008. The final merger was to take place January 1, 2009.

But on December 14, BofA financial officers informed CEO Kenneth Lewis that Merrill Lynch’s quarterly losses would be $3 billion more than expected (the $9 billion in expected losses ended up being a $15 billion loss — a $6 billion increase over what stockholders expected and approved). Three days later Lewis informed U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson by phone that Bank of America planned to exit the merger using the MAC clause. Paulson urged Lewis to get on an airplane and visit his office.

Lewis met with Paulson and Bernanke December 21, where Lewis was told he would be replaced if BofA exercised the MAC clause. “I can’t recall if he said ‘we would remove the board and management if you called it’ or if he said ‘we would do it if you intended to,’”  Lewis told Cuomo. Then Bank of America Chief Executive Officer Kenneth Lewis tried to “deescalate” the conflict by saying he’d talk to his board. Lewis also testified he was instructed not to reveal the staggering Merrill Lynch losses to his stockholders: “I was instructed that ‘We do not want a public disclosure,’” Lewis told Cuomo’s office. Lewis took it as a demand to defraud his stockholders, a demand that he and his board of directors complied with.

The BofA board met the next day to discuss the disastrous merger, and the minutes revealed: “The Treasury and Fed state strongly that were the Corporation [Bank of America] to invoke the material adverse change (“MAC”) clause in the merger agreement with Merrill Lynch and fail to close the transaction, the Treasury and Fed would remove the Board and Management of the Corporation.”

That decision by Lewis and his board led Bloomberg.com financial columnist Jonathan Weil to comment in a particularly insightful column: “As for Lewis and the rest of Bank of America’s board, it’s a foregone conclusion that their word is now mud. The more honorable and legally appropriate path for them would have been to resign rather than participate in the cover-up.”

But more than just honor was violated. The law was violated as well. According to bank fraud laws, Paulson, Bernanke, Lewis, and his board of directors committed bank fraud against their stockholders. The Justice Department’s Criminal Reference Manual says of the bank fraud law: “The elements of the offense of making a false statement are: (1) making a false statement or willfully overvaluing property or security knowing the same to be false, (2) for the purpose of influencing in any way the action, (3) of the enumerated agencies and organizations.”

Bank fraud laws are so severe that an actual loss of stock value needn’t be actualized in order for criminal bank fraud to take place, according to the Justice Department Criminal Reference Manual. “The mere probability of loss to the bank is sufficient to establish intent to injure, and neither a possibility of future benefit to the bank nor restitution is a defense.” Of course, Bank of America did experience a serious financial injury. The stock price tanked from about $30 per share in September down to $5 per share in March, an 87 percent loss of value, and the otherwise financially secure Bank of America needed billions in federal bailout money just to survive.

Senator Chris Dodd told CNN that hearings on Cuomo's revelations may be warranted, though Weil noted, “Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd took V.I.P. loans from Countrywide Financial Corp., now a subsidiary of Bank of America.” So what are the chances that a serious investigation will take place?

Weil correctly points out: “Knowing what we know now, how could you ever trust anything Bernanke says again?” He also appropriately wonders openly whether current Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner (then the New York Federal Reserve Bank chairman and number two man on the Fed’s Open Market Committee) was involved in the deal, or if he was somehow incompetently unaware of what was going on right under his nose. Either way, the government’s financial leadership in Washington right now is untrustworthy at best and felonious at worst.

In the mythology of the left, unregulated “free enterprise” as a financial system failed under the Bush administration. The Bank of America/Merrill Lynch fraud case authoritatively proves that mythology false. Laissez-faire free enterprise was pretty much the opposite of what happened on Wall Street during the financial boom and subsequent bust. The failure was caused by government, which in this case nearly bankrupted the largest bank in America when top government officials engaged in criminal fraud and leveled ugly political threats that — if they had been made by Mafia functionaries — would be prosecuted under racketeering laws.
thenewamerican.com
Title: Re: Did Bernanke and Paulson Commit Bank Fraud? Does a Bear Sh1t in the woods!!
Post by: marra on June 01, 2009, 12:26:08 pm
In 10 years or so when all the other related lawsuits are settled then these guys might get nailed
Title: Criminal Bernanke on 60 Minutes
Post by: Freebird100 on June 07, 2009, 06:11:54 pm
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/07/08/60minutes/main13502.shtml

His voice quivers sometimes.It probably means he`s lying his ass off.
Title: Re: Criminal Bernanke on 60 Minutes
Post by: Freebird100 on June 07, 2009, 06:16:48 pm
Let`s see it he asks him why the Federal Reserve is NOT part of the U.S. government.
Title: Bernanke...Rothschild Cartel Agent, Disloyal To America - Video
Post by: Shadow911Zeus on June 11, 2009, 12:16:28 am
Does it seem like it's really too late to fix this country?
What are we going to do?
Does this video even really matter anymore?




Here is the link : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INmqvibv4UU
Title: Re: Bernanke...Rothschild Cartel Agent, Disloyal To America - Video
Post by: Unintelligable Name on June 11, 2009, 12:25:17 am
 ;D

Does it matter? Silly fool of course it matters!

Video made me smile.
Title: Re: Bernanke...Rothschild Cartel Agent, Disloyal To America - Video
Post by: Unintelligable Name on June 11, 2009, 01:14:35 am
We'll abolish the Federal Reserve, pass off all debts carried by the United States to the Official Representatives who incured the debts using the citizens as collateral through the fraudulant Income Tax scheme, and go back to a Constitutional Republic founded on transparency and decency.
Title: Re: Bernanke...Rothschild Cartel Agent, Disloyal To America - Video
Post by: Unintelligable Name on June 11, 2009, 02:32:16 am
(http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/political-pictures-protesters-courage-hopeless.jpg)
Title: Geithner Said to Tell Bernanke Fed Gains Most in Rules Overhaul
Post by: jofortruth on June 12, 2009, 09:48:42 am
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aiXYMtYIk7_A



Title: Bernanke's AUDIT THE FED scaremongering
Post by: Mike Philbin on June 26, 2009, 07:49:48 am
You've all seen this, right?

Bernanke, "My concern about the legislation is that if the GAO is auditing not only the operational aspects of the programs and the details of the programs but making judgments about our policy decisions would effectively be a takeover of policy by the Congress and a repudiation of the Federal Reserve would be highly destructive to the stability of the financial system, the Dollar and our national economic situation."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjULF_Xg6Ps
sounds like a very pro-FED editorial stance from this 'pussy inquisition'.
Title: Bernanke says Fed can take on supercop role
Post by: llorcan on July 21, 2009, 11:53:02 am
http://connectingthenewsdots.blogspot.com/2009/07/bernanke-says-fed-can-take-on-supercop.html

Again we are faced with the Obama administrations plan to expand the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank's power to control every aspect of our economy. We need Ron Paul's proposed audit the fed legislation now more then ever.

"Bernanke urged Congress to keep proposals to audit the Fed away from monetary policy duties. "A perceived loss of monetary policy independence could raise fears about future inflation," he warned." --- Yet again a Federal Reserve chief is threatening our Congress to collapse our economy if they pursue the audit legislation.

Just so it is clear what is happening; the head of a Privately owned organization is threatening our representatives.

"Consumer groups and lawmakers have blamed the Fed for not cracking down early on dubious mortgages practices that fed the housing boom and figured into its collapse." --- Not cracking down on these dubious mortgages? LOL!! Who do they think created these mortgages in the first place. Of coarse they could not crack down on them until they had fully reaped their own profits from the housing bubble.

It is clear. Until we wake up and realize the cause and affect of recent actions, we will not be able to dissolve the criminal organizations that brought us here and return to a more stable economy.
Title: Douche-Bag Bernanke says Fed can take on supercop role
Post by: Monkeypox on July 21, 2009, 01:27:22 pm
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20090721/D99IV7RO0.html

By JEANNINE AVERSA

WASHINGTON (AP) - Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Tuesday fended off congressional skepticism about expanding the Fed's duties to police big financial companies given the central bank's failure to catch problems that led to the financial crisis.

Bernanke also faced some grilling from the House Financial Services Committee about taxpayer bailouts of financial companies, slow moving efforts to curb home foreclosures and concerns about the Fed's track record in protecting consumers from abusive practices from lenders, credit card companies and other financial service providers.

"The Fed has made some big mistakes," said the panel's highest-ranking Republican, Spencer Bachus of Alabama. Letting the Fed become the financial supercop would be "just inviting a false sense of security" that would be shattered at taxpayers' expense, he warned.

Bernanke argued that the Obama administration's proposal would be a "modest reorientation" of the Fed's powers, not a great expansion of them.

The Fed chief also sought to beat back an administration proposal that would create a new consumer protection regulator for financial services and strip some of those duties from the central bank.

Consumer groups and lawmakers have blamed the Fed for not cracking down early on dubious mortgages practices that fed the housing boom and figured into its collapse. Later this week, the Fed will issue a proposal boosting disclosures on mortgages and home equity lines of credit. It also will include new rules governing the compensation of mortgage originators.

The Fed chief urged Congress to keep proposals to audit the Fed away from monetary policy duties. "A perceived loss of monetary policy independence could raise fears about future inflation," he warned.

Ron Paul, R-Texas, a frequent Fed critic, rejected that argument and said the Fed already makes political calculations.

"Just the fact that (the Fed) can issue a lot of loans and special privileges to banks and corporations," Paul said. "That's political."

Bill Posey, R-Fla., who wants the Fed to be more open, argued that some people rightly say "you can find out more about the operations of the CIA, than the Fed. The public has the right to know."

Bernanke's term expires early next year, and President Barack Obama will have to decide whether to reappoint him. The Fed chief's innovative policies have been credited with pulling the economy from the edge of the abyss last year. But those actions also have touched off criticism about putting taxpayers at risk and whether the government should be cleaning up Wall Street messes.

The Fed boss sought to assure investors and Congress that the Fed will be able to reel in its extraordinary economic stimulus and prevent a flare up of inflation when the recovery is more firmly rooted.

Any such steps will be far off in the future and the central bank's focus remains "fostering economic recovery," he said.

To that end, Bernanke again pledged to keep its key bank lending rate at a record low near zero for an "extended period." Economists predict rates will stay at record lows through the rest of this year.

Laying out a plan now to unwind the Fed's stimulus may give Bernanke more leeway to hold rates at record lows to brace the economy. That's because doing so could tamp down investors' fears that the Fed's aggressive actions to lift the country out of its longest recession since World War II could spur inflation later on.

"It is important to assure the public and the markets that the extraordinary policy measures we have taken in response to the financial crisis and the recession can be withdrawn in a smooth and timely manner as needed, thereby avoiding the risk that policy stimulus could lead to a future rise in inflation," Bernanke said. "We are confident that we have the necessary tools to implement that strategy when appropriate."

To revive the economy, the Fed has plowed trillions into the financial system in an effort to drive down rates on mortgages and other consumer debt. It also has created programs to bust through credit clogs, a key ingredient to turning the economy around.

When the time comes, the Fed will need to soak up that money.

Besides raising its key bank lending rate, the Fed can raise the rate it pays banks on reserve balances held at the central bank, Bernanke said. That would give banks an incentive to keep their money parked there, rather having it flow back into the financial system, where it can stoke inflationary pressures. The Fed also can drain money from the financial system by selling securities from its portfolio with an agreement to buy them back at a later date or it can sell securities outright.

Steering the economy from recession to recovery will be a delicate move for Bernanke - economically and politically.

On the economic front, Bernanke repeated the Fed's forecast that the economy should start growing again in the second half of this year, but he warned growth would be slight, leading to higher unemployment.

Despite some improvements - including a stabilization in consumer spending and moderating declines in housing activity - the economy remains vulnerable, he said.

"Job insecurity, together with declines in home values and tight credit, is likely to limit gains in consumer spending," Bernanke said. "The possibility that the recent stabilization in household spending will prove transient is an important downside risk to the outlook."

The nation's unemployment rate climbed to a 26-year high of 9.5 percent in June. The Fed says it could rise as high as 10.1 percent this year, and stay elevated into 2011. The post-World War II high was 10.8 percent at the end of 1982, when the country had suffered through a severe recession.

Expectations for a lethargic recovery should keep a lid on inflation this year, Bernanke said. With consumers likely to stay cautious amid rising unemployment, companies won't be able to jack up prices.
Title: Alan Grayson grills Ben Bernanke on Foreign Lending 07/21/2009
Post by: qwerty_1 on July 21, 2009, 01:47:07 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_VCy0lMU1g


 8)
Title: Re: Alan Grayson grills Ben Bernanke on Foreign Lending 07/21/2009
Post by: qwerty_1 on July 21, 2009, 10:50:32 pm
Thank Grayson!


 8)
Title: Bernanke says Fed can take on supercop role
Post by: DCUBED on July 21, 2009, 11:42:33 pm
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090721/ap_on_bi_ge/us_bernanke

Bernanke says Fed can take on supercop role

WASHINGTON – Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke ran into skepticism Tuesday from lawmakers wary of expanding the Fed's duties to police big financial companies. They argued that the Fed failed to spot problems that led to the financial crisis in the first place.

"The Fed has made some big mistakes," said Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee.

An Obama administration proposal to make the Fed the supercop of globally interconnected financial companies would be "just inviting a false sense of security that inevitably will be shattered at the expense of the taxpayer," Bachus warned.

Bernanke countered that the administration's proposal would be a "modest reorientation" of the Fed's powers, not a great expansion of them.

The Fed boss sought to assure investors and Congress that the central bank will be able to reel in its extraordinary economic stimulus and prevent a flare up of inflation once a recovery is firmly rooted. Still, any such steps will be far off in the future. The central bank's focus remains "fostering economic recovery," he said.

Bernanke also worked to beat back an administration proposal to create a new consumer protection regulator for financial services and strip some of those duties from the central bank. The House panel delayed a committee vote on that legislation until September.

Consumer groups and lawmakers have blamed the Fed for failing to crack down early on dubious mortgages practices that fed the housing boom and figured into its collapse. Later this week, the Fed will issue a proposal to boost disclosures on mortgages and home equity lines of credit. It also will include new rules governing the compensation of mortgage originators.

Bernanke also argued against congressional proposals to let the Government Accountability Office, Congress' investigative arm, audit the central bank. He feared that audits that delve into the Fed's interest-rate decisions could compromise its independence in setting interest-rate policies.

"A perceived loss of monetary policy independence could raise fears about future inflation," he warned.

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, a frequent Fed critic, rejected that argument and said the Fed already makes political calculations.

"Just the fact that (the Fed) can issue a lot of loans and special privileges to banks and corporations," Paul said. "That's political."

Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla., who wants the Fed to be more open, argued that some people rightly say "you can find out more about the operations of the CIA, than the Fed. The public has the right to know."

Bernanke's term expires early next year, and President Barack Obama will have to decide whether to reappoint him. The Fed chief's innovative policies have been credited with pulling the economy from the edge of the abyss last year.

But those actions also have touched off criticism about putting taxpayers at risk and whether the government should be cleaning up Wall Street messes.

Bernanke again pledged to keep its key bank lending rate at a record low near zero for an "extended period." Economists predict rates will stay at record lows through the rest of this year.

Laying out a plan now to unwind the Fed's stimulus could give Bernanke more leeway to hold rates at record lows to brace the economy. It could ease investors' fears that the Fed's aggressive steps to end the longest recession since World War II could spur inflation later on.

"It is important to assure the public and the markets that the extraordinary policy measures we have taken in response to the financial crisis and the recession can be withdrawn in a smooth and timely manner as needed, thereby avoiding the risk that policy stimulus could lead to a future rise in inflation," Bernanke said. "We are confident that we have the necessary tools to implement that strategy when appropriate."

But House committee chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., said it is important that the Fed not take those actions "prematurely" and snuff out a recovery.

Nigel Gault, economist at IHS Global Insight, said Bernanke wanted to send Congress a clear message: "Our monetary exit strategy is ready. Don't try to interfere with it."

On Wall Street, bond investors took comfort in Bernanke's remarks, pushing up Treasury prices for a second straight day. The Dow Jones industrial average gained nearly 68 points to 8,915.94, the seventh straight advance for the blue chips. Broader indices also finished higher.

To revive the economy, the Fed has plowed trillions into the financial system in an effort to drive down rates on mortgages and other consumer debt. It also has created programs to bust through credit clogs, a key ingredient in turning the economy around.

Eventually, the Fed will need to soak up that money.

Besides raising its key bank lending rate, the Fed can raise the rate it pays banks on reserve balances held at the central bank, Bernanke said. That would give banks an incentive to keep their money parked there, rather having it flow back into the economy, where it can stoke inflationary pressures.

The Fed also can drain money from the financial system by selling securities from its portfolio with an agreement to buy them back at a later date. Or it can sell securities outright.

Steering the economy from recession to recovery will be a delicate move for Bernanke — economically and politically.

Bernanke repeated the Fed's forecast that the economy should start growing again in the second half of this year. But he warned that growth would be slight, leading to higher unemployment.

The nation's unemployment rate climbed to a 26-year high of 9.5 percent in June. The Fed says it could rise as high as 10.1 percent this year and stay elevated into 2011. The post-World War II high was 10.8 percent at the end of 1982.

"We have a very long haul" back to full economic health, Bernanke told lawmakers.
Title: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: TheHouseMan on July 22, 2009, 08:55:45 am
My comment: The American people GAVE the Federal Reserve their taxpayer money in the banker bailout bills. They have the right to know where that money has been spent, and is being spent!

The Federal Reserve is not supposed to have total independence from Congressional scrutiny. That would place you above the law, which is illegal and obviously wrong.

Overall, a very deceptive article from Forbes.com.

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/21/federal-reserve-congress-business-washington-bernanke.html?feed=rss_popstories

Bernanke fights audit threat to the Fed

Central bank chief argues more review would compromise independence, seeking to deny legislative victory for one of Fed's biggest opponents.

(http://images.forbes.com/media/2009/07/17/0717_bernanke_170x170.jpg)

WASHINGTON -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke faced a grilling in Congress on Tuesday about the role of the Fed, and spoke out strongly against a legislative proposal to audit the central bank.

Speaking to the House Financial Services Committee, Bernanke tempered optimism that the economy is improving, noting that, "despite these positive signs, the rate of job loss remains high and the unemployment rate has continued its steep rise." He added the Fed expects inflation to remain subdued over the next two years.

He discussed the Federal Reserve's strategy to extricate itself from the outsized role it's taken in the economy to avert financial disaster. He reminded Congress about the need to get the budget deficit fixed: If not, "we risk having neither financial stability nor durable economic growth," he said.

Bernanke also came out in strong opposition to legislation proposed by Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, to audit the Federal Reserve.

Since its introduction in February, the bill has attracted 275 co-sponsors, enough to gain passage in the House of Representatives. In the Senate, the prospects are unclear. Fourteen Republicans, three Democrats and one Independent, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who votes with Democrats, have signed on to the bill. The legislation simply calls for a Government Accountability Office audit of the Federal Reserve.

Why is something that sounds so simple so contentious?

Bernanke sees the legislation as threatening. "Because GAO reviews may be initiated at the request of members of Congress, reviews or the threat of reviews in these areas could be seen as efforts to try to influence monetary policy decisions," Bernanke said.

The actual facts of the debate have become quite confused. It's not as if the Fed functions without any auditing. The Fed is, in fact, so audited that it issued a 52-page report just to recount the audits it underwent in 2008.

The law currently disallows auditing of three areas: the swap lines the Federal Reserve arranges with other central banks and international financing organizations; the actual deliberations and decisions of monetary policy (such as how much to raise and lower interest rates); and transactions made under the Federal Open Market Committee's direction.

However, Bernanke noted that the Fed releases the minutes of its meetings within three weeks (available on its Web site) and after five years, the verbatim transcripts of its meetings. Every week, the Fed publishes its balance sheet. Many of its loan programs are spelled out in detail (prepare to have your mind numbed here).

Bernanke further noted that the GAO has already been given expanded authority to audit the Federal Reserve's actions providing bailout loans to Bear Stearns and AIG ( AIG - news - people ). The Federal Reserve is responsible for administering part of the $700 billion TARP bailout, the loan program known as TALF, and this, too, is subject to GAO and inspector-general auditing.

The Federal Reserve is not nearly as prone to secrecy as its detractors would like people to believe.

Likely at the forefront of Bernanke's mind is that Rep. Paul, the sponsor of the Federal Reserve Sunshine Act, would rather see the Fed abolished than audited. In 2002, Paul introduced legislation "to restore financial stability to America's economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve," because "every economic downturn suffered by the country over the last 80 years can be traced to Federal Reserve policy." (This is a long debate, but it should be noted that data from the National Bureau of Economic Statistics shows that from 1854 to the creation of the Federal Reserve, the country spent 47% of the time in recession; since the Federal Reserve was created, the U.S. has been in recession only 21% of the time. Whatever role the Fed plays in creating recessions, it's not as if the absence of the central bank would automatically mean some kinds of end to all recessions.)

Bernanke said that if the bill passed, "financial markets, in particular, likely would see a grant of review authority in those areas to the GAO as a serious weakening of monetary policy independence." Perhaps it's not the review authority itself, but a legislative victory for one of the Fed's fiercest opponents that markets would be watching.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Satyagraha on July 22, 2009, 09:10:42 am
Coverage on now - CSPAN3...
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 09:16:10 am
Hey Bernanke...Where the f**k is our money asshole?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: luckee1 on July 22, 2009, 09:20:26 am
I love how they make threats to us, veiled as negative affects on economy, if they are audited or held accountable.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 09:24:08 am
Coverage on now - CSPAN3...

http://c-span.org
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 09:24:51 am
Kucinich: ‘Is the Fed paying banks not to loan money?’
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/21/kucinich-is-the-fed-paying-banks-not-to-loan-money/
By Stephen C. Webster Published: July 21, 2009

Update (at bottom): White House does not know how TARP funds were used

House Domestic Policy Subcommittee plans probe of TARP funds

Ohio Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich wants to know: “If [the Troubled Asset Relief Program] isn’t about keeping people in their homes or providing credit to businesses, what is it for?”

Expressing his frustration before the Government and Oversight Committee, the two-time presidential candidate suggested that the Federal Reserve may be paying banks to hoard money and avoid making loans.

Before the committee — which assembled Tuesday to hear the testimony of Neil Barofsky the Special Inspector General for TARP, along with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke — Kucinich wondered aloud if “banks are parking a historic amount of taxpayers’ money in the Federal Reserve while the businesses and consumers across America are starved for credit,” and whether the Federal Reserve is paying banks to avoid making loans.

“Is the Fed paying banks NOT to loan money?” a Kucinich media advisory pondered.

To support his line of questioning, he cited a Bloomberg report which noted that “banks’ excess reserves at the Fed rose to a record $877.1 billion daily average in the two weeks ended May 20, from $2 billion a year earlier.

“Excess reserves — money available for lending that banks choose to leave with the Fed instead — averaged $743.9 billion in the first two weeks of this month,” the report continued.

“First, Congress was told that TARP was for the purchase of toxic assets, to help keep people in their homes,” the Congressman said. “Then the Bush Administration switched the program. Next, Congress was told that the TARP funds were instead needed to bail out the banks, in the form of a direct capital infusion, to keep credit markets alive.”

He continued: “If TARP isn’t about keeping people in their homes or providing credit to businesses, what is it for? I think the vast majority of Americans would be outraged to learn their tax dollars were facilitating hoarding at the Fed and increased profit making for banks.”

In his testimony, Bernanke said the pace of America’s economic decline seems to have slowed, but he expects continued unemployment near 10 percent of the population through the end of 2010.

“The weak job market in the United States, coupled with falling home prices and tight credit, he said, are putting downward pressure on households, undermining ‘the recent stabilization in household spending,’” according to The New York Times.

Increased oversight soon?

Kucinich said the House Domestic Policy Subcommittee will probe how the $700 billion in troubled asset relief funds were used, in light of the Fed’s nondisclosure. It will not be the first time the nation’s largest bank has faced efforts to increase oversight of its policy decisions and accounting.

In a letter to Bernanke regarding the use of TARP funds for a $3.6 billion bonus package given out to Merrill Lynch & Co. employees, Kucinich insisted that “[the] answers the Subcommittee seeks will be of interest to the American public, who are rightly concerned about how recipient firms have used TARP monies, and how well the Federal Government has monitored the use of those funds and safeguarded them from waste and abuse.”

Bernanke told the panel in late June that the Federal Reserve “acted with the highest integrity throughout its discussions with Bank of America regarding that company’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch.”

Republican Congressman Ron Paul of Texas has, in particular, been a thorn in the side of the bank which controls America’s currency. His bill, House Resolution 1207, which would audit the Fed, has garnered 274 co-sponsors: “[Every] House Republican and almost 100 Democrats — and counting,” noted The Wall Street Journal.

“Although Federal Reserve officials regularly explain the rationale for their policy decisions in public venues, the process of vetting ideas and proposals, many of which are never incorporated into policy decisions, could suffer from the threat of public disclosure,” Federal Reserve deputy chairman Donald Kohn argued earlier this month.

“The big guns are coming out now,” said Congressman Paul in a recent video update. “They are trying to line up the establishment economists and other business people to warn people about the great danger of the American people finding out who’s benefiting from the behind the doors, seeing the activities of the Federal Reserve.

“I think it’s going to be impossible for them to ignore everything we’ve done and just walk away,” he said.

Update: White House does not know how TARP funds were used

During Tuesday’s White House press briefing, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave a convoluted answer to a reporter who asked why the hundreds of billions in TARP funds have not been tracked.

“I think that Treasury Department puts out monthly reports on the lending activities from banks,” he began. “Again one of the suggestions was, in some ways being able to follow what might not be, according to us, followable. In other words you have the fungibility of money that is not put in a separate TARP lending account for the deposit and guarantee in Auburn, Alabama, for us to measure the increase in lending.

“The administration believes that that transparency is important but can be done better in measuring the increase in that lending. But it is going to be hard to follow, again, something as fungible as money moving from one bank to the other.”
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Satyagraha on July 22, 2009, 09:27:41 am
Bernanke is painting a rosy picture describing all the good things they've done... right.
What about the audit???? If you're so proud of your policy, then show us how you spent our money.

Correction: Show us how you spent the money our great-great-grandchildren will earn.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 09:32:21 am
Bernanke: “I Don’t Know” Which Foreign Banks Were Given Half a Trillion
http://www.infowars.com/bernanke-i-don%e2%80%99t-know-which-foreign-banks-were-given-half-a-trillion/
Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet.com Wednesday, July 22, 2009



Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke was confronted yesterday by Congressman Alan Grayson about which foreign banks were the recipients of Federal Reserve credit swaps, but he was unable to provide an answer as to where over half a trillion dollars had gone.

Asked which European financial institutions received the money, which was handed out by The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), a component of the Federal Reserve System, Bernanke responded, “I don’t know.”

“Half a trillion dollars and you don’t know who got the money?” asked Grayson.

As we have previously reported, the destination of trillions in bailout funds remains hidden after the Fed refused to disclose where it had gone despite a lawsuit filed by Bloomberg.

Bernanke said the Fed had a “long standing legal authority” to hand money to foreign banks under section 14 of the Federal Reserve Act, a claim contradicted by Bernanke’s own report, as Grayson soon highlighted.

Grayson said that he had investigated one of the arrangements, a $9 billion dollar package to New Zealand, which works out at $3000 dollars for every citizen of New Zealand.

“Seriously, wouldn’t it have been better to extend that kind of credit to Americans rather than New Zealanders,” said Grayson.

The Congressman then implied that handing money to foreign institutions was unconstitutional, reading from Article I, “No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.”

“Do you think it’s in the spirit of the Constitution for a group like the FOMC to hand out a half a trillion dollars to foreigners without any action by this Congress?” asked Grayson, to which Bernanke responded that Congress had approved it with the Federal Reserve act of 1913. Grayson responded that in 1913, the entire GDP of the U.S. was well under half a trillion dollars.

“Is it safe to say that nobody in 1913 contemplated that a small little group of people would decide to hand out half a trillion dollars to foreigners?,” asked Grayson, to which Bernanke again claimed that the authority had been used numerous times before.

Grayson debunked this claim by pointing to Bernanke’s own report, which stated that the entire amount had been handed out starting from the last quarter of 2007, and the amount given out before that to foreign banks was zero.

Watch the clip below.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 09:41:03 am
Bernanke is painting a rosy picture describing all the good things they've done... right.
What about the audit???? If you're so proud of your policy, then show us how you spent our money.

Correction: Show us how you spent the money our great-great-grandchildren will earn.

Bernanke's voice sounds like an adolescent going through puberty. The screaching highs and nervous quibbles seems like he is desperately trying not to just blurt out:

"Rothschilds and Rockefellers told me to tell you to f**k off! You are our slaves, we birthed you and we have a right to terminate you and spend all of your descendents future earnings!"
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Satyagraha on July 22, 2009, 09:42:52 am
Bernanke's voice sounds like an adolescent going through puberty. The screaching highs and nervous quibbles seems like he is desperately trying not to just blurt out:

"Rothschilds and Rockefellers told me to tell you to f**k off!"

Chris Dodd is throwing softballs ... he's on the payroll. Where's Ron Paul? That's the part I want to hear... someone with cojones.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Geolibertarian on July 22, 2009, 09:49:34 am
Over the years I've often heard debt-money (http://www.moneyasdebt.net) apologists attempt to justify the Fed's "independence" in the name of keeping monetary policy "out of politics."

It should now be clear to everyone that the phrase "out of politics" is merely a euphemism (http://propagandamatrix.com/forum/index.php/topic,5047.0.html) for unaccountability -- in this case, to the hundreds of millions of people over whose economic lives the criminal parasites who own and control the Fed exert near dictatorial control!
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: luckee1 on July 22, 2009, 09:50:31 am
Bernanke's voice sounds like an adolescent going through puberty. The screaching highs and nervous quibbles seems like he is desperately trying not to just blurt out:

"Rothschilds and Rockefellers told me to tell you to f**k off! You are our slaves, we birthed you and we have a right to terminate you and spend all of your descendents future earnings!"

I agree, if they are so powerful, why is he so nervous?
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 09:54:26 am
Chris Dodd is throwing softballs ... he's on the payroll. Where's Ron Paul? That's the part I want to hear... someone with cojones.

Remember the Dodd/Shelby Bailout bill (that Shelby then seemed to oppose)?  It was written by Bank of America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

National Review Online given copy of Bank of America's 61 page Internal Memo that Matches Banker Bailout Bill
Friday, June 20, 2008
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODJkN2Q3NTY0MjAwYjJlNTY0NTJmMWEzZTI1OGZjZTg=


National Review Online has obtained an internal Bank of America "discussion document" (pdf here) on the subject of the FHA Housing Stabilization and Homeownership Retention Act of 2008, a.k.a. the Dodd-Shelby mortgage-lender bailout bill.

Yesterday, Tim Carney reported that the prevailing sentiment on Capitol Hill is that the Dodd-Shelby bill "is exactly what Bank of America and Countrywide wanted." BofA is in the process of acquiring Countrywide. Countrywide is currently embroiled in a scandal over its V.I.P. program, under which several powerful politicians, including Sen. Chris Dodd, got preferential loan rates.

This discussion document (dated March 11, 2008) would appear to support the contention that BofA essentially wrote the bailout section of the bill. Almost all of BofA's preferences are mirrored in the Dodd-Shelby legislation. The BofA document even offers PR tips, such as "We believe that any intervention by the federal government will be acceptable only if it is not perceived as a bail-out of the bond market."

The president has threatened to veto Dodd-Shelby because it would "unfairly benefit lenders who made bad loans." The Senate will resume debating the bill on Monday.

The BofA doc is worth posting here for a couple of reasons: First, the similarities between BofA's ideal bill and the bill before the Senate are obvious even to the layperson — read the document, then read David C. John's analysis of the bailout and see for yourself.

Second, we'd invite our readers with some expertise in this area to look over the document for things we might have missed. Opponents of the bailout are lucky that a few tenacious Republicans (Kit Bond, DeMint et al) were able to hold up the bill and keep it from passing as quickly as expected. The fight resumes next week, so take a look at this document and keep digging.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 09:56:22 am
I agree, if they are so powerful, why is he so nervous?

They are a powerful house of cards built up with fear, deception, and secrecy. Cockroaches scaring your children at night.  But turn on the lights and they scatter and run!
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 09:57:40 am
US 'exposure to crisis $23.7 trillion'
20 July 2009
, (BBC News)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8160282.stm

The total exposure of the US government to the financial crisis could hit $23.7 trillion (£14.3tn), according to a watchdog report.

Photo: President Obama has stressed the importance of government spending

Neil Barofsky, overseeing the Troubled Asset Relief Program (Tarp), made the estimate in prepared remarks to a House of Representatives committee.

The worst-case estimate represents the maximum exposure if all parties offered support requested maximum assistance.

The figure includes all government and Federal Reserve initiatives.

'Repeated failure'

"From programmes involving large capital infusions into hundreds of financial institutions, to a mortgage modification programme, to public-private partnerships using tens of billions of taxpayer dollars to purchase 'toxic' assets from banks, Tarp has evolved into a programme of unprecedented scope, scale and complexity," said Mr Barofsky, special inspector general of Tarp.

However, he said the programme was only part of the wider effort to rescue the US economy.

"As massive and important as Tarp is on its own, it is just one part of a much broader federal government effort to stabilise and support the financial system.

"The total potential federal government support could reach $23.7tn," he added.

Mr Barofsky said any judgement on the effectiveness of Tarp should be made in the context of the government's overall efforts to revive the economy.

He also criticised the government for "repeatedly" failing to adopt recommendations from his office regarding transparency.


US 'exposure to crisis $23.7 trillion http://tinyurl.com/kulzs4
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 10:08:40 am
Bernanke said that 25% of TARP money has been spent on good things.  He needs to tell the White House because they have no clue where the money went:


White House does not know how TARP funds were used
July 22, 2009
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/21/kucinich-is-the-fed-paying-banks-not-to-loan-money/

During Tuesday’s White House press briefing, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave a convoluted answer to a reporter who asked why the hundreds of billions in TARP funds have not been tracked.

“I think that Treasury Department puts out monthly reports on the lending activities from banks,” he began. “Again one of the suggestions was, in some ways being able to follow what might not be, according to us, followable. In other words you have the fungibility of money that is not put in a separate TARP lending account for the deposit and guarantee in Auburn, Alabama, for us to measure the increase in lending.

“The administration believes that that transparency is important but can be done better in measuring the increase in that lending. But it is going to be hard to follow, again, something as fungible as money moving from one bank to the other.”
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 10:14:46 am
From the man who signed the Federal Reserve Act into pseudo-law:

I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world -- no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Satyagraha on July 22, 2009, 10:15:26 am

“The administration believes that that transparency is important but can be done better in measuring the increase in that lending. But it is going to be hard to follow, again, something as fungible as money moving from one bank to the other.”

What utter bullsh*t. They have NO TROUBLE tracking that pesky 'fungible' money when it comes to collecting taxes.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 10:15:48 am
US 'exposure to crisis $23.7 trillion'
20 July 2009,
(BBC News)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8160282.stm

U.S. Rescue May Reach $23.7 Trillion, Barofsky Says (Update3)
20 July 2009
, by Dawn Kopecki and Catherine Dodge (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aZ27ITF7gaoQ

Watchdog sees huge U.S. bill for banks bailout
Financial bailout's cost to U.S. could total almost $24 trillion
20 July 2009
, (MCNBC - AP)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32010841/ns/business-us_business


US 'exposure to crisis $23.7 trillion' http://tinyurl.com/kulzs4

U.S. Rescue May Reach $23.7 Trillion, Barofsky Says http://tinyurl.com/q2gnj3

Watchdog sees huge U.S. bill for banks bailout: Financial bailout's cost to U.S. could total almost $24 trillion http://tinyurl.com/lvnqxk
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 10:16:54 am
boooyaahhh!!!!

Jim Bunning R-Kentucky!

Getting me some KFC to support this man!!!!

Oh man this guy has Bernanke sweating. Calls out his obvious bullshit.

Paraphrasing: "I have known for years what now the rest of the American people know... the Fed's monetary policy for the past decade is flawed. Has led to greater recessions then would have otherwise been without it. A stable currency would lead to a stronger economy with greater employment."
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Satyagraha on July 22, 2009, 10:19:55 am
I was just going to say - I see a senator with a pair. I'll chip in for the KFC.

Now Schumer - buzzkill.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 10:49:00 am
I was just going to say - I see a senator with a pair. I'll chip in for the KFC.

Now Schumer - buzzkill.

Just wait until Bernie Sanders rips him a new A-Hole!

Past Bernie questioning of Fed chairs and Tres Sec:

Sanders and Bernanke http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWXrMCGJT4
WHERE IS THE MONEY? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOpQkRsEfaU
SENATORS AGAINST THE BAILOUT: Bernie Sanders (I-VT) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRsikjj5b7U
Bernie and Geithner http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7mqC-s0Ax4
Rep. Bernard Sanders vs. Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBnKh6B2cMw
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: egypt on July 22, 2009, 10:52:31 am
What is all this "independence" garbage the fed res uses as blab anyway?

duh.  Why should they be independent=above the law?  Any business I've been involved with, my own or working for others, was accountable!  No other businesses I was ever aware of were allowed to just "do what they wanted in secret."  Indeed, if the government wanted to audit them, or ourselves, personally -- hey! couldn't get out of that one!  Let alone Congress wanting the audit.

It's my opinion the Fed Res does a really lousy job and has, since day one.  They need to be audited and heavily guided so that their business practices are more productive.  Indeed, their performance has been so bad in America and throughout the world that they need to be fired and another company hired by the US to manage the US Treasury?

I am sure that we cannot be under bankruptcy operations as a country, anymore.  I am sure that any debt we owed has been paid off many times over!

$24,000,000,000,000.00

I want my money back!

Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: TheHouseMan on July 22, 2009, 10:58:49 am
The "independence" argument is so ridiculous. You cannot be independent from the entire country... I know that's what they want, to just avoid Congressional procedures and basic transparency

How safe can an investment be if you can't even reveal who it was made to... especially a, uh, $24 trillion investment...

These people are really just idiots. Their entire house of cards is based on secrecy. It's going to blow up in their faces... This is a little bit funny, even.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Geolibertarian on July 22, 2009, 11:00:51 am
Remember that youtube clip of Obama promising during last year's campaign that he wouldn't use Presidential signing statements (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obama-issues-signing-statement-on-106b-war-bill-2009-06-26.html), and how effectively Alex used it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pr-k0gVBDGY) late last month to expose Obama as a bald-faced liar?

We need to find another such clip, only this time of Obama professing his commitment to ensuring that the banker ripoff "bailout" include such things as "transparency," "accountability" and "oversight."

Does anyone know of one offhand?
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 11:03:22 am
The "independence" argument is so ridiculous. You cannot be independent from the entire country... I know that's what they want, to just avoid Congressional procedures and basic transparency

How safe can an investment be if you can't even reveal who it was made to... especially a, uh, $24 trillion investment...

These people are really just idiots. Their entire house of cards is based on secrecy. It's going to blow up in their faces... This is a little bit funny, even.

Independent = Free to steal $24 Trillion
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: winthorp on July 22, 2009, 11:06:32 am
I bet you there is going to be a big WAR soon.  They can't hide and make excuses anymore so they need something BIG to take our attention off of them.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 11:06:39 am
bwaaaahahahahaha

Bernanke: "We do not need an audit because I come here to bullshit you for 2 hours every 6 months."
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 11:08:18 am
I bet you there is going to be a big WAR soon.  They can't hide and make excuses anymore so they need something BIG to take our attention off of them.

We are already engaged in 2 fulll wars, 5 half wars, and engagements in over 100 countries. We have over 700 bases on foreign soil.  They have been pushing the "war" distractions for over 50 years (Korea/Vietnam/Iraq/Nicaragua/Panama/Iraq/Afghanistan/Africa/etc.).

The purpose of war is to create debt slaves.  It has been exposed almost 100 years ago in General Smedley Butler's "War is a Racket" booklet.

TIMES UP ASSHOLES!

YOU OWE US MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Geolibertarian on July 22, 2009, 11:10:33 am
What is all this "independence" garbage the fed res uses as blab anyway?

As I said before, the so-called "independence" of the Fed is merely a euphemism (http://propagandamatrix.com/forum/index.php/topic,5047.0.html) for the unaccountability of the Fed to the hundreds of millions of people over whose economic lives it exerts quasi-dictatorial control.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: egypt on July 22, 2009, 11:25:07 am
ok fine:

$23,700,000,000,000.00

I guess $300 billion is quite a lot and should be accounted for.

LoL !

That Bernanke was barely able to speak and seemed shakey in his voice when responding to Alan Grayson!  Bernanke was caught in two big lies in just a few minutes!  Grayson made a good point in asking wouldn't Americans benefit better from the money given to New Zealand?  New Zealand's share of the USA amounted to $3000 per person in New Zealand.

Taking money out of the US Treasury and "giving" it to other countries is clearly an Act of Treason.

These thugs need to be arrested and now.  Obama is not even our President.  The Congress is not allowed to function in that they cannot even read a Bill before being threatened with Martial Law to pass it.

It should have been a huge wakeup call when legislation was passed that effectively said monopolies were ok.  Why do people not realize that legislation implemented in the first place preventing such things (and others) was for a REASON!

Just who were the Legislators supposedly serving our Country in Congress when all these laws were passed?  Just WHO were the Congress persons who passed the Patriot Act?  They are all guilty of Treason and need to be dragged before the Court on it!
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: luckee1 on July 22, 2009, 11:26:50 am
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=120234.0;topicseen

thread started regarding the coverage
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 11:30:33 am
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=120234.0;topicseen

thread started regarding the coverage

That is not this coverage, that is an interview with Ron Paul this morning on Dylan Ratigan's new program (after he quit CNBC (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=95892.0) because he could not fricking take the BS anymore).  He also is the one who exposed on Morning Joe (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=89147.0) about how much crap was going on in the US financial systems particularly with AIG.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Dig on July 22, 2009, 11:52:09 am
Doesn't everyone get it by now?

Federal Reserve is INDEPENDENT = Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE INSTITUTION

They are NOT FEDERAL

IT IS A PRIVATE GROUP OF INTERNATIONAL BANKERS DECIDING HOW YOU LIVE

THEY ARE NOT ELECTED, THEY ARE INDEPENDENT!

How can anyone still think that the fed is part of the government?
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Satyagraha on July 22, 2009, 12:01:59 pm
I had to run out - are they done? Or lunchbreak... ? Did I miss Bernie?
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: egypt on July 22, 2009, 12:05:41 pm
They are not Independent.  They are a private company.  As such, they are subject to to the government they are formed under (America?) & can be audited, held accountable & prosecuted for their crimes.  This is why they need our military or any military to beat us down and keep their control.

Doesn't everyone get it by now?

Federal Reserve is INDEPENDENT = Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE INSTITUTION

They are NOT FEDERAL

IT IS A PRIVATE GROUP OF INTERNATIONAL BANKERS DECIDING HOW YOU LIVE

THEY ARE NOT ELECTED, THEY ARE INDEPENDENT!

How can anyone still think that the fed is part of the government?
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Geolibertarian on July 22, 2009, 12:14:29 pm
Doesn't everyone get it by now?

Federal Reserve is INDEPENDENT = Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE INSTITUTION

They are NOT FEDERAL

IT IS A PRIVATE GROUP OF INTERNATIONAL BANKERS DECIDING HOW YOU LIVE

THEY ARE NOT ELECTED, THEY ARE INDEPENDENT!

How can anyone still think that the fed is part of the government?

As I explain here (http://propagandamatrix.com/forum/index.php/topic,5068.0.html), people continue to live in willful denial either out of cowardice or self-righteous arrogance.

An intellectual coward's absolute worst nightmare is to be called a "conspiracy theorist (http://www.gatecreepers.com/entries/exclusive-debunking-myths-on-conspiracy-theorie/)," so he'd believe the Earth is flat if an insult-spewing coincidence theorist (http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2008/12/coincidence-theorists-guide-to-911.html) claimed it's a "conspiracy theory" to believe the Earth is round.

As for the self-righteous, self-appointed know-it-alls, I think a rather self-evident rule of human nature is that, the more frequently and arrogantly a person mindlessly ridicules and demonizes those he disagrees with, the more ego he'll have to swallow to admit he was wrong. And that's the psychological hole into which snickering, authority-worshipping "conspiracy debunkers" have dug themselves on this and other issues. They have so much ego invested in being right, that they'd sooner say 2+2=5 than admit to having been wrong all these years.

In either case you're casting pearls before swine in trying to talk sense to them.

They're literally hell-bent on finding everything out the hard way, and if they get their way, they'll drag the rest of us right over the cliff with them.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Satyagraha on July 22, 2009, 12:38:22 pm
Here's a link to the video:
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=287913-1
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: stymo1 on July 22, 2009, 01:18:44 pm
Remember that youtube clip of Obama promising during last year's campaign that he wouldn't use Presidential signing statements (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obama-issues-signing-statement-on-106b-war-bill-2009-06-26.html), and how effectively Alex used it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pr-k0gVBDGY) late last month to expose Obama as a bald-faced liar?

We need to find another such clip, only this time of Obama professing his commitment to ensuring that the banker ripoff "bailout" include such things as "transparency," "accountability" and "oversight."

Does anyone know of one offhand?

Couldn't find a video yet, but found these articles:

Obama: No Blank Check on Bailout


http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/obama-no-blank-check-on-bailout/ (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/obama-no-blank-check-on-bailout/)

CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Senator Barack Obama said the government plan to stabilize the nation’s financial markets came with “a staggering price tag,” but he told voters here on Sunday that any rescue plan needed to include new regulations of the financial system.

“First, there must be no blank check when American taxpayers are on the hook for this much money,” Mr. Obama told supporters at an outdoor rally in downtown Charlotte. “Second, taxpayers shouldn’t be spending a dime to reward C.E.O.s on Wall Street while they’re going out the door.”

“This initial outlay of up to $700 billion is sobering,” Mr. Obama said. “In return for their support, the American people must be assured that the deal reflects the basic principles of transparency, fairness, and reform.”

Obama Statement on Financial Rescue

http://thepage.time.com/obama-statement-on-financial-rescue/ (http://thepage.time.com/obama-statement-on-financial-rescue/)

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama—as prepared for delivery
Senator Obama's Plan To Protect Taxpayers and Homeowners
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Tampa, Florida

"And it is wholly unreasonable to expect that American taxpayers would or should hand this Administration or any Administration a $700 billion blank check with absolutely no oversight or conditions when a lack of oversight in Washington and on Wall Street is exactly what got us into this mess.

Now that the American people are being called upon to finance this solution, the American people have the right to certain protections and assurances from Washington.

First, the plan must include protections to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not used to further reward the bad behavior of irresponsible CEOs on Wall Street. There has been talk that some CEOs may refuse to cooperate with this plan if they have to forgo multi-million-dollar salaries. I cannot imagine a position more selfish and greedy at a time of national crisis. And I would like to speak directly to those CEOs right now: Do not make that mistake. You are stewards for workers and communities all across our country who have put their trust in you. With the enormous rewards you have reaped come responsibilities, and we expect and demand that you to live up to them. This plan cannot be a welfare program for Wall Street executives.

Second, the power to spend $700 billion of taxpayer money cannot be left to the discretion of one man, no matter who he is or which party he is from. I have great respect for Secretary Paulson, but he cannot act alone. We should set up an independent board that includes some of the most respected figures in our country, chosen by Democrats and Republicans, to provide oversight and accountability at every step of the way. I am heartened that Secretary Paulson appeared to be softening on this position in his testimony this morning.

Third, if taxpayers are being asked to underwrite hundreds of billions of dollars to solve this crisis, they must be treated like investors. The American people should share in the upside as Wall Street recovers. There are different ways to accomplish this, including putting equity into these firms instead of buying their troubled assets.

But regardless of how we structure the plan, if the government makes any kind of profit on this deal, we must give every penny back to the taxpayers who put up the money in the first place. And after the economy recovers, we should institute a Financial Stability Fee on the entire financial services industry to repay any losses to the American people and make sure we are never asked to foot the bill for Wall Street's mistakes again. We can ask taxpayers to make an investment in the stability of our economy, but we cannot ask them to hand their money over to Wall Street without some expectation of return."


**********************************************

And there you have it folks, we ended up getting a 360 degree about face and a great big FU to us all.
Title: Re: Bernanke demonizes American citizens who ask where their money is going
Post by: Matt Hatter on July 22, 2009, 02:24:42 pm
Chris Dodd is throwing softballs ... he's on the payroll. Where's Ron Paul? That's the part I want to hear... someone with cojones.


Lol he is such a slimy worm!
Title: VIDEO: "Which Foreigners Got the Fed's $500,000,000,000?" Bernanke didn't know
Post by: jofortruth on July 22, 2009, 07:38:29 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0NYBTkE1yQ&feature=player_embedded


Bernanke looks as guilty as he is in this hearing video. The Congressman NAILS HIM!  
Title: Re: Grayson: "Which Foreigners Got the Fed's $500,000,000,000?" Bernanke didn't know
Post by: egypt on July 22, 2009, 07:43:18 pm
I loved this!  Boy, Grayson caught Bernanke really good a couple of times!

Indeed, why doesn't Bernanke think that money which amounts to $3k per person for the New Zealanders, should have gone to the American People instead? hmmm?

yeah. Bernanke didn't even know, nor did his advisors sitting behind him.  But, Grayson knew it went to New Zealand.

I'm going to call my girlfriend in New Zealand and tell her I want my money. :D
Title: Re: Grayson: "Which Foreigners Got the Fed's $500,000,000,000?" Bernanke didn't know
Post by: jofortruth on July 22, 2009, 08:00:08 pm
I loved this!  Boy, Grayson caught Bernanke really good a couple of times!

Indeed, why doesn't Bernanke think that money which amounts to $3k per person for the New Zealanders, should have gone to the American People instead? hmmm?

yeah. Bernanke didn't even know, nor did his advisors sitting behind him.  But, Grayson knew it went to New Zealand.

I'm going to call my girlfriend in New Zealand and tell her I want my money. :D


lol I would do that also :)           

The lies are over the top and a few in Congress are finally waking up to them. THANK YOU REP GRAYSON for using your brain and EXPOSING BEN AGAIN! WHAT A WORM HE IS!
Title: Re: VIDEO: "Which Foreigners Got the Fed's $500,000,000,000?" Bernanke didn't know
Post by: egypt on July 22, 2009, 08:11:26 pm
Let's send a letter to New Zealand and ask for our money back LOLOLOL !
Title: Re: VIDEO: "Which Foreigners Got the Fed's $500,000,000,000?" Bernanke didn't know
Post by: egypt on July 22, 2009, 08:19:09 pm
Dear New Zealand Citizens:

We honestly sympathize with the poor economy worldwide, because we experience it first-hand, as well.

But, please realize that it is not the American People who have been raising havoc with world affairs through wars, genocides, atrocities & strange economic dealings for the last 100 years.  The truth be told, it is an imposter company that came up with the ideaology of banking and it gained underhanded access to our US Treasury.

This same rogue, shadow government just sent you $500,000,000,000.00.  It was not theirs to send.

Would you please return our money so that we can continue to fight and bring the thieves to justice?

Sincerely,

American Citizens
aka We The People
Title: Re: VIDEO: "Which Foreigners Got the Fed's $500,000,000,000?" Bernanke didn't know
Post by: jofortruth on July 22, 2009, 08:23:46 pm
Dear New Zealand Citizens:

We honestly sympathize with the poor economy worldwide, because we experience it first-hand, as well.

But, please realize that it is not the American People who have been raising havoc with world affairs through wars, genocides, atrocities & strange economic dealings for the last 100 years.  The truth be told, it is an imposter company that came up with the ideaology of banking and it gained underhanded access to our US Treasury.

This same rogue, shadow government just sent you $500,000,000,000.00.  It was not theirs to send.

Would you please return our money so that we can continue to fight and bring the thieves to justice?

Sincerely,

American Citizens
aka We The People

I Love It! WELL SAID!  :D

However, you could add a:

PS: Would you please get Ben Bernanke to deliver it personally and keep him there! We have enough idiots running things here in America. We'll be glad to share them with you also! Ya know, the Elite's favorite phrase is "but it's for the Greater Good"! (Actually what would be for the GREATER GOOD would be to get these parasites out of leadership positions and bring them to justice)
Title: Re: VIDEO: "Which Foreigners Got the Fed's $500,000,000,000?" Bernanke didn't know
Post by: egypt on July 22, 2009, 08:34:12 pm
LoL !!!

yea -- please do keep Bernanke!
Title: FL Rep Laughs In Bernanke's Face
Post by: LG on July 23, 2009, 02:59:32 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00ECLxK2YTs&feature=player_embedded

Priceless.
Title: Ben Bernanke was Wrong: Video
Post by: Ghost in the Machine on July 24, 2009, 03:09:42 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QpD64GUoXw
Title: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: ChristSavage on July 26, 2009, 10:35:18 pm
And dissing the Audit The Fed push.  Wha, you think he was gonna be for auditing 'em?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090727/bs_nm/us_usa_fed_bernanke

42 mins ago

KANSAS CITY, Missouri (Reuters) – The U.S. jobless rate is likely to stay high even once the nation exits recession some time in the next few months, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said on Sunday.

Taping a "Bernanke on the Record" special that will air on PBS this week, the top U.S. monetary policy-maker defended the aggressive, even unorthodox actions taken by the Fed during the long recession and deep financial crisis.

"I was not going to be the Federal Reserve Chairman who presided over the second Great Depression," Bernanke said.

"When you're in a situation like this, a perfect storm, sometimes you have to do things that are a little unorthodox, out of the box,"

Speaking to an audience drawn from local citizens, Bernanke said the Fed is doing all it can to turn the economy around.

"The Federal Reserve has been putting the pedal to the metal," he said, adding that "recessions happen."

But Bernanke said it takes GDP growth of about 2.5 percent to keep the jobless rate constant. The Fed's current outlook does not call for growth to reach that level in the latter part of 2009.

Latest government data show the U.S. unemployment rate at 9.5 percent, the highest since 1983.

"We're doing everything we can to support the economy. We hope that will get us going some time next year." In the meantime, inflation is likely to stay low for the next couple of years.

Asked about his opinion on the dollar, Bernanke said the U.S. central bank, in general, supports a strong dollar policy.

"The best way to have a strong dollar is to have a strong economy," he added.

The forum, moderated by veteran anchorman Jim Lehrer, was attended by about 190 local citizens pulled together by a nonpartisan civic group.

Bernanke bristled with emotion when asked about assaults on the Fed's independence -- notably, a proposal in Congress for the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to be able to "audit" the Fed's interest rate decisions.

I don't think that's consistent with independence. I don't think the American people want Congress running monetary policy. That's exactly what (the bill) would do," he said.

"Studies have shown that political influence does not lead to good policy."

(Reporting by Ros Krasny and Mark Felsenthal; Editing by Andrea Ricci)

Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: heavyhebrew on July 26, 2009, 11:38:44 pm
Man, I hope to see, someday, people like Bernanke on the witness stand defending their criminal actions. Or Hank Paulson tarred, feathered and carried out of D.C. on a rail pole.
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: Monkeypox on July 26, 2009, 11:41:07 pm
Strong economy?  Based on WHAT?  We don't manufacture anything, we aren't allowed to utilize most of our natural resources, and millions of jobs have been sent overseas.
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: codemonkey70 on July 26, 2009, 11:43:29 pm
Strong economy?  Based on WHAT?  We don't manufacture anything, we aren't allowed to utilize most of our natural resources, and millions of jobs have been sent overseas.

Thats what I keep asking...
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: Dig on July 26, 2009, 11:54:04 pm
Strong economy?  Based on WHAT?  We don't manufacture anything, we aren't allowed to utilize most of our natural resources, and millions of jobs have been sent overseas.

Based on continuing to print more money out of thin air.
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: heavyhebrew on July 26, 2009, 11:55:17 pm
Strong economy?  Based on WHAT?  We don't manufacture anything, we aren't allowed to utilize most of our natural resources, and millions of jobs have been sent overseas.

d00d, the Dow Jones just went past 9,000! OVER 9,000!
Happy times are here again! Get over those depressing things like facts, statistics and reality based ideas. That is just silly, sad stuff and it just holds back further recovery.

From the banksters perspective, the economy is hella strong, vibrant and profitable.

You think they give a rats ass about Main Street, you, me or the guy across the street? They got nations to loot, master plans to serve and the possibility of getting a high position in the New World Order.

What is 10 million homeless when you are getting a yacht?
You ever met a 'captain of industry'? Limp handshakes, soulless eyes and and the nature of avarice taken to an evolutionary extreme.

You and me? We are the suckers, the marks, the foils to their schemes. Our so called government is their facilitators. Their gated communities and extravagant mansions are their castles and keeps.

Welcome to neo-fuedalism.
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: sharpsteve on July 27, 2009, 12:01:08 am
NYT
Forget Aloof, Bernanke Goes Barnstorming
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/27/business/27bernanke.html

The best part of the article
Quote

“The Federal Reserve, in collaboration with the giant banks, has created the greatest financial crisis the world has ever seen,” Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, said at a House hearing last week in which Mr. Bernanke testified about the state of the economy.

Republican lawmakers portray the Fed as the embodiment of heavy-handed big government, and have called for scaling back the central bank’s regulatory powers. But liberal Democrats, like Representative Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio, have accused the Federal Reserve of caving in to demands by banks for huge bailouts, for failing to protect consumers against dangerous financial products and for being too secretive about its emergency rescue programs.

More than 250 lawmakers have signed a bill sponsored by Mr. Paul that would allow the Government Accountability Office to “audit” the Fed’s decisions on monetary policy — a move that Fed officials see as a direct threat to their political independence in carrying out their central mission of setting interest rates.

Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: Dig on July 27, 2009, 12:01:35 am
Show this to any moron that thinks we are rebounding:

Inflation Nation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzmYI_4XCbM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQCCDttLhA4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVcyM2Z4Ego
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: larsonstdoc on July 27, 2009, 12:21:55 am



  BEN S. (B.S.) BERNANKE--a good Jewish boy until he made his pact with the NWO.
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: blackturtle.us on July 27, 2009, 12:42:41 am
d00d, the Dow Jones just went past 9,000! OVER 9,000!
Happy times are here again! Get over those depressing things like facts, statistics and reality based ideas. That is just silly, sad stuff and it just holds back further recovery.


It's hard to say what the surge in the Dow Jones actually means. Many analysts predicted several months ago that the last half of 2009 would appear strong, but that 2010 would bring about renewed economic problems. Some analysts say that a strong Dow indicates that the economy is about to turn around. Who knows? I'm hoping for the best, but I'm not counting on anything!!!
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: AlphaM on July 27, 2009, 02:10:40 am
Speaking of the Dow being >9000, this must be the last push to sucker all of the investors back in...
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: John Galt on July 27, 2009, 02:46:59 am
Show this to any moron that thinks we are rebounding:

Inflation Nation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzmYI_4XCbM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQCCDttLhA4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVcyM2Z4Ego

Sane, good choices. I've shared those same videos with everyone close to me, as they are well-produced and hit on all the important points.

This Obama bubble is gonna burst and burst soon, sometime between now and the end of October.

Inflation (and in my opinion, hyperinflation) appears inevitable at this point, with or without a new war or false flag op. I'm with Jimmy Rogers when he advocates investing in gold, silver and agriculture to preserve buying power. Heed the warnings, because this 4 month dead cat bounce is long in the tooth and was irrational from the start.

~jg
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: RoadRunner on July 27, 2009, 02:50:03 am
if he didnt lie, our country would collapse today, hes buying us time

not saying i dont hate the guy for royally f**king up and being an evil bastard who stole trillions from the middle class
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: John Galt on July 27, 2009, 02:52:39 am
if he didnt lie, our country would collapse today, hes buying us time

not saying i dont hate the guy for royally f**king up and being an evil bastard who stole trillions from the middle class

His lies are catching up to him. I give him and the stock market until end of October before we see some major correcting.
Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: 2Revolutions on July 27, 2009, 06:05:08 am
It simple for Bernanke, if they don't call the current economy a depression, then the news won't report that it is a Depression.  Who heard of such nononsense as a jobless recovery.   

Strong economy?  Based on WHAT?  We don't manufacture anything, we aren't allowed to utilize most of our natural resources, and millions of jobs have been sent overseas.

Ponzi Schemes such as the new Cap and Trade market which will replace the housing market. 

Title: Re: Bernanke on TV Defends Aggressive Actions
Post by: New Whirled Order on July 27, 2009, 06:39:47 am
His lies are catching up to him. I give him and the stock market until end of October before we see some major correcting.

Jim Sinclair over at http://jsmineset.com/ (http://jsmineset.com/) agrees with you.  He says we have 102 days left before all confidence collapses.  I believe that would be around the first week in November.
Title: Bernanke: "I Had To Hold My Nose" Over Bailouts
Post by: Satyagraha on July 27, 2009, 06:42:04 am
Bernanke: "I Had To Hold My Nose" Over Bailouts
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/26/bernanke-i-had-to-hold-my_n_245129.html
07/26/09 10:34 PM

WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Sunday that he had to "hold my nose" over last year's taxpayer-financed bailouts of big financial companies but argued that the action had to be taken to avoid a major meltdown of the U.S. financial system and the broader economy.

Bernanke's comments came during a town-hall style meeting in Kansas City, Mo., where he was peppered with several questions about government decisions last year to rescue so-called "too big to fail companies" like insurance giant American International Group, whose collapse would have wreaked havoc on the global economy.

A small-business owner complained to Bernanke that such actions were "hard to swallow," saying he felt like small businesses – also struggling to survive the recession and all the financial fallout – were being shortchanged.

"Nothing made me more frustrated, more angry, than having to intervene" when companies were "taking wild bets," Bernanke said. But not acting would have had grave consequences for the economy, he added.

"I was not going to be the Federal Reserve chairman who presided over the second Great Depression," he said. "I had to hold my nose. ... I'm as disgusted as you are. ... I absolutely understand your frustration."

Public television's Jim Lehrer moderated the one-hour town hall meeting. It will air this week in three installments on PBS' "The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer."

At the height of the financial crisis last fall, Bernanke recalled spending nights on the sofa in his office. It was a "perfect storm," he said, where housing, credit and financial problems converged into a major crisis the likes of which haven't been seen since the 1930s. To deal with the crisis, Bernanke said he sometimes had to do things "outside the box."

The financial crisis underscores the need for Congress to enact legislation that will create a government mechanism for safely unwinding big financial companies, along the lines of the process used by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to handle failing banks, Bernanke said.

When asked about the Fed's diligence in protecting consumers, Bernanke acknowledged that "we were late in addressing the subprime lending problem," referring to the risky mortgages and dubious lending practices that powered the housing boom and contributed to its crash. "We have to take some heat for that."

Still, Bernanke made the case – as he did last week on Capitol Hill – that consumer protection oversight should stay with the Fed. An Obama administration proposal would create a new consumer protection agency overseeing mortgage, credit cards and other financial products, stripping the Fed of some of its duties. Of setting up such a new agency, Bernanke seemed to soften his earlier stance, saying, "I'm neither opposed to it or in favor or it."

When Lehrer said some people think the Fed is the fourth branch of the government, Bernanke responded, "That's a tremendous exaggeration." He said the Fed's independence from political interference in setting interest rates to influence economic activity is crucial. "You get much better results" for the economy when this is the case, he said. "We're very, very sensitive to this issue."

Asked about President Obama's $787 billion stimulus package of tax cuts and increased government spending, Bernanke said most of the money will flow in 2010 so "it might be a little bit early" to judge its effectiveness. Although big budget deficits couldn't be avoided this year and next, given government efforts to help the economy, Bernanke urged Congress to develop a plan now to bring back "fiscal sanity."

On the economy, Bernanke repeated the Fed's forecast that unemployment will probably top 10 percent this year, even as the economy starts growing again in the second half of 2009. The jobless rate is now at a 26-year high of 9.5 percent. In a "few years" the economy will be back on track and "growing strongly again," Bernanke said. "It will take some patience."

The Fed, he said, "has been putting the pedal to the metal" to turn the economy around.

Inflation, meanwhile, will remain "quite low" for the next couple of years, Bernanke said. Given the outlook for a slow recovery, companies won't be in a position to jack up rates or feel inclined to beef up workers' wages, he said.

Bernanke's appearance on the program is part of a broader campaign, unusual for a Fed chairman, to reach out to ordinary Americans. In March, Bernanke granted a rare TV interview, appearing on CBS' "60 Minutes."

"I'm answerable to the American people," Bernanke told the audience at the town hall meeting.

His efforts to explain the Fed's actions to get the economy and financial markets back on firm footing comes as the clock ticks on Bernanke's term as Fed chief. His term expires early next year, and President Barack Obama has not said whether he will be reappointed.

The Fed chief, who took the helm on February 2006, has been on the front lines of efforts to battle the financial crisis and end the recession, the longest since World War II.

His aggressive and unconventional actions – including supporting the bailout of AIG to the tune of more than $180 billion – have been credited with averting a financial catastrophe last year but also have touched off anger from the public and lawmakers on Capitol Hill about helping financial companies that made reckless gambles.

Title: VIDEO: Ben Bernanke on the verge of tears on PBS over Audit the Fed Bill.
Post by: Irobot on July 28, 2009, 12:33:04 pm
VIDEO: Ben Bernanke on the verge of tears on PBS over Audit the Fed Bill.

http://snardfarker.ning.com/profiles/blogs/video-ben-bernanke-on-the
Title: Re: VIDEO: Ben Bernanke on the verge of tears on PBS over Audit the Fed Bill.
Post by: Cpl744 on July 28, 2009, 12:41:30 pm
He didn't seem like he was almost in tears.. more like a BS pitch to the American people to make them think the FL is somehow "transparent"..  ::)
Title: Associated Press: Bernanke Fights House Bill To Audit The Fed
Post by: Dig on July 29, 2009, 10:07:21 am
Bernanke Fights House Bill To Audit The Fed
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/07/28/business/econwatch/entry5193539.shtml
Posted by Declan McCullagh July 28, 2009 12:32 PM


(AP)
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is strongly opposing a proposal in Congress, which enjoys the support of over half of the U.S. House of Representatives, to audit the Fed.

During an appearance on PBS's NewsHour, which will be aired this week on local PBS stations, Bernanke said the proposed legislation would interfere with the central bank's independence. "I don't think the American people want Congress running monetary policy," he said. "And I think that's very very critical for people to understand." (See transcript below.)

This is an odd claim. If you read the bill (H.R.1207), it simply amends existing law to say "under regulations of the Comptroller General, the Comptroller General shall audit" the Federal Reserve Board and its member banks.

The Comptroller General is a Senate-confirmed official who's also the head of the Government Accountability Office (GAO), a legislative branch agency organized under the U.S. Congress. In other words, we're not talking about a political bomb-thrower, but a veteran civil servant tasked with important oversight responsibilities.

The argument for an audit has become stronger in the wake of the extraordinary and unprecedented steps the Federal Reserve has taken in response to the market turmoil that began two years ago. Among them: the Fed has printed hundreds of billions of dollars to purchase what are delicately called "troubled assets"; it has created mammoth Wall Street bailout funds with acronyms like CPFF and TALF; and it has done all of this without prior approval by the U.S. Congress.

As far back as 1977, the GAO was saying it needed the authority to conduct a full audit of the Fed. "We do not see how we can satisfactorily audit the Federal Reserve System without authority to examine the largest single category of financial transactions and assets (foreign currency purchases) that it has," its report to Congress said at the time.

If the Fed had stuck to its traditional role of setting interest rate targets and employing other monetary policy tools, it's unlikely this measure -- the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009 -- would have drawn more than a modicum of public and congressional support today.

But because Bernanke and other Fed officials have been bailing out financial institutions, such as providing up to $30 billion to let JPMorgan buy Bear Stearns last year, and because the national monetary base has recently doubled, public interest in the topic has spiked.

Bernanke can thank (or blame) Rep. Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning Texas Republican and longtime Fed critic, for focusing so much attention on this topic. Paul was the original author of the Audit-The-Fed bill, which can now claim 277 sponsors, up from 170 two months ago. It's been spurred along by concerns about the way the government is responding to what has become an unusually severe recession -- and public opinion turning against the Federal Reserve.

"Since its inception, the Federal Reserve has always operated in the shadows, without sufficient scrutiny or oversight of its operations," Paul said in a February 2009 speech announcing the bill. "While the conventional excuse is that this is intended to reduce the Fed's susceptibility to political pressures, the reality is that the Fed acts as a foil for the government. Whenever you question the Fed about the strength of the dollar, they will refer you to the Treasury, and vice versa. The Federal Reserve has, on the one hand, many of the privileges of government agencies, while retaining benefits of private organizations, such as being insulated from Freedom of Information Act requests."

Paul points out that although Federal Reserve has the authority to enter into agreements with foreign central banks and foreign governments, the GAO is prohibited from auditing or even reviewing any of those agreements. (Current law says the GAO may not audit "transactions for or with a foreign central bank, government of a foreign country, or nonprivate international financing organization.")

The 2008 presidential candidate has been a longtime Fed critic, and even an advocate of its abolishment, saying for years that if the central bank keeps interest rates too low, bubbles are likely to form. In 2002, for instance, Paul correctly predicted that government policies would create "a short-term boom in housing" while increasing "the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market." This represents a minority view among economists -- see a CBSNews.com review of a recent book on the financial crisis with a foreword by Rep. Paul -- but one that has found more adherents recently.

Here's an excerpt from the transcript of the PBS exchange:
PBS' Jim Lehrer: There's an effort in Congress, and in the House in particular, to audit what the Federal Reserve does, particiularly in monetary policy. How do you feel about that?

Bernanke: So that bill, people don't fully understand what that bill is about. It sounds like, audit the Fed, it sounds like "Let's look at the books." That's what it sounds like. Congress already looks at our books. We have many different levels of auditors. The GAO, the General Accountability Office, which is supposed to be doing this audit, already looks at virtually all of our activities. And the ones it doesn't, our financial books, financial loans, and the ones it's not looking at, and where the taxpayer needs some assurance, we're willing to work with Congress to make sure the GAO gets the information it needs.

Bernanke: What people don't understand is that this bill would give the GAO, the GAO, the authority to audit monetary policy. And what does that mean? That means if the Federal Reserve decided a year from now that because of incipient inflation it was time to raise interest rates, that the Congress would say, 'Ah, the GAO's going to audit that decision. It's going to subpoena your materials. It's going to demand information from members of the FOMC. It's going to evaluate your decision. It's going to report to Congress.' I don't think that's consistent with independence. We are completely open to providing any information Congress wants to make sure we're using taxpayer money safely and soundly, that we're meeting all our responsibilities. I don't think the American people want Congress running monetary policy. And I think that's very very critical for people to understand.

PBS' Jim Lehrer: You think that's what it would end up doing?

Bernanke: Exactly, that's exactly what it would do. There's a provision in that law, which, currently, current law, which carves out monetary policy. It doesn't give Congress authority, GAO authority to audit it. That was put in in 1978, at a time when we had a lot of inflation, which you might remember. After that the Fed became more independent, brought inflation down. But now, that's exactly what it would do. If that carveout was eliminated, Congress would have the authority anytime to ask the GAO to come in, and audit, and look at, and evaluate the monetary policy decisions made by the Fed. That's not consistent with independence.

Perhaps. Then again, the text of this proposal is not chiseled into granite. If the auditing authority granted to the GAO becomes too intrusive, Congress can always amend it.

While Rep. Paul's bill enjoys strong bipartisan support in the House of Representatives, the Senate version (S.604) has only 20 sponsors and was blocked from coming to a vote by the Democratic leadership earlier this month. Now we'll see if public concern about the Federal Reserve's recent activities is sufficient to overcome this last political hurdle.
Title: Re: Associated Press: Bernanke Fights House Bill To Audit The Fed
Post by: Dig on July 29, 2009, 10:11:05 am
The Rothschild owned Associated Press finally cracked!

This is the first semi-reality based article they have allowed on this issue. 

And look how they end the story:

"the Senate version (S.604) has only 20 sponsors "

HAS ONLY 20 SPONSORS?!?!?!?

ONLY?!?!?!?!

Show me one fricking bill that required more than 20 senate sponsors to be able to get a vote!

But still the complete slimeballs know the house of cards is failing.
Title: (Audit the Fed)Bernanke May Have to Sacrifice Lending Powers or Independence
Post by: Sheepleprod on July 29, 2009, 10:17:06 am
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601068&sid=atdHeCJ1_K0U

Bernanke May Have to Sacrifice Lending Powers or Independence


By Craig Torres

July 29 (Bloomberg) -- The financial-overhaul plan before Congress leaves the Federal Reserve in the business of lending to everyone from General Electric Co. to investors in student loans. That makes it harder for Chairman Ben S. Bernanke to keep Congress from second-guessing what he does.

Bernanke is trying to deflect a bill, co-sponsored by 276 members of the House of Representatives, that would require audits of central bank operations, including monetary policy decisions, by the Government Accountability Office. Audits wouldn’t be “consistent with independence,” Bernanke said at a Kansas City town hall meeting July 26. “I don’t think the American people want Congress running monetary policy.”

Unless the Fed retreats from unlimited lending, Bernanke can expect such a result, said Marvin Goodfriend, an economist at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. The more the Fed invades the domain of Congress by supplying credit to businesses and markets outside the banking system, the more Congress will seek a hand in monetary policy, said Goodfriend, a former adviser to the Richmond Fed.

“Central bank independence is incompatible over time with all but limited, temporary last-resort lending” to banks, Goodfriend said in an interview. The Fed’s role in emergency lending “needs to be clarified before the next crisis,” he said.

Congress may demand more say over the Fed’s credit policies. Democratic Representative Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania is gathering signatures for a letter asking Bernanke to extend the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility.

Extending TALF

The TALF, an emergency program that lends to investors to purchase securities backed by consumer and business loans, is set to expire Dec. 31. Bernanke told the Senate Banking Committee July 22 that it would be “difficult” to justify extending the TALF if markets return to normal operations.

Such pressure to keep some lending programs going is likely to complicate future Fed efforts to keep a lid on inflation. Bernanke’s supporters say his actions have been consistent with the central bank’s traditional role as lender of last resort.

“The Fed is best suited to go in quickly if there is a fire,” said Mark Gertler, a New York University economist and research co-author with Bernanke. “But you would like an arrangement where if the assets are held for any period of time, the Treasury takes them over.”

The 88-page financial-overhaul plan the Obama administration submitted to Congress, written by the Treasury with input from the Fed, doesn’t limit whom the central bank can lend to or for how long, beyond the Fed’s own definition of “unusual and exigent circumstances.”

Emergency credit policies have helped more than double the Fed’s balance sheet over the past year to more than $2 trillion, including loans to support insurer American International Group Inc. and risky assets once owned by Bear Stearns Cos.

‘Vast Power’

“The Fed clearly cherishes its vast power to create and spend trillions of dollars,” Texas Republican Representative Ron Paul, who wrote the House bill on Fed audits, said on his Web site. “The only accountability the Federal Reserve has is ultimately to Congress.”

Bernanke told Paul at a House Financial Services Committee hearing last week that GAO audits, often initiated at the request of members of Congress, could be used as a club against the Fed.

“If we were to raise interest rates at a meeting and someone in the Congress didn’t like that and said ‘I want the GAO to audit that decision,’ wouldn’t that be viewed as an interference?” Bernanke asked. “Reviews or the threat of reviews in these areas could be seen as efforts to try to influence monetary policy decisions,” he said in testimony. NO BERNANKE WE WANT TO END THE FED

Risk Regulator

Congress has stepped up pressure on the Fed partly in reaction to proposals from the Obama administration to give the central bank more authority to regulate risk across the financial system. Lawmakers in both parties have expressed wariness about giving the Fed even more power.

“I understand your concern about the Fed’s independence, but you are the one that threw away the independence by acting as an arm of the Treasury and engaging in fiscal policy,” Kentucky Republican Senator Jim Bunning told Bernanke at a July 22 hearing. “Would you rather have an audit of the Fed or give up all of your non-monetary-policy functions?”

Bernanke told the Financial Services Committee that the Fed’s ability to repair the credit markets demonstrates the value of leaving the central bank with broad lending authority.  REPAIR??? YOU MEAN PROP UP AND REINFLATE

“We’ve been fairly successful,” he said.

Lehman Bankruptcy

Bernanke rushed to support credit markets in the wake of the Sept. 15 bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. By mid- October, investors in top-rated 30-day asset-backed commercial paper demanded returns more than 3 percentage points above the benchmark lending rate, compared with 0.6 percentage point before the Lehman failure. The spread has since narrowed to about 0.4 percentage point.

As markets return to normal, the Fed should say “we are not going to finance these programs anymore and we are getting out of credit-allocation policies,” said Mickey Levy, chief economist at Bank of America Corp. in New York. “The fiscal role the Fed is playing is inconsistent with its longstanding mandate” to achieve stable prices and full employment.
Title: Re: Associated Press: Bernanke Fights House Bill To Audit The Fed
Post by: Cpl744 on July 29, 2009, 10:30:39 am
It doesn't matter if they get audited anyway..  What ever the truth is, no matter how bad, the powers that be would never allow it to be released.
Title: Re: Associated Press: Bernanke Fights House Bill To Audit The Fed
Post by: heavyhebrew on July 29, 2009, 10:38:58 am
It doesn't matter if they get audited anyway..  What ever the truth is, no matter how bad, the powers that be would never allow it to be released.

I disagree.
Title: Re: (Audit the Fed)Bernanke May Have to Sacrifice Lending Powers or Independence
Post by: Ghost in the Machine on July 29, 2009, 10:40:12 am
Ending the Fed! we need to go back to a gold standard!
Title: Re: Associated Press: Bernanke Fights House Bill To Audit The Fed
Post by: Dig on July 29, 2009, 10:50:20 am
It doesn't matter if they get audited anyway..  What ever the truth is, no matter how bad, the powers that be would never allow it to be released.

Yeah nothing matters, everybody go to bed sucking your thumb in the fetal position and await the standard issue to kick in your door!

Man, we have been bombarded with disinfo and misinfo for so many years we cannot even tell when we are exposing major parts of the matrix.
Title: Re: Associated Press: Bernanke Fights House Bill To Audit The Fed
Post by: chris jones on July 29, 2009, 10:52:41 am
Two sides to the coin.

Heads we win, the FEDS audited, we get a voice back, and with the maby, just maby some heads roll..

Tails, RP has brought attention to the FED, the people are opening an eye, there is exposure, and the Pols are now aware that the citizens of this nation are not complete FN braindead.
Title: Re: Associated Press: Bernanke Fights House Bill To Audit The Fed
Post by: TheHouseMan on July 29, 2009, 11:50:00 am
this bill is as good as passed, unless the people who have signed on are lying and are going to pull out at the last moment.
Title: Re: Associated Press: Bernanke Fights House Bill To Audit The Fed
Post by: Dig on July 29, 2009, 12:04:42 pm
this bill is as good as passed, unless the people who have signed on are lying and are going to pull out at the last moment.

Rothschild's Associated Press seems to be admitting defeat on this one, looks like this chess piece has been moved and we need to possibly looking at what type of strategies they are incorporating to work around this.  I doubt there is one, this is a major move by patriots.
Title: Bernanke calls the Federal Reserve a "government agency"
Post by: kevlar442 on July 31, 2009, 01:13:26 am
http://www.infowars.com/bill-to-audit-the-fed-gains-momentum-as-public-support-grows/

Should we start calling it the Federal Reserve Agency?
Title: Joker/CFR Krugman says: Bernanke saved your babies' lives, kneel before ZOD!!!
Post by: Dig on August 10, 2009, 04:42:26 pm
‘Great Depression 2.0′ avoided: Krugman
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/08/10/great-depression-20-avoided-krugman/
By Agence France-Presse Published: August 10, 2009
(http://politicalvindication.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/kneel_before_zod.jpg)

KUALA LUMPUR — The world has avoided a “Great Depression 2.0″ but it will take at least two years for the global economy to make a full recovery, Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman said on Monday.

Krugman said in a speech to an international business forum here that although the worst of the financial crisis was over, the world now faces a prolonged slowdown like Japan’s “lost decade” of the 1990s.

“How do we get out? I think the technical answer is — God knows. We have a great shortage of role models,” said Krugman, a professor of economics at Princeton University in the United States.

Krugman said that in the past, swift economic recoveries saw affected countries export their way out of trouble, trading with countries with large surpluses.

“Unless we can find another planet to export to, we cannot have an export-led recovery from this global financial crisis, which means we have a serious difficulty,” he said.

Other possible solutions — consumer spending, business investment and housing booms are all unlikely to kick-start the US or world economy this time.

“We seem to have avoided the Great Depression 2.0,” Krugman said, but added: “I do believe that full recovery is at least two years and probably more than that off.”

He compared the world economic picture to “a globalised version of Japan through much of the ’90s. Formally, Japan spent only pockets of its lost decade in recession, but as a whole it was a period of consistently slow growth.”

Krugman said that to find anything comparable to the current woes, economists have to look back to the 1930s, when a global slump was brought to an end “by a very large set of public works programs known as World War II.

“Hopefully we’re not going to repeat that strategy,” he joked, adding that policy makers could try more stimulus programs, higher inflation targets and spurring business investment.

“We don’t know which of these things would work, so we need to try all of them,” he said.

Krugman also urged a restructuring of the financial system to prevent a recurrence of the crisis, with more effective bank regulation, and limits on the risk that important institutions can take on.

“The general principle is that anything that in a crisis has to be rescued — like a bank — when you’re not in a crisis, has to be regulated like a bank,” he said.

“I have no confidence this is going to happen. In a way, the downside of our having managed to avoid a full repeat of the Great Depression is that we may have rescued the economy too soon before the political momentum for fundamental reform was strong enough to cause changes.

“Which means I worry this is all going to happen again in the not-too-distant future
Title: Re: Joker/CFR Krugman says: Bernanke saved your babies' lives, kneel before ZOD!!!
Post by: winthorp on August 10, 2009, 04:50:34 pm
We are from Krypton!  WE RULE!
Title: Economists: Recession OVER (haha!!) and Bernanke is the saviour!!!
Post by: TheHouseMan on August 12, 2009, 09:24:32 am
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/11/report-economists-say-recession-want-bernanke-stay/

Is the recession over? Economists polled by the Wall Street Journal say yes, and they suggest that's a big reason why Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke should stay.

The Journal reports that the experts are overwhelmingly in favor of President Obama asking Bernanke to stay on for another four-year term when his current term ends Jan. 31. Bernanke has been a key figure in the government's efforts to reverse the country's economic meltdown, a role that has earned him some criticism but also praise for handling of the crisis.

Economists date the start of the recession to December 2007 -- defining much of Bernanke's term, which started in early 2006 -- and a majority agree that the recession is coming to an end.

Bernanke "deserves a lot of credit for stabilizing the financial markets," Joseph Carson of AllianceBernstein told the Journal.

Obama said last week that the "worst may be behind us," and the Labor Department on Tuesday seemed to bolster that notion, reporting that productivity surged in the spring by the largest amount in almost six years while labor costs plunged at the fastest pace in nine years.

Productivity is a key ingredient for rising living standards because it means that companies can pay their workers more with the wage increases financed by rising output.

However, in the current recession, companies have been using the productivity gains to bolster their bottom lines in the face of declining sales. Many companies have been reporting second-quarter earnings results that have beaten expectations despite falling sales, due largely to their aggressive cost cutting.

Many economists believe the current recession is on the verge of ending. If the economy starts to grow in the second half of this year, companies are expected to switch from layoffs and trimming workers' hours to boosting employment as demand for their products increases.

As for Bernanke, it seems increasingly likely that he'll get to keep his job.

"Continuity is critical as we emerge from this crisis," Diane Swonk of Mesirow Financial told the Wall Street Journal. "Otherwise, we could slip back in again. Bernanke is the best suited to undo what has been done when the time comes."
Title: Re: Economists: Recession OVER (haha!!) and Bernanke is the saviour!!!
Post by: kushfiend on August 12, 2009, 09:29:37 am
why do they still even call this shithole economy a recession? Any economist [who isn't hired by the WH to lie to you] will tell you that we have been in a DEPRESSION since at least 2006.

O wow, the job loss rate slowed down, so that must mean we're getting out of the recession!? What kind of b.s. circular reasoning is that!?  So what if last month we lost 50k jobs and this month we lost 40k? Is that supposed to be some kind of an improvement?

disgusting.  I just pray every day that people can wipe the sludge of lies from their eyes and see the govt. and the world for what it really is, not what G.E. over at MSNBC would like us to believe.
Title: Re: Economists: Recession OVER (haha!!) and Bernanke is the saviour!!!
Post by: Geolibertarian on August 12, 2009, 09:51:27 am
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/11/report-economists-say-recession-want-bernanke-stay/

Is the recession over? Economists polled by the Wall Street Journal say yes

The coded message behind this blatantly obvious PsyOp is:

"Thus, if you're still out of job and home, then it's not because of anything criminal bankers and their puppet politicians are doing wrong, but because of something you are doing wrong."

It's their sick little way of getting the Main Street victims of this engineered collapse to blame themselves instead of the Wall Street culprits.

---------------------------------

http://www.infowars.com/this-is-no-recession-its-a-planned-demolition/ (http://www.infowars.com/this-is-no-recession-its-a-planned-demolition/)

This is No Recession: It’s a Planned Demolition

Mike Whitney
Infowars
August 11, 2009

Credit is not flowing. In fact, credit is contracting. That means things aren’t getting better; they’re getting worse. When credit contracts in a consumer-driven economy, bad things happen. Business investment drops, unemployment soars, earnings plunge, and GDP shrinks. The Fed has spent more than a trillion dollars trying to get consumers to start borrowing again, but without success. The country’s credit engines are grinding to a halt.

Bernanke has increased excess reserves in the banking system by $800 billion, but lending is still slow. The banks are hoarding capital in order to deal with the losses from toxic assets, non performing loans, and a $3.5 trillion commercial real estate bubble that’s following housing into the toilet. That’s why the rate of bank failures is accelerating. 2010 will be even worse; the list is growing. It’s a bloodbath.

The standards for conventional loans have gotten tougher while the pool of qualified credit-worthy borrowers has shrunk. That means less credit flowing into the system. The shadow banking system has been hobbled by the freeze in securitization and only provides a trifling portion of the credit needed to grow the economy. Bernanke’s initiatives haven’t made a bit of difference. Credit continues to shrivel.

The S&P 500 is up 50 percent from its March lows. The financials, retail, materials and industrials are leading the pack. It’s a “Green Shoots” Bear market rally fueled by the Fed’s Quantitative Easing (QE) which is forcing liquidity into the financial system and lifting equities. The same thing happened during the Great Depression. Stocks surged after 1929. Then the prevailing trend took hold and dragged the Dow down 89 percent from its earlier highs. The S&P’s March lows will be tested before the recession is over. Systemwide deleveraging is ongoing. That won’t change.

No one is fooled by the fireworks on Wall Street. Consumer confidence continues to plummet. Everyone knows things are bad. Everyone knows the media is lying. Credit is contracting; the economy’s life’s blood has slowed to a trickle. The economy is headed for a hard landing.

Bernanke has pulled out all the stops. He’s lowered interest rates to zero, backstopped the entire financial system with $13 trillion, propped up insolvent financial institutions and monetized $1 trillion in mortgage-backed securities and US sovereign debt. Nothing has worked. Wages are falling, banks are cutting lines of credit, retirement savings have been slashed in half, and home equity losses continue to mount. Living standards can no longer be bandaged together with VISA or Diners Club cards. Household spending has to fit within one’s salary. That’s why retail, travel, home improvement, luxury items and hotels are all down double-digits. The easy money has dried up.

According to Bloomberg:

[Continued... (http://www.infowars.com/this-is-no-recession-its-a-planned-demolition/)]

---------------------------------

The question, as always, is: what should we do about the all-out offensive war being waged against us by these economic terrorists (otherwise known as "international bankers")?

Go on the counteroffensive, that's what!

       http://propagandamatrix.com/forum/index.php/topic,5221.0.html (http://propagandamatrix.com/forum/index.php/topic,5221.0.html)
Title: MSN.com shows Bernanke giving us the middle finger with sh!t eating grin
Post by: Jeffro on August 12, 2009, 02:33:17 pm
(http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/2368/bernake.jpg)
Title: Re: MSN.com shows Bernanke giving us the middle finger with sh!t eating grin
Post by: TBPauly on August 12, 2009, 02:37:26 pm
Now that's just flat out nasty...
Title: Re: MSN.com shows Bernanke giving us the middle finger with sh!t eating grin
Post by: Pimp Game on August 12, 2009, 02:44:13 pm
Let's see how much you feel like grinning and laughing when we bring back the gillotine and line you FED boys up.
Title: Re: MSN.com shows Bernanke giving us the middle finger with sh!t eating grin
Post by: chris jones on August 12, 2009, 03:15:02 pm

He is a punk. A first class coward hidding behind his title and his backup.

What would happen to this freak if he were to do this in a public unprotected area.
Title: Re: MSN.com shows Bernanke giving us the middle finger with sh!t eating grin
Post by: JBS on August 12, 2009, 08:57:10 pm
that is Obama's top man, a tyrant, traitor and criminal, perfect man for the job
Title: Re: MSN.com shows Bernanke giving us the middle finger with sh!t eating grin
Post by: releasethebonds on August 12, 2009, 09:04:02 pm
(http://dailybail.com/storage/bernanke_will_smith.JPG?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1237169894358)
Title: Re: MSN.com shows Bernanke giving us the middle finger with sh!t eating grin
Post by: birgit on August 12, 2009, 09:09:58 pm
The Liberty Tree needs to be a huge California Redwood

 a half a mile tall and  half that wide to  hold all of the decorations we need to display on it!!
Title: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: America2 on August 21, 2009, 03:26:20 pm
Let's pop out that Kool-Aid bottle!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090821/ap_on_bi_st_ma_re/us_wall_street

NEW YORK – Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has told investors what they want to hear: The economy is indeed on the verge of recovery.

And investors have responded Friday by enthusiastically buying stocks. Major stock indicators have all surged more than 1 percent and hit new highs for the year. And Treasury prices have tumbled and pushed yields sharply higher, as investors no longer felt they needed the safety of government debt.

Bernanke told a Fed conference, "the prospects for a return to growth in the near term appear good."

That sent the Dow Jones industrials soaring 155 points to 9,505. The Standard & Poor's 500 index is up 18 at 1,026 and the Nasdaq composite index is up 31 at 2,020.

Advancing stocks are ahead of losers by 4 to 1 on the New York Stock Exchange, where volume came to 1.48 billion shares.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

NEW YORK (AP) — Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has told investors what they wanted to hear: The economy is indeed on the verge of recovery.

Major stock indicators surged more than 1 percent in early afternoon trading Friday and hit new highs for the year. The Dow Jones industrial average briefly surpassed the 9,500 mark, a level it hasn't seen since Nov. 5.

Meanwhile, Treasury prices tumbled, pushing yields sharply higher, as investors no longer needed the safety of government debt. The stock market's gains were broad, reaching across all industries, but the biggest jumps came from energy, industrial and material stocks as oil and commodities prices soared. Bank stocks also rose sharply.

"The prospects for a return to growth in the near term appear good," Bernanke said at an annual Fed conference in Wyoming. He did warn, however, that lending is not back to normal, and that the difficulty consumers and businesses are having obtaining loans will be a challenge.

A bigger-than-expected jump in home sales also gave stocks a boost and helped send bonds lower. The National Association of Realtors said sales of existing homes rose 7.2 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.24 million in July, from a pace of 4.89 million in June.

It was the fourth straight monthly increase and the highest level of sales since August 2007. The rise in sales came amid a sharp decline in home prices.

The day's news jump-started a listless market that has been marked by choppy trading this week amid mixed economic news and light summer volume.

Though Bernanke's positive assessment on the economy was encouraging, the market's challenges, including rising unemployment and sluggish consumer spending, are certainly far from over. The market appears to be on an upward trajectory, but analysts cautioned that stocks will likely bounce around through at least the rest of the summer.

"The news isn't going to be all good from here on out," said Jordan Smyth, managing direct at Edgemoor Investment Advisors in Bethesda, Md.

The Dow Jones industrial average rose 152.66, or 1.6 percent, to 9,502.71. The Standard & Poor's 500 index rose 18.45, or 1.8 percent, to 1,025.82, while the Nasdaq composite index rose 29.58, or 1.5 percent, to 2,018.80.

About four stocks rose for every one that fell on the New York Stock Exchange where volume came to 1.03 billion shares.

Bond prices tumbled. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note, which moves opposite its price, jumped to 3.56 percent, from 3.44 percent late Thursday.

The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies rose 11.81, or 2.1 percent, to 580.49.

In other signs of investors' growing confidence in the economy, oil prices touched their highest point of the year on hopes that energy demand will soon pick up. After briefly nearly $75, light, sweet crude for October delivery rose 98 cents to settle at $73.89 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

And the dollar, which, like Treasurys, is considered a safe-haven asset, tumbled against other major currencies.

Bernanke's comments were consistent with the Fed's observations about the economy earlier this month, which similarly helped re-energize the stock market after its summer rally had stalled. But later that week, reports showing weaker-than-expected retail sales and flagging consumer confidence overshadowed the Fed's upbeat view of the economy and stocks toppled.

Next week, investors will get two key reports on consumer confidence that, if worse than expected, could easily upset the market's gains.

"We're not past the volatile stages of the market," said Lowell Pratt, president of The Burney Co., an equity management firm.

Investors have been closely watching for signs that consumers, like the market, are becoming more confident about the economy's prospects for recovery and in turn will increase their spending. Consumer spending accounts for more than two-thirds of economic activity.

But as long as job losses continue to mount, it will be difficult for consumers to feel comfortable about spending freely.

"Consumer spending normally is the driver of recoveries at the beginning," said Bob Baur, chief global economist at Principal Global Investors. "That's not happening this time."

"At some point, the market is going to ask to see more than just mixed data," he said. "It's going to want to see some real jobs produced and an end to job losses and some validation that the consumer isn't going to stay in a slump."

Analysts have long warned of an eventual decline in stocks after the market's massive jump since early March, during which major indexes have risen more than 40 percent off of 12-year lows. But the market has yet to see a significant pullback.

Though trading has been erratic this week, the market has managed to eke out three days of moderate gains after a big drop in stocks on Monday. Major indexes are all on track to post gains for the week and finish at their highest levels of the year.

Overseas, Japan's Nikkei stock average fell 1.4 percent. Britain's FTSE 100 gained 2.0 percent, Germany's DAX index jumped 2.9 percent, and France's CAC-40 soared 3.2 percent.
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: Monkeypox on August 21, 2009, 03:36:41 pm
Well, his word is good enough for me!

 :P
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: LoreOnTerror on August 21, 2009, 03:44:56 pm
They turning the light at the end of the tunnel back on?
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: tattoo8118 on August 21, 2009, 03:45:37 pm
They turning the light at the end of the tunnel back on?

More like a nightlight ,with a dim bulb

Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: OverMade on August 21, 2009, 03:49:03 pm
That is excellent news the economy is recovering. But what gets me is last time I was on that site www.dailyjobcuts.com (http://www.dailyjobcuts.com)  It seems that the layoffs are not stopping. Oh waits stupid me its a jobless recovery.... Stupid
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: Monkeypox on August 21, 2009, 03:50:42 pm
That is excellent news the economy is recovering. But what gets me is last time I was on that site www.dailyjobcuts.com (http://www.dailyjobcuts.com)  It seems that the layoffs are not stopping. Oh waits stupid me its a jobless recovery.... Stupid

Wow, great first post!

 ;D
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: OverMade on August 21, 2009, 03:51:10 pm
This is definitely getting insane, watching the TV and News... makes me sick
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: scoffer on August 21, 2009, 04:04:46 pm
Every time Bernanke reports positive financial news thing go to he**.
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: Mber on August 21, 2009, 04:12:50 pm
This is definitely getting insane, watching the TV and News... makes me sick
I would recommend not watching it anymore, for your psychological health that is hehe
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: OverMade on August 21, 2009, 04:15:51 pm
Hhahaha   :D   Yeah I think your right. And thanks Mod 
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: psy0ps on August 21, 2009, 04:40:07 pm
Well, his word is good enough for me!

 :P

I wonder why anyone would believe a word out of the criminal Bernanke's mouth?
Heres a video that is well worth the watch about Ben's forecasts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INmqvibv4UU&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INmqvibv4UU&feature=related)
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: lavosslayer on August 21, 2009, 06:39:43 pm
This is definitely getting insane, watching the TV and News... makes me sick

tell me about it...whats even worse is being forced to listen to Fox news all evening long when my parents are watching it and then hearing them quote Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck as though they are the gospel!! UGH!!
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: Clyde Barrow on August 21, 2009, 08:04:01 pm
    
Bernanke 2012 !!!

 :P
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: sociostudent on August 21, 2009, 08:09:29 pm
tell me about it...whats even worse is being forced to listen to Fox news all evening long when my parents are watching it and then hearing them quote Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck as though they are the gospel!! UGH!!

I know, and then when you try to tell them anything about (legitimate) FEMA camps or vaccination bracelets, you can tell they think you're one of those "crazy 'militia types' that good 'ole GB was talking about"...it gets incredibly frustrating.
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: Letsbereal on August 21, 2009, 08:48:16 pm
Recession? It’s all in the mind… You see!

Your such delusional silly little people ....

Makes me smigger a good laugh! smig...smig... Smig!


(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v393/youricarma/Miscellaneous/XM03_Blackadder.jpg)

Recession? It’s all in the mind… Reuters Blogs
http://blogs.reuters.com/macroscope/2009/08/21/recession-its-all-in-the-mind/
Title: Re: Bernanke says economy near recovery! WOOHOO!
Post by: Soulman on August 21, 2009, 10:07:46 pm
It's stunning to see how gullible these people actually are.

Perhaps their greed has overridden what may remain of their common sense?

PT Barnum was right.
Title: Bernanke, who gave $23.7 Trillion to Rothschild told: "Do it again!" by Obama
Post by: DCUBED on August 24, 2009, 08:52:13 pm
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_bernanke

AP source: Obama to nominate Bernanke to 2nd term

OAK BLUFFS, Mass. – An Associated Press source says President Barack Obama plans to nominate Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke to a second term. Obama is to make the announcement on Tuesday during a break from his vacation on Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts. The source is a senior administration official who discussed the announcement late Monday on the condition of anonymity.

Bernanke was first named Fed chairman by former President George W. Bush. In his announcement, Obama plans to praise Bernanke as someone who led the country through a financial crisis.

Obama plans to note Bernanke's expertise on the Great Depression of the 1930s and his efforts to prevent another crisis.
Title: Re: Obama to nominate Bernanke to 2nd term
Post by: Satyagraha on August 24, 2009, 08:59:11 pm
Of course he will nominate Bernanke. That's what the teleprompter will tell him to say.
His boss has chosen Bernanke. Now, the real question is 'who's the boss'?
Title: Re: Obama to nominate Bernanke to 2nd term
Post by: LoreOnTerror on August 24, 2009, 09:30:23 pm
In his announcement, Obama plans to praise Bernanke as someone who helped lead the country into a financial crisis.


Error Fixed.
Title: Re: Obama to nominate Bernanke to 2nd term
Post by: chris jones on August 24, 2009, 10:27:45 pm


Hard to beleive, no, its not.
Title: Re: Obama to nominate Bernanke to 2nd term
Post by: Geolibertarian on August 24, 2009, 10:41:17 pm
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_bernanke

AP source: Obama to nominate Bernanke to 2nd term

"Chaaaaange!" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Dr1sgcC6k4)

::)
Title: Re: Obama to nominate Bernanke to 2nd term
Post by: Dig on August 25, 2009, 07:56:46 am
Obama on now with Bernanke, uggghhhh
Title: Check out this propaganda!
Post by: rawiron1 on August 25, 2009, 09:11:58 am
Bloomberg headline...

"Bernanke Named to Second Term at Fed After Keeping U.S. Out of Depression"

WTF?!?

http://www.bloomberg.com/?b=0&Intro=intro3

Jason
Title: Re: Check out this propaganda!
Post by: jofortruth on August 25, 2009, 09:15:02 am
Obama just reappointed him for another 4 years to finish the destruction of America!   ::)
http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/25/news/economy/Bernanke_Second_Term/index.htm?postversion=2009082509

Once again, Obama shows he is NOT a leader but does exactly as he's told by his Masters! What a wimp!


Title: Re: Check out this propaganda!
Post by: luckee1 on August 25, 2009, 09:22:29 am
Obama breaks vacation, keeps Bernanke at Fed

(http://www.comcast.net/slideshow/finance/finance-20090825-US.Bernanke/)
By PHILIP ELLIOTT, AP 22 minutes ago

OAK BLUFFS, Mass. — President Barack Obama announced Tuesday he wants to keep Ben Bernanke on as Fed chairman, saying he shepherded America through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

"Ben approached a financial system on the verge of collapse with calm and wisdom; with bold action and out-of-the-box thinking that has helped put the brakes on our economic freefall," said Obama, with Bernanke standing by his side. "Almost none of the decisions he or any of us made have been easy."

Obama made the announcement while on vacation on the island of Martha's Vineyard off the coast of Massachusetts after aides said initially that the president intended a news-free week there. Both he and Bernanke sported the open-collar look.

Bernanke, 55, is credited with turning the economy away from its deepest and longest recession since the 1930s. Now he faces the challenge of meeting White House expectations to chart the full economic recovery considered critical to Obama's legacy.

In sticking with a Republican for the nation's top banker, the Democratic president was aiming for stability at a time of continuing, though easing, crisis. The move was designed to reassure the U.S. financial sector as well as foreign central banks that the Obama administration isn't changing course on its largely well-received approaches to the financial meltdown and overall monetary policy.

The announcement also came nearly concurrently with a piece of bad economic news. Obama interrupted his vacation to telegraph his decision just ahead of a White House report that gave more bleak assessments of the nation's deficit picture.

Figures released by the White House budget office on Monday foresee a cumulative $9 trillion deficit from 2010-2019, $2 trillion more than the administration estimated in May. Moreover, the figures show the public debt doubling by 2019 and reaching three quarters the size of the entire national economy.

The White House said Obama decided on the last-minute schedule addition to help "put him more in `vacation mode." "There's been a lot of speculation out there, and the president wanted to put it to rest," Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton told reporters as the presidential entourage headed from the site of the announcement to a golf course.

Bernanke's early tenure was as complicated as the crisis facing the banks he sought to save.

The Fed chairman's successful, although unconventional, strategy to move the economy away from recession, unlock frozen credit and stabilize spiraling financial markets depended in large part on creating radical and unprecedented lending programs. But he's not without his detractors, and the Democratic chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, Connecticut's Chris Dodd, immediately warned of a thorough hearing before Bernanke would be confirmed for a second four-year term.

With such controversy surrounding some of his decisions, Bernanke's fate had been the subject of speculation for months.

Many on Wall Street and in academic circles had viewed Bernanke as the best choice to tackle continued high unemployment, fight off any threat of inflation and take on the next set of risky, difficult decisions.

Announcing his decision to bypass prominent Democratic economic figures for the job, Obama had nothing but praise for Bernanke.

The president also put in a plug for his own administration's actions to stabilize the financial system, restructure the auto industry and approve $787 billion in stimulus spending.

Appearing in makeshift press workspace on the island, Bernanke said that if confirmed by the Senate, he'd work to provide "a strong foundation for growth and stability" in the economy.

"The Federal Reserve, like other economic policy makers, has been challenged by the unprecedented events of the past few years," Bernanke said. "We have been bold or deliberate as circumstances demanded, but our objective remains constant: to restore a more stable financial and economic environment in which opportunity can again flourish and in which Americans hard work and creativity can receive their proper rewards."

The economy is emerging from recession and is poised for growth. However, it will be slow-going and the unemployment rate, now at 9.4 percent, is likely to top 10 percent this year before it starts going down.

For Obama, there was little political downside in choosing to nominate Bernanke. The move displays bipartisanship and a steady, unchanging hand on the economic tiller. Fully occupied with an attempted health care overhaul, Obama's team could little afford the distraction of changing the head of the Fed.

Bernanke was appointed Fed chairman by President George W. Bush and sworn in Feb. 1, 2006, following Alan Greenspan's 18-year tenure.

___

Associated Press writers Jim Kuhnhenn in Washington, Jeannine Aversa in Jackson Hole, Wyo., and Glen Johnson and Jason Bronis in Oak Bluffs, Mass., contributed to this report.
Title: Re: Check out this propaganda!
Post by: Berminator on August 25, 2009, 09:25:18 am
Paris  "America's been took it's plain to see."
Title: Re: Check out this propaganda!
Post by: NWOSCUM on August 25, 2009, 09:44:05 am
This can only point to MORE "hope and change"!!   >:(
Title: Re: Check out this propaganda!
Post by: Sheepleprod on August 25, 2009, 10:03:52 am
Round 2 "Fight"
Title: Re: Check out this propaganda!
Post by: Dig on August 25, 2009, 10:09:53 am
Senate still needs to confirm him (is my understanding). Bernie Sanders is on the committee, gonna be a hell of anass whooping.  But in the end, the fed needs to be audited no matter who the puppet is that is the so called chairman.
Title: Re: Bernanke, who gave $23.7 Trillion to Rothschild told: "Do it again!" by Obama
Post by: Dig on August 25, 2009, 10:12:27 am
Hope and Change. Dictionary is going to need some revisions after this presidency.
Title: Re: Bernanke, who gave $23.7 Trillion to Rothschild told: "Do it again!" by Obama
Post by: Kilika on August 25, 2009, 10:21:40 am
Who didn't know he would be rehired? ::) That's not news, just confirmation. But it really matters not, because the chairman is just a mouthpiece, a highly paid spokesperson for the international banking cartel.
Title: Re: Bernanke, who gave $23.7 Trillion to Rothschild told: "Do it again!" by Obama
Post by: Geolibertarian on August 25, 2009, 10:44:02 am
Who didn't know he would be rehired? That's not news, just confirmation. But it really matters not, because the chairman is just a mouthpiece, a highly paid spokesperson for the international banking cartel.

As is Obama -- and not just for the international banking cartel (http://www.themoneymasters.com), but for the military-industrial complex (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdrGKwkmxAU), which is why he also rehired Bush's Secretary of Imperialism (http://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket) "Defense," Robert Gates (http://www.rense.com/general74/fili.htm).

But since it was Obama who did the rehiring, you can't object to it without being a "racist."  

Right, Obama cultists?   ::)
Title: Re: Bernanke, who gave $23.7 Trillion to Rothschild told: "Do it again!" by Obama
Post by: DireWolf on August 25, 2009, 11:19:53 am
Any deeper down this rabbit hole and I will be speaking Chinese.

Here I go, bong tai.
Title: Obama "appoints" Bernanke for 2nd term as Federal Reserve chairman
Post by: TheHouseMan on August 25, 2009, 04:18:56 pm
Summary: Somehow I doubt that puppet Obama had anything to do with this... Bernanke continues to push for "independent" Fed...

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE57O0P220090825

OAK BLUFFS, Massachusetts (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama nominated Ben Bernanke to a second term as Federal Reserve chairman on Tuesday, aiming for continuity at a time when the U.S. economy is breaking free from a deep recession.

The decision, while widely expected, was welcomed by financial markets and policy makers around the globe. Economists said it removed uncertainty at a delicate juncture in the economy's recovery.

Obama interrupted his vacation on the Massachusetts island of Martha's Vineyard to make the brief announcement with Bernanke, 55, at his side.

"Ben approached a financial system on the verge of collapse with calm and wisdom; with bold action and outside-the-box thinking that has helped put the brakes on our economic freefall," Obama said.

Bernanke's four-year term expires in January and the president had not been expected to make an announcement until later this year.

Critics said the announcement had been timed to deflect attention from less market-friendly news on the government's budget deficit, but an Obama aide denied this.

"There has been a considerable amount of speculation in the marketplace, both in the market and among observers of the Fed, and going into the fall the president wanted to end that speculation," Austan Goolsbee, a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, told Reuters Television.

The White House raised its 10-year cumulative budget deficit projection by $2 trillion on Tuesday to approximately $9 trillion. That would push the national debt up from more than $11 trillion now to more than $20 trillion in 2019.

With polls showing Americans deeply worried about the deficit, the new data will make it more difficult for Obama to push through his ambitious economic and healthcare overhaul.

U.S. stocks were slightly higher in afternoon trading, buoyed by news of Bernanke's nomination and strong housing and consumer confidence data.

OBAMA MADE DECISION LAST MONTH

Before the president began a week-long vacation on Sunday, Obama administration officials repeatedly stressed that he would not be making news.

Analysts said the timing of the announcement was shrewd.

"We entered the financial crisis two years ago with an untested Fed chairman. Bernanke has been through the crucible since then," said Lou Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson ICAP in Jersey City, New Jersey.

"Moving into the clean-up phase with another new and untested chairman would have just compounded the uncertainty in the outlook."  

With growing signs the U.S. economy is slowly recovering, thanks in large part to Bernanke's efforts, the Fed chairman should have little difficulty winning confirmation from the Senate again.

Obama decided to nominate Bernanke a month ago, after consulting Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, an administration official said.

Lawrence Summers, Obama's top White House economic adviser and a former U.S. Treasury secretary who had been mentioned as a possible candidate for the top job at the Fed, also recommended Bernanke's nomination, the official said.

Bernanke was told in the Oval Office last Wednesday.

Obama is counting on Bernanke to nurse the economy back to health at a time when unemployment, home foreclosures and bank failures are still mounting.

The Fed chairman has pushed U.S. interest rates to near zero and flooded financial markets with hundreds of billions of dollars to stem a credit crisis and turn back recession.

Bernanke, appointed by President George W. Bush and widely respected as a top scholar on the Great Depression, now faces the challenge of pulling back the Fed's extraordinary support for the economy without setting back hopes for a recovery.

"PROBABLY THE RIGHT CHOICE"

Joining Obama in a school hall in the town of Oak Bluffs, Bernanke shook hands with the president before praising his support for a strong and independent Federal Reserve.

"We have been bold or deliberate as circumstances demanded, but our objective remains constant: to restore a more stable economic and financial environment in which opportunity can again flourish, and in which Americans' hard work and creativity can receive their proper rewards," Bernanke said.

After the announcement, Obama headed to a golf course for a second straight day on the links.

Obama's Democrats control the Senate, but Bernanke, a Republican, has faced criticism from lawmakers in both parties who say he has gone too far in extending Fed support that will be difficult to unwind, threatening future inflation.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd vowed a "thorough and comprehensive" hearing to consider Bernanke's nomination. But he appeared to endorse a second term for the Fed chairman, saying he was "probably the right choice."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Bernanke's renomination sent the right signal to financial markets and he expected the Senate to reconfirm him.

Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, said the confirmation hearings would be an opportunity to question Bernanke about the cumulative impact of the administration's trillions of dollars in new spending and borrowing.

(Additional reporting by Tim Ahmann and Lucia Mutikani in Washington; Editing by Simon Denyer and Phil Stewart)
Title: Re: Check out this propaganda!
Post by: chris jones on August 25, 2009, 06:35:54 pm
Obama just reappointed him for another 4 years to finish the destruction of America!   ::)
http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/25/news/economy/Bernanke_Second_Term/index.htm?postversion=2009082509

Once again, Obama shows he is NOT a leader but does exactly as he's told by his Masters! What a wimp!

Hi Jo.

Yup, he is, but you know I sincerely beleive he was well aware of this long before he took office.
A step futher, he wanted the throne, was primed, groomed, mentored, and given the script. He accepted the terms in trade for his soul, if he had one that is.
He now sits upon his throne, suking around with the big dogs and fully welcomed to the table of power.
Your right he is a wimp, take away their titles, positions on high, and they are cowards. Sociopaths generally are, its been said  that its difficult to catch them, their slick, from the childhood years on they have found manipulation and deception an ends to their means.
Title: Re: Bernanke, who gave $23.7 Trillion to Rothschild told: "Do it again!" by Obama
Post by: Satyagraha on August 25, 2009, 08:32:29 pm
And in the end, when they've finished with him, we might find out about the birth certificate.
Title: Re: Bernanke, who gave $23.7 Trillion to Rothschild told: "Do it again!" by Obama
Post by: Letsbereal on August 25, 2009, 08:38:15 pm
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v393/youricarma/Miscellaneous/alfred-e-obama-mad.jpg)
Title: Re: Bernanke, who gave $23.7 Trillion to Rothschild told: "Do it again!" by Obama
Post by: New Whirled Order on August 25, 2009, 08:58:36 pm
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i228/Loveways/Paulson_Bernanke_IndyMac.jpg)

(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i228/Loveways/shrinking-dollar.jpg)

(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i228/Loveways/clip-image0029.jpg)

Title: Re: Bernanke, who gave $23.7 Trillion to Rothschild told: "Do it again!" by Obama
Post by: Silveryminnow on August 25, 2009, 09:02:36 pm
It amazes me how Obama can just look into a camera and flat out lie to the American People, how after reaping the benefits of being a citizen of this country, he can just apathetically destroy it. Everyone not living in Neverland knows that the current economic indicators are being floated by a bail out bubble. Obamas plan is then what, print more money? Its pure insanity and is turning our currency into nothing better than toilet paper. Personally, I am cringing at the tax hikes to come just to maintain basic services here in my city. Its no suprise that Obama has nominated Bernake, who has already proven that he has absolutely no scruples about looting the treasury of this nation for the personal benefit of himself, cronies and banking cartels. I always knew that idiots would destroy this country, wasnt prophetic, just have to spend 10 minutes listening to their stream of bullsh*t!
Title: Senator Sanders slams Bernanke nomination [Finally a statement of semi-truth]
Post by: Dig on August 25, 2009, 10:57:08 pm
Senator Sanders slams Bernanke nomination
http://www.americablog.com/2009/08/senator-sanders-slams-bernanke.html
by Chris in Paris on 8/25/2009 06:40:00 PM
Tuesday, August 25, 2009

If only more in Congress and the White House shared this view. Bernanke was part of the problem and remains an obstacle to change. Here's the full statement:
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today issued the following statement on the nomination of Ben S. Bernanke for another term as chairman of the Federal Reserve:
------------
"As a result of the greed, irresponsibility and illegal behavior of Wall Street our country has experienced the worst economic decline since the Great Depression. Mr. Bernanke was head of the Fed and the nation's chief economist as this crisis, driven by reckless speculation, developed. Tragically, like the rest of the Bush administration, he was asleep at the wheel during this period and did nothing to move our financial system onto safer grounds.

“As the middle class of this country continues to shrink, we need a chairman of the Federal Reserve who is more concerned about expanding the productive economy – increasing decent-paying jobs for all Americans – than continuing to fan the flames of Wall Street greed and outrageous compensation packages.”
Title: Re: Senator Sanders slams Bernanke nomination [Finally a statement of semi-truth
Post by: larsonstdoc on August 25, 2009, 11:01:15 pm
Bravo Sen. Sanders!
Title: Re: Senator Sanders slams Bernanke nomination [Finally a statement of semi-truth]
Post by: Satyagraha on August 25, 2009, 11:08:32 pm
I should just move north to live in VT. We are stuck with Olver who's been a congressman since dinosaurs roamed the area.
Title: Bernanke victim of indentity fraud ring
Post by: hardrain77 on August 26, 2009, 07:02:47 pm
At least he now has some idea of what it's like to be the victim and not the thief...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/213696
Title: Re: Bernanke victim of indentity fraud ring
Post by: thatgrownman on August 26, 2009, 11:20:35 pm
staged?

Applauding law enforcement to go after these kinda financial crimes is kinda funny coming from the Al Capone of financial criminals.
Title: Secret WH Memo: Bernanke tells G20 "The recession is likely over"
Post by: Satyagraha on September 25, 2009, 06:21:06 am
Time to Change Bernanke's Medication?
Secret White House letter to G-20

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-palast/time-to-change-bernankes_b_294262.html

I still get a thrill whenever I get my hands on a confidential memo with "The White House, Washington" on the letterhead. Even when--like the one I'm looking at now--it's about a snoozy topic: This week's G-20 summit.

But the letter's content shook me awake and may keep me up the rest of the night.

The 6-page letter from the White House, dated September 3, was sent to the 20 heads of state that will meet this Thursday in Pittsburgh. After some initial diplo-blather, our President's "sherpa" for the summit, Michael Froman, does a little victory dance, announcing that the recession has been defeated. "Global equity markets have risen 35 percent since the end of March," writes Froman. In other words, the stock market is up and all's well.

While acknowledging that this year's economy has gone to hell in a handbag, Obama's aide and ambassador to the G-20 seems to be parroting the irrational exuberance of Federal Reserve Chief Ben Bernanke who declared last week that, "The recession is very likely over." All that was missing from Bernanke's statement was a banner, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED."

And the French are furious. The White House letter to the G-20 leaders was a response to a confidential diplomatic missive from the chief of the European Union Fredrik Reinfeldt written a day earlier to "Monsieur le Président" Obama.

We have Reinfeldt's confidential note as well. In it, the EU president says, despite Bernanke's happy-talk, "la crise n'est pas terminée (the crisis is not over) and (continuing in translation) the labor market will continue to suffer the consequences of weak use of capacity and production in the coming months." This is diplomatic speak for, What the hell is Bernanke smoking?

May I remind you Monsieur le Président, that last month 216,000 Americans lost their jobs, bringing the total lost since your inauguration to about seven million? And rising.

The Wall Street Journal also has a copy of the White House letter, though they haven't released it. (I have: read it here, with the EU message and our translation.) The Journal spins the leak as the White House would want it: "Big Changes to Global Economic Policy" to produce "lasting growth." Obama takes charge! What's missing in the Journal report is that Obama's plan subtly but significantly throttles back European demands to tighten finance industry regulation and, most important, deflects the EU's concern about fighting unemployment.

Europe's leaders are scared witless that the Obama Administration will prematurely turn off the fiscal and monetary stimulus. Europe demands that the US continue pumping the economy under an internationally coordinated worldwide save-our-butts program.

As the EU's Reinfeldt's puts it in his plea to the White House, "It is essential that the Heads of State and Government, at this summit, continue to implement the economic policy measures they have adopted," and not act unilaterally. "Exit strategies [must] be implemented in a coordinated manner." Translating from the diplomatique: If you in the USA turn off fiscal and monetary stimulus now, on your own, Europe and the planet sinks, America with it.

Obama's ambassador says, Non! Instead, he writes that each nation should be allowed to "unwind" anti-recession efforts "at a pace appropriate to the circumstances of each economy." In other words, "Europe, you're on your own!" So much for Obama channeling FDR.

The technical policy conflict between the Obama and EU plans reflects a deep difference in the answer to a crucial question: Whose recession is it, anyway? To Obama and Bernanke, this is a bankers' recession and so, as "stresses in financial markets have abated significantly," to use the words of the White House epistle, then "Happy Days Are Here Again." But, if this recession is about workers the world over losing their jobs and life savings, the EU view, then it's still "Buddy, Can You Spare a Dime."

If Bernanke and Obama were truly concerned about preserving jobs, they would have required banks loaded with taxpayer bail-out loot to lend these funds to consumers and business. China did so, ordering its banks to increase credit. And boy, did they, expanding credit by an eye-popping 30%, rocketing China's economy out of recession and into double-digit growth.

But the Obama Administration has gone the opposite way. The White House letter to the G-20 calls for slowly increasing bank reserves, and that can only cause a tight credit market to tighten further.

It's not that the White House completely ignores job losses. The US letter suggests, "The G-20 should commit to ... income support for the unemployed." You can imagine the Europeans, who already have generous unemployment benefits--most without time limits--turning purple over that one. America's stingy unemployment compensation extension under the Stimulus Plan is already beginning to expire with no live proposal to continue aid for the jobless victims of this recession.

The Europeans are so cute when they're angry, when they pound their little fists. Obama assumes he can ignore them. The EU, once the big player in the G-7, has seen its members' status diluted into the G-20, where the BRIC powers (Brazil, Russia, India and China) now flex their muscles. But Europeans have a thing or two to teach Americans about the economics of the twilight of empire.

Maybe the differences are cultural, not economic; that Europeans lack America's Manifest Destiny can-do optimism.

So, to give the visitors a taste of the yes-we-can spirit, Obama should invite Pittsburgh's 93,700 jobless to the G-20 meet to celebrate that 35% rise in the stock market.

Or -- my own suggestion -- change Bernanke's medication.

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-palast/time-to-change-bernankes_b_294262.html
Title: Bernanke says new super currency would weaken dollar
Post by: Eckhart Tolle on October 01, 2009, 08:32:09 pm
(http://imgs.xinhuanet.com/icon/2007english/logo.jpg)

(http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-10/02/xin_512100602090910903941.jpg)
U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke testifies before the House Financial Services Committee on financial regulatory reform on Capitol Hill in Washington, the United States, Oct. 1, 2009. According to Ben Bernanke, the U.S. dollar is not at any immediate risk of losing its status as a reserve currency. (Xinhua/Zhang Yan)

Bernanke says new super currency would weaken dollar

2009-10-02 09:04:45    

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-10/02/content_12171819.htm


    WASHINGTON, Oct. 1 (Xinhua) -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said on Thursday that a new super currency would weaken the dollar, but he also noted the dollar is not at any immediately risk of losing its status.

    "There's no immediately risk to the dollar, it's a relatively long-term issue," Bernanke told lawmakers when asked to respond World Bank President Robert B. Zoellick's recent remarks on the dollar.

    Zollick warned on Monday that the United States would be mistaken to take for granted the dollar' s place as the world' s predominant reserve currency.

    "Looking forward, there will increasingly be other options to the dollar," said the World Bank chief, adding the status would depend how well the U.S. can manage the debt.

    Bernanke said in the hearing that he agreed with Zoellick, noting if the U.S. could not get "the macro house" in order, the dollar will be in danger.

    When asked what would happen if the dollar were no longer the top reserve currency, Bernanke said that the currency would weaken and the Fed would have to watch for any inflationary effects.

    "But again, I want to reiterate that I don't see this as a near-term risk, so long as we as a country take appropriate steps to mange our fiscal positions and keep inflation low," said the U.S. central bank chief.
Title: 10/01/09: House Financial Services Hearing with Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke
Post by: Matthew on October 02, 2009, 01:23:40 am
Entire hearing (3 hours):

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2009/10/01/HP/A/23745/House+Financial+Services+Hearing+with+Federal+Reserve+Chair+Bernanke.aspx

In testimony to the House Financial Services Cmte, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said that oversight of financial instutions should be shared by more regulators than just the Federal Reserve. His testimony was in response to proposed legislation that would reform bank regulation in the wake of the financial crisis. 
Title: Re: 10/01/09: House Financial Services Hearing with Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke
Post by: LoreOnTerror on October 02, 2009, 02:08:32 am
Only 4 minutes in and I already don't like the way Barney Frank is making excuses for the Fed.
Title: Re: 10/01/09: House Financial Services Hearing with Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke
Post by: Belial on October 02, 2009, 02:31:19 am
In Barney Franks credit he did great at the 1207 hearing and I was laughing at some of his comments towards the fed. I was bitterly disappointed with that hearing though it was so perfectly bipartisan until they started talking about 13.1 and then introduced their own reform bills into the hearing.

HR 1207 needs to be a stand alone bill passed before the reform package imo.
Title: Paulson, Bernanke, Geithner Forced Banks to Take Bailout Fund, Public Misled
Post by: Eckhart Tolle on October 05, 2009, 08:40:33 pm
(http://media.cnsnews.com/resources/47040.jpg)
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner testifying on TARP -- the Troubled Asset Relief Program

Inspector General: Paulson, Bernanke, Geithner Forced Banks to Take Bailout Funds


Monday, October 05, 2009
By Matt Cover

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55017



(CNSNews.com) – In a new report, Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP), reveals that then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and key federal regulators forced the nation’s nine largest financial institutions to take billions in taxpayer bailout dollars in October 2008, threatening that if the banks refused, the government would take their stock shares anyway.
 
Barofsky’s report, released Monday, examines the circumstances under which the government selected the initial nine participants of its Capital Purchase Program (CPP) bailout. The report found that the government picked the banks because of their size and involvement in the U.S. financial system, not because they needed the money or not.
 
The inspector general’s report also found that federal officials, including then-Secretary Paulson, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, and current-Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner all viewed the plan as an offer the banks could not refuse.
 
“Officials at Treasury, the Federal Reserve, and other federal regulators felt strongly that the nine institutions should not be permitted to reject the government’s capital infusions,” the report says.
 
The report also confirms and cites a set of “CEO Talking Points” provided for Paulson that indicate that the government did not consider its plan optional.
 
“Taken together, your nine firms represent a significant part of our financial system – therefore – in our view you must be central to any solution,” the talking points state.
 
“We don’t believe it is tenable to opt out because doing so would leave you vulnerable and exposed,” the talking points continue. “If a capital infusion is not appealing, you should be aware that your regulator will require it in any circumstance.”
 
The SIGTARP report cites Paulson’s talking points, confirming them with the former secretary, who told the IG that, if necessary, he would tell the banks’ CEOs that they had no choice but to sell shares of their companies to the government.
 
“Furthermore, former Secretary Paulson told SIGTARP that, if necessary, the government would make clear to the nine executives that they had no choice but to take the money,” the IG report documents.

(http://media.cnsnews.com/resources/49734.jpg)
This May 2009 photo depicts the headquarters of JPMorgan Chase & Co., which announced Wednesday, June 17, that it repaid in full the $25 billion preferred stock investment it accepted through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). (AP Photo/Mark Lennihan)

“Indeed, one bank executive told SIGTARP that the impression he received from Secretary Paulson and other regulators was that the executives did not have a choice in the matter,” states the report.
 
Interviews with six of those bank executives by SIGTARP reveal that the government intended that all nine banks take the funds, regardless of whether the money was needed, in order to hide the fact that some of them were in grave danger.
 
“These six executives also told SIGTARP that government officials strongly urged them to accept the capital injections as a group,” says the report, “irrespective of whether they believed that their institutions required such substantial assistance.”
 
“Federal Reserve officials later explained that acting as a group would help avoid any stigma that might have been associated with accepting capital from the government,” reads the report. “If some of the institutions had accepted and others had not, the markets might have viewed the decision to accept capital as a sign that the institution was experiencing financial problems.”
 
These problems, which some of the firms were in fact experiencing, might have led investors to withdraw their money because they were afraid that the banks might fail and their investments would be worthless – which some of the banks did, sending their stock values plummeting.
 
In fact, the report reveals that the health of the individual banks was not much of a concern for the government, which chose the banks because of their size and involvement in the U.S. financial system and not because they needed the money.
 
“According to government officials interviewed by SIGTARP, the relative health of the first nine institutions selected to receive CPP funds was not a primary factor in the institutions’ selection,” the report finds.
 
Despite statements by both Paulson and Bernanke that all nine institutions were “healthy,” government officials had concerns that some institutions needed the money while others were in relatively good shape. This fact was confirmed to SIGTARP by both Bernanke and Geithner.
 
“Chairman Bernanke told SIGTARP that there were differences in the nine banks in terms of strength and weakness, but that the selection was generalized in order to avoid stigmatizing any one bank as being a weak bank and creating a panic,” reads the report.
 
“He recounted, for example, that a few of the banks were under stress, but that they were included because they were key players in the financial markets,” the report reads.
 
It continues: “Secretary Geithner, who was then President of the FRBNY [Federal Reserve Bank of New York] told SIGTARP that, in selecting the first nine institutions, size and importance were the key characteristics that guided the process, and that no judgments were made as to their strength or weakness.”
Title: Re: Paulson, Bernanke, Geithner Forced Banks to Take Bailout Fund, Public Misled
Post by: Eckhart Tolle on October 05, 2009, 08:42:08 pm
(http://www.shortnews.com/bilder/logo2.gif)

Treasury misled Public, Bailout Report says
     

10/06/2009 12:51 AM     ID: 80993      Permalink   

http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=80993

Inspector General Neil M. Barofsky released a report today that accuses the Treasury Dept. of misleading statements to the Public, and unfair distribution of Bailout funds to the biggest banks.

According to the report, a Treasury spokesperson made misleading statements concerning the health of the Nation's banks while simultaneously giving billions in aid. The report also details the way funds to 9 major banks were distributed.

In response, the Treasury said that any statements made during the then unfolding financial crisis “must be considered in light of the unprecedented circumstances in which they were made.”

Title: Re: Paulson, Bernanke, Geithner Forced Banks to Take Bailout Fund, Public Misled
Post by: Eckhart Tolle on October 05, 2009, 08:45:49 pm
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01472/wall_1472064c.jpg)


US Treasury 'overstated' health of America's biggest banks

Thye US Treasury overstated the financial health of America's nine largest banks last year when it invested $125bn into them, an internal investigation has found.

 

By James Quinn, US Business Editor
Published: 8:35PM BST 05 Oct 2009
Wall Street - US Treasury 'overstated' health of America's biggest banks

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/6263302/US-Treasury-overstated-health-of-Americas-biggest-banks.html

Neil Barofsky, inspector general of the Treasury's $700bn (£440bn) Troubled Assets Relief Programme (TARP), revealed that officials from both the Treasury and the Federal Reserve exaggerated the apparent resilience of the nine banks in spite of knowledge to the contrary.

"There were concerns about the health of several of the nine institutions at that time.. their overall selection was far more a result of the officials' belief in their importance to a system that was viewed as being vulnerable to collapse than concerns about their individual health and viability," Mr Barofsky's report says.

The nine banks forced to take part in the capital injection scheme included Citigroup and Bank of America, who, in spite of both receiving $25bn of TARP funds last October, both required a further injection of $20bn plus loan-loss guarantees to cover losses on toxic assets.

The October injections were however forced on to the banks in question by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, telling reluctant chief executives including Goldman Sachs' Lloyd Blankfein and JP Morgan Chase's Jamie Dimon that not taking the money was not an option.

In his new report, Mr Barofsky highlights a number of public comments made by both Treasury and Fed officials last October about the health of the nine banks, saying that such "inaccurate statements" only serve to make the TARP more controversial than it has already proven to be.

Mr Barofsky said last month he thought it "highly unlikely" the Treasury will ever be able to recoup its full investment.
Title: Jim Rogers to Bernanke: Close the Federal Reserve and then resign.
Post by: PessimismPorn on November 18, 2009, 06:36:49 pm
Jim Rogers to Bernanke: Close the Federal Reserve and then resign.

http://jimrogers1.blogspot.com/2009/11/jim-rogers-bernanke-federal-reserve.html
Title: Bernanke Warns of Risks in removing "god-like" authority of the fed
Post by: Dig on November 28, 2009, 02:33:53 pm
Bernanke Warns of Risks in removing "god-like" authority of the fed
(http://markettalk.newswires-americas.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/bernanke_crying.jpg)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/business/economy/29fed.html
By JOHN H. CUSHMAN Jr.
Published: November 28, 2009

WASHINGTON — The chairman of the Federal Reserve Board warned bluntly on Saturday that provisions in financial legislation before the House and Senate would “seriously impair” the Fed as it struggled to maintain financial and economic stability.

Ben Bernanke, the chief of the Fed, aims to preserve its powers and independence.

In a column published on The Washington Post’s Web site and scheduled to appear on the op-ed page on Sunday, the chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, sharply criticized a Senate provision that he said “would strip the Fed of all its bank regulatory powers” and a House provision to repeal a 30-year-old law “to protect monetary policy from short-term political influence.”

The Federal Reserve’s jurisdiction to regulate banks has come under increasing attack in Congress in recent months, reflecting the anger of voters at the huge taxpayer costs of the bailout of Wall Street.

Mr. Bernanke repeated, as he has many times before, that while some of the measures in response to the financial crisis were “distasteful and unfair,” they were necessary.

The White House and senior Democratic lawmakers in both the House and the Senate have proposed eliminating the Fed’s current role of setting the rules for products like mortgages and credit cards. Instead, officials have proposed a new federal consumer financial protection agency to both set and enforce rules over such products.

The op-ed article was part of Mr. Bernanke’s running campaign to preserve the Fed’s powers and independence as the system of financial regulation is overhauled. In the past, it would have been unusual for a Fed chairman to make such pointed remarks in a public forum, but Mr. Bernanke has been more outspoken than most.

“Now more than ever, America needs a strong, nonpolitical and independent central bank with the tools to promote financial stability and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation,” he said.

And when it comes to monetary policy, he said, “independent does not mean unaccountable.” He said the actions of the Fed were already thoroughly reviewed and needed to be protected from Congressional influence, “which would undermine the confidence the public and the markets have in the Fed.”

A House committee has already completed its first draft of the legislation, while a companion measure has been introduced in the Senate but not approved by a committee.
Title: Re: Bernanke Warns of Risks in removing "god-like" authority of the fed
Post by: Dok on November 28, 2009, 02:36:15 pm
Quote
WASHINGTON — The chairman of the Federal Reserve Board warned bluntly on Saturday that provisions in financial legislation before the House and Senate would “seriously impair” the Fed as it struggled to maintain financial and economic stability.

shouldnt that be the destruction and fall of the Republic?
Title: Re: Bernanke Warns of Risks in removing "god-like" authority of the fed
Post by: Dig on November 28, 2009, 03:15:35 pm
Bernanke going completely psychotic
threatening economic meltdown if the Fed gets audited

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_azimCSzqNnc/SekREyCp8kI/AAAAAAAABDU/l27pTtBlrN8/s400/ben_bernanke.jpg)
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/69611-bernanke-fires-back-at-dodd-paul-bills-to-curtail-the-fed?tmpl=component&print=1&page=
By Michael O'Brien - 11/28/09 10:22 AM ET

Legislation in Congress to audit and remove some power from the Federal Reserve would threaten the central bank's independence, Chairman Ben Bernanke said this weekend.

Bernanke, the chairman of the Fed, said that proposals from Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) contained in separate bills would harm U.S. efforts to stabilize the economy.

"I am concerned...that a number of the legislative proposals being circulated would significantly reduce the capacity of the Federal Reserve to perform its core functions," Bernanke wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Post to be published Sunday.

 
Bernanke referenced Paul's effort to audit the Fed (which Bernanke said would threaten the Fed's traditional political independence), as well as Dodd's financial overhaul bill, which would take a great deal of banking oversight authority out of the central bank's powers.

"These measures are very much out of step with the global consensus on the appropriate role of central banks, and they would seriously impair the prospects for economic and financial stability in the United States," Bernanke said. "The Fed played a major part in arresting the crisis, and we should be seeking to preserve, not degrade, the institution's ability to foster financial stability and to promote economic recovery without inflation."

The chairman chalked up the legislative moves against the Fed to populist anger at the bailouts undertaken by the U.S. in the past year. Indeed, Paul's legislation in the House attracted 313 cosponsors in the midst of other congressional shots at the Fed in recent months.

"Independent does not mean unaccountable. In its making of monetary policy, the Fed is highly transparent, providing detailed minutes of policy meetings and regular testimony before Congress, among other information," Bernanke wrote. "Now more than ever, America needs a strong, nonpolitical and independent central bank with the tools to promote financial stability and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation."

Source:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/69611-bernanke-fires-back-at-dodd-paul-bills-to-curtail-the-fed
Title: Re: Bernanke Warns of Risks in removing "god-like" authority of the fed
Post by: larsonstdoc on November 28, 2009, 03:21:57 pm
Quote
"I am concerned...that a number of the legislative proposals being circulated would significantly reduce the capacity of the Federal Reserve to perform its core functions," Bernanke wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Post to be published Sunday.

 

Translation--He means it would close the blind teller's window at the US Treasury when the Zombie bankers come in and steal their trillions ($23.7 Trillion so far and counting).
Title: Re: Bernanke Warns of Risks in removing "god-like" authority of the fed
Post by: Dig on November 28, 2009, 03:27:49 pm
Fed chairman pens op-ed panning proposed audit
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_azimCSzqNnc/SeWjgbJUviI/AAAAAAAABA4/uIjDRm46Tvs/s400/bernanke%2Bbare%2Bass.jpg)

http://rawstory.com/2009/11/fed-chairman-pens-oped-panning-proposed-audit/
By Raw Story
Saturday, November 28th, 2009 -- 11:00 am

The head of the US central bank said Saturday he was "concerned" by some congressional proposals aimed at regulating the US financial system that infringe upon the powers of the Federal Reserve.

"I am concerned, however, that a number of the legislative proposals being circulated would significantly reduce the capacity of the Federal Reserve to perform its core functions," Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke wrote in an op-ed piece in The Washington Post.

He said some proposals considered by the US Senate as part of attempts to strengthen US government regulation of the financial sector would strip the Fed of all its bank regulatory powers.

He also noted that a House committee had recently voted to repeal a 1978 provision that was intended to protect monetary policy from short-term political influence.

"These measures are very much out of step with the global consensus on the appropriate role of central banks, and they would seriously impair the prospects for economic and financial stability in the United States," Bernanke wrote.

"The Fed played a major part in arresting the crisis, and we should be seeking to preserve, not degrade, the institution's ability to foster financial stability and to promote economic recovery without inflation," he stressed.

"Independent does not mean unaccountable. In its making of monetary policy, the Fed is highly transparent, providing detailed minutes of policy meetings and regular testimony before Congress, among other information," Bernanke argued. "Now more than ever, America needs a strong, nonpolitical and independent central bank with the tools to promote financial stability and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation."

Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), who has sought to audit the nation's largest bank for nearly 27 years, does not believe Bernanke's fears are substantiated.

"There is no reason why the world can't know, eventually, what the Fed is doing," he said recently.

His legislation, House Resolution 1207, cleared a key congressional panel on Nov. 19 by a vote of 43 to 26.

"[It] would require the Government Accountability Office to audit the central bank's interest rate policy, agreements with foreign governments, foreign central banks and the International Monetary Fund," according to MarketWatch. "It also would permit audits of a roughly $800 billion Fed mortgage-backed securities purchase program, which could grow to $1.25 trillion, Paul said."

This video is from Russia Today, broadcast Nov. 23, 2009.
Title: Re: Bernanke Warns of Risks in removing "god-like" authority of the fed
Post by: ES on November 28, 2009, 06:01:50 pm
Fed chairman pens op-ed panning proposed audit
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_azimCSzqNnc/SeWjgbJUviI/AAAAAAAABA4/uIjDRm46Tvs/s400/bernanke%2Bbare%2Bass.jpg)

http://rawstory.com/2009/11/fed-chairman-pens-oped-panning-proposed-audit/
By Raw Story
Saturday, November 28th, 2009 -- 11:00 am

The head of the US central bank said Saturday he was "concerned" by some congressional proposals aimed at regulating the US financial system that infringe upon the powers of the Federal Reserve.

"I am concerned, however, that a number of the legislative proposals being circulated would significantly reduce the capacity of the Federal Reserve to perform its core functions," Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke wrote in an op-ed piece in The Washington Post.

He said some proposals considered by the US Senate as part of attempts to strengthen US government regulation of the financial sector would strip the Fed of all its bank regulatory powers.

He also noted that a House committee had recently voted to repeal a 1978 provision that was intended to protect monetary policy from short-term political influence.

"These measures are very much out of step with the global consensus on the appropriate role of central banks, and they would seriously impair the prospects for economic and financial stability in the United States," Bernanke wrote.

"The Fed played a major part in arresting the crisis, and we should be seeking to preserve, not degrade, the institution's ability to foster financial stability and to promote economic recovery without inflation," he stressed.

"Independent does not mean unaccountable. In its making of monetary policy, the Fed is highly transparent, providing detailed minutes of policy meetings and regular testimony before Congress, among other information," Bernanke argued. "Now more than ever, America needs a strong, nonpolitical and independent central bank with the tools to promote financial stability and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation."

Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), who has sought to audit the nation's largest bank for nearly 27 years, does not believe Bernanke's fears are substantiated.

"There is no reason why the world can't know, eventually, what the Fed is doing," he said recently.

His legislation, House Resolution 1207, cleared a key congressional panel on Nov. 19 by a vote of 43 to 26.

"[It] would require the Government Accountability Office to audit the central bank's interest rate policy, agreements with foreign governments, foreign central banks and the International Monetary Fund," according to MarketWatch. "It also would permit audits of a roughly $800 billion Fed mortgage-backed securities purchase program, which could grow to $1.25 trillion, Paul said."

This video is from Russia Today, broadcast Nov. 23, 2009.

please stop posting homoerotic FED porno.
Title: Bernanke to US: Don't tamper with the Fed
Post by: mp3228 on November 29, 2009, 09:15:03 am
http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/28/news/economy/bernanke_oped/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, just days ahead of his confirmation hearing, is warning Congress that actions limiting the central bank's independence could prove detrimental to the causes of financial reform and economic recovery.

In an op-ed piece to be published in Sunday's Washington Post, Bernanke criticizes two moves aimed at limiting the Fed -- a proposal in the Senate to strip the central bank of its bank regulatory powers and a House Financial Services Committee vote to audit monetary policy deliberations and actions.

"These measures are very much out of step with the global consensus on the appropriate role of central banks, and they would seriously impair the prospects for economic and financial stability in the United States," Bernanke wrote.

Bernanke says the congressional moves are a byproduct of the public frustration over the financial crisis and the government's response, especially the bailout of large banks. (Fed rage boils on Capitol Hill)

"The government's actions to avoid financial collapse last fall -- as distasteful and unfair as some undoubtedly were -- were unfortunately necessary to prevent a global economic catastrophe that could have rivaled the Great Depression in length and severity, with profound consequences for our economy and society," he wrote.

But the Fed chairman says that, while reforms are needed, "we should be seeking to preserve, not degrade, the institution's ability to foster financial stability and to promote economic recovery without inflation."
0:00 /03:18Buffett: Bernanke deserves an A

Among the ideas he supports is development of a special bankruptcy procedure for firms "whose disorderly failure would threaten the integrity of the financial system -- to ensure that ad hoc interventions of the type we were forced to use last fall never happen again."

Bernanke's column comes ahead of a Senate Banking Committee hearing, scheduled for Thursday, considering his nomination for a second term as Fed chairman. President Obama announced the nomination in August.

The last sentence of his commentary is likely to be the theme he and his supporters will stress during the hearing.

"Now more than ever, America needs a strong, nonpolitical and independent central bank with the tools to promote financial stability and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation," Bernanke wrote.
Title: Re: Bernanke to US: Don't tamper with the Fed
Post by: tosso on November 29, 2009, 09:18:16 am
"Now more than ever, America needs a strong, nonpolitical and independent central bank with the tools to promote financial stability and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation," Bernanke wrote.

looooooool


Now more than ever Fed must be audited and bring back their powers to Kongress
Title: Re: Bernanke to US: Don't tamper with the Fed
Post by: RoadRunner on November 29, 2009, 09:21:15 am
Quote
"Now more than ever, America needs a strong, nonpolitical and independent central bank with the tools to promote financial stability and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation," Bernanke

I agree, thats why the Fed has got to go! We need a central bank which is backed by Gold, and has no political ties and cant print any money to "SAVE US FROM FINANCIAL PROBLEMS"

The Federal Reserve needs to die, we need the federal reserve note to fail, we need to seize the central bankers assets and wealth who are responsible for the crisis, redistribute all their gold / silver / companies to "the people" they stole from, they need to go to jail , and then we need to never allow central banks to rise to power again.
Title: Re: Bernanke to US: Don't tamper with the Fed
Post by: mp3228 on November 29, 2009, 09:25:54 am
The Fed should be roadkill by now. Let it die, and rot in hell along with the IMF.

Jail Bernake.
Title: Re: Bernanke to US: Don't tamper with the Fed
Post by: jofortruth on November 29, 2009, 09:39:26 am
Quote
"These measures are very much out of step with the global consensus on the appropriate role of central banks,


Is this like them lying that there was a "global consensus" on global warming?    

(When you hear them say "CONSENSUS", it's just another buzz word and a lie. I'm tired of hearing it used because those using it have lost all credibility.)
 

These guys are the biggest and now the lamest liars there ever was. You can take your "FAKE CONSENSUS" and shove it.

THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE ARE AGAINST THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND THE FAKE GLOBAL WARMING!

What a bunch of idiots these people are to think that educated people would accept this garbage!  ::)


IF THE SENATE REAFFIRMS BERNANKE FOR ANOTHER TERM AS FED CHAIRMAN, THEY SHOULD ALL BE FIRED FOR BEING STUPID! (Of course most of the Senators should lose their jobs as it stands presently for not have a lick of integrity, backbone or loyalty to their own country) >:(
Title: Re: F**k you Bernanke!
Post by: Dig on November 29, 2009, 11:44:39 am
Shine a Light on the Fed’s Black Box: Spitzer on HR 1207
http://www.infowars.com/shine-a-light-on-the-feds-black-box-spitzer-on-hr-1207/
Infowars
November 27, 2009




“Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders. The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States” — Sen. Barry Goldwater (Rep. AR)

“This [Federal Reserve Act] establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Wilson} signs this bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized....the worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill." — Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. , 1913

"From now on, depressions will be scientifically created." — Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh Sr. , 1913

"The financial system has been turned over to the Federal Reserve Board. That Board as ministers the finance system by authority of a purely profiteering group. The system is Private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money" -- Charles A. Lindbergh Sr., 1923


“The Federal Reserve bank buys government bonds without one penny…” — Congressman Wright Patman, Congressional Record, Sept 30, 1941


“We have, in this country, one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board. This evil institution has impoverished the people of the United States and has practically bankrupted our government. It has done this through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it”. — Congressman Louis T. McFadden in 1932 (Rep. Pa)

“The Federal Reserve banks are one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who does not know that this nation is run by the International bankers.” — Congressman Louis T. McFadden (Rep. Pa)

“Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are the United States government’s institutions. They are not government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign swindlers” — Congressional Record 12595-12603 — Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency (12 years) June 10, 1932

“I have never seen more Senators express discontent with their jobs….I think the major cause is that, deep down in our hearts, we have been accomplices in doing something terrible and unforgivable to our wonderful country. Deep down in our heart, we know that we have given our children a legacy of bankruptcy. We have defrauded our country to get ourselves elected.” — John Danforth (R-Mo)

“These 12 corporations together cover the whole country and monopolize and use for private gain every dollar of the public currency…” — Mr. Crozier of Cincinnati, before Senate Banking and Currency Committee – 1913

“The [Federal Reserve Act] as it stands seems to me to open the way to a vast inflation of the currency… I do not like to think that any law can be passed that will make it possible to submerge the gold standard in a flood of irredeemable paper currency.” — Henry Cabot Lodge Sr., 1913
Title: Re: F**k you Bernanke!
Post by: Dig on November 29, 2009, 11:45:46 am
Audit the Fed:
Bernanke and the Bankers Are Running Scared

(http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p182/Brocke1964/NWO_OnTheRun_1.jpg)
http://www.infowars.com/audit-the-fed-bernanke-and-the-bankers-are-running-scared/
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
November 28, 2009

Ben Bernanke, Federal Reserve mob boss, is running scared. He is deathly afraid an audit of his criminal organization.

“These measures are very much out of step with the global consensus on the appropriate role of central banks, and they would seriously impair the prospects for economic and financial stability in the United States,” Bernanke wrote in the CIA’s favorite newspaper, The Washington Post.

Maybe Bernanke is worried he will be obliged to wear an orange jumpsuit in the wake of an audit.

Bernanke penned his tribute to central banking and globalism prior to his scheduled testimony before a Senate panel on his renomination to serve a second four-year term as Fed mob boss.

Bankster tool Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, tried to derail an effort to audit the Fed but failed. A proposal to audit the Fed’s monetary policy deliberations won a committee vote recently over Frank’s objections.

In his Mockingbird media editorial, Bernanke “conceded the Fed had missed some of the riskiest behavior in the lead up to the crisis. But he said the Fed had helped avoid an even more damaging economic meltdown and has stepped up its policing of the financial system.”

In fact, the Fed was specifically designed to create financial crises. It was all plotted in 1910 when minions of J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, the Rothschilds and Warburgs met on Jekyll Island off the coast of Georgia. In 1913, the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank was created as a direct result of that secret meeting. Said Congressman Charles Lindbergh on the midnight passage of the Federal Reserve Act: “From now on, depressions will be scientifically created.”

In order to scientifically create an economic depression, the Fed prompted irresponsible speculation by expanding the money supply sixty-two percent between 1923 and 1929. The so-called Great Depression followed. This depression “was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence,” declared Congressman Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking Committee. “The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as rulers of us all.”

In March of 1929, Paul Warburg issued a tip that the scientifically created crash was coming. Before it did, John D. Rockefeller, Bernard Baruch, Joseph P. Kennedy, and other banksters got out of the market.

A few years later, the banksters and their minions met in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, and plotted the creation of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The purpose of these two criminal organizations was to set-up a global Federal Reserve system and wage economic warfare on billions of people. The weapon they used was debt and the loss of sovereignty that follows.


In 1971, then president Nixon fit one of the last pieces into the puzzle — he signed an executive order declaring that the United States no longer had to redeem its paper dollars for gold. It was a great day for the banksters and the global elite. The gold standard ensured predictability and regularity in the economy and the banksters wanted to put an end to that. For the bankers, order and control is realized out of chaos and misery.

Fast-forward to the present day. Bernanke’s Fed has meticulously sabotaged the economy in order to create a crisis in classic Hegelian fashion. The corporate media tells us the crisis is the result of ineptitude and mismanagement at the Federal Reserve. Au contraire. Like the Great Depression, the even Greater Depression now on the horizon was scientifically created.

The Fed is the primary instrument the bankers are now using to destroy the middle class, hand over all public assets and resources to them, implement a crushing austerity, usher in a new era of global corporatist feudalism and build a sprawling planet-wide slave plantation based on China’s totalitarian model.

It is the ultimate dream of the banking cartel. It will be used as the foundation to build world government. Destroying the dollar as the world’s reserve currency is only the beginning.

Bernanke knows Ron Paul and the audit the Fed movement are extremely dangerous. That’s why he is pushing this facile “oops” theory. In order to fix things, the Fed will use its “knowledge of complex financial institutions” in order to supervise them, he writes in his Mockingbird editorial. Allowing audits of Federal Reserve monetary policy would increase the perceived influence of Congress on interest rate decisions, he says.

No, it would lay bare the criminality of the Federal Reserve. Maybe Bernanke is worried he will be obliged to wear an orange jumpsuit in the wake of an audit.

As for Congress, Bernanke needs to read Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. Congress shall have exclusive power to “coin Money, regulate the Value thereof,” not a criminal cartel of monopoly men who dream of a prison planet.
Title: Re: F**k you Bernanke!
Post by: larsonstdoc on November 29, 2009, 11:56:44 am
Chicago Traders Cheer Ron Paul On As He Tears Into Bernanke
(http://img.youtube.com/vi/R1eMwmriO2E/default.jpg)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8GtXKP6bmQ


  They took this clip off youtube.  I like Rick Santelli.  You know he would like to say more but he can't.  He always tears into Steve LIESman.
Title: Re: F**k you Bernanke!
Post by: Dig on November 29, 2009, 12:05:50 pm
Ron Paul Schools Ben Bernanke Yet Again 2-27-08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gldETRlhiXk

Bernanke Testimony, Part 26 (Rep. Kucinich Questioning, Round 2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MaY2hhXQ30

Ron Paul & Ben Bernanke: testimony to U.S. House
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTBrJNipytg

RON PAUL v. FED CHAIR BERNANKE: Free Market Smackdown!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZwEbfIvS8Y&feature=fvw

Ron Paul Lectures Bernanke: U.S. Moving Towards Fascism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbi-0Tg1b_g&feature=related

Congressman Ron Paul Schools Bernanke on the Bailout Plan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv6rQ0U01Yc&feature=related

CNBC: Ron Paul's question makes Ben Bernake's voice quiver
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pEiLHnjAiw&feature=related


MILLIONS OF PEOPLE HAVE SEEN THESE VIDEOS!

HIS THREATS THAT HE WILL BUST THE ECONOMY IF WE KEEP REQUESTING AN AUDIT IS EXTORTION AND TERRORISM!
Title: Re: F**k you Bernanke!
Post by: Overcast on November 30, 2009, 10:16:54 am
“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”

Give them all their money back and break their power. It's the ONLY thing they have over us
Title: Senator Moves to Hold Up Bernanke Confirmation
Post by: larsonstdoc on December 03, 2009, 12:25:26 am
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/business/03fed.html?_r=1                                                                          Senator Moves to Hold Up Bernanke Confirmation

By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
Published: December 2, 2009
WASHINGTON — Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont said on Wednesday that he would try to block the Senate from confirming Ben S. Bernanke to a second term as chairman of the Federal Reserve.


 
Brendan Hoffman/Associated Press
Senator Bernard Sanders is expected to hold up the nomination of Ben S. Bernanke for a second term as chairman of the Federal Reserve.


The move is unlikely to derail Mr. Bernanke’s reappointment, but it could slow the confirmation process and give the Fed’s critics additional opportunity to press their case. As a practical matter, it means Senate Democratic leaders will have to line up 60 votes in favor of Mr. Bernanke rather than a simple majority at a time when the Federal Reserve is under increasing populist attacks from lawmakers on both the right and the left.

Mr. Bernanke will testify on Thursday at his confirmation hearing before the Senate banking committee. He is expected to face criticism for not doing more to prevent the financial crisis, and calls by some lawmakers for a sharply reduced regulatory role in the future.

Mr. Sanders, an independent, is not a member of the Senate banking committee, but he has frequently accused the Federal Reserve of bailing out Wall Street firms and the banking industry at the expense of ordinary citizens.

“In this country, there is profound disgust at what happened on Wall Street,” Mr. Sanders said in an interview. “People want a new direction and people are asking, where was the Fed? How did the Fed allow this to happen, when one of their mandates is to oversee the safety and soundness of the banking system?”

Mr. Sanders said he would place a hold on Mr. Bernanke’s nomination when it reached the Senate floor. Under Senate rules, lawmakers would need 60 votes to override Mr. Sanders and proceed with a vote.

Though the Senate has been paralyzed by similar blocking tactics on countless other issues, Mr. Bernanke probably has enough support in both parties to clear the 60-vote hurdle.

The Fed chairman was appointed by President George W. Bush and took over the central bank in February 2006. Despite his Republican ties, Mr. Bernanke forged a close working relationship with President Obama and his top economic advisers during the financial crisis.

Mr. Bernanke’s four-year term as Fed chairman ends on Jan. 31, 2010. If he were not reconfirmed by then, he could continue to serve in an acting role until he was confirmed or someone else was confirmed to succeed him. His supporters include much of the Senate’s Democratic leadership, though some senior Democrats have been grudging.

Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut and chairman of the banking committee, has said Mr. Bernanke was “probably” the best person to lead the Fed because he responded valiantly to the financial crisis when it began two years ago.

But Mr. Dodd has also proposed stripping the Federal Reserve of virtually all its powers as a banking regulator, and consolidating all the federal government’s bank regulatory efforts in a new agency. In an Op-Ed article last Sunday in The Washington Post, Mr. Bernanke sharply criticized Mr. Dodd’s proposal.

Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, the top Republican on the Senate banking committee, has also been sharply critical of the Federal Reserve but has not yet said how he will vote on Mr. Bernanke’s nomination.

Mr. Sanders, one of the Senate’s most left-leaning lawmakers, had already said he would vote against Mr. Bernanke’s appointment. He has also sponsored a bill that would allow Congress to “audit” all of the Federal Reserve’s activities, including its core mission of steering the economy by setting interest rates.

Mr. Sanders’s bill is identical to one championed by Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, which Mr. Bernanke and other top Fed officials have adamantly opposed on the grounds that it would undermine the central bank’s independence.

But in a surprising setback to the Fed, the House Financial Services Committee voted last month to approve Mr. Paul’s bill as an amendment to a broader bill on financial regulation.



Title: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: larsonstdoc on December 03, 2009, 11:15:51 am
  Hammers Bernanke this morning at his reconfirmation hearing.

  We need more Senators like Bunning

  He calls the Federal Reserve the Creature from Jekyll Island.

  His remarks should be on youtube soon.

  
Title: Re: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: larsonstdoc on December 03, 2009, 05:01:43 pm
This is the transcript from this morning.  Sen. Jim Bunning talking to Helicopter Ben. They left out the Jeckyll Island reference.  THE RAT BASARD DEMOCRATS AND A FEW REPUBLICANS ARE GOING TO GIVE THIS NWO SCUM 4 MORE YEARS AS FED CHIEF!!!!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/03/senator-to-fed-chair-bern_n_378673.html

Statement of Senator Jim Bunning as Prepared for Delivery Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee Hearing on the Nomination of Ben Bernanke December 3, 2009

Four years ago when you came before the Senate for confirmation to be Chairman of the Federal Reserve, I was the only Senator to vote against you. In fact, I was the only Senator to even raise serious concerns about you. I opposed you because I knew you would continue the legacy of Alan Greenspan, and I was right. But I did not know how right I would be and could not begin to imagine how wrong you would be in the following four years.

The Greenspan legacy on monetary policy was breaking from the Taylor Rule to provide easy money, and thus inflate bubbles. Not only did you continue that policy when you took control of the Fed, but you supported every Greenspan rate decision when you were on the Fed earlier this decade. Sometimes you even wanted to go further and provide even more easy money than Chairman Greenspan. As recently as a letter you sent me two weeks ago, you still refuse to admit Fed actions played any role in inflating the housing bubble despite overwhelming evidence and the consensus of economists to the contrary. And in your efforts to keep filling the punch bowl, you cranked up the printing press to buy mortgage securities, Treasury securities, commercial paper, and other assets from Wall Street. Those purchases, by the way, led to some nice profits for the Wall Street banks and dealers who sold them to you, and the G.S.E. purchases seem to be illegal since the Federal Reserve Act only allows the purchase of securities backed by the government.

On consumer protection, the Greenspan policy was don't do it. You went along with his policy before you were Chairman, and continued it after you were promoted. The most glaring example is it took you two years to finally regulate subprime mortgages after Chairman Greenspan did nothing for 12 years.Even then, you only acted after pressure from Congress and after it was clear subprime mortgages were at the heart of the economic meltdown. On other consumer protection issues you only acted as the time approached for your re-nomination to be Fed Chairman.

Alan Greenspan refused to look for bubbles or try to do anything other than create them. Likewise, it is clear from your statements over the last four years that you failed to spot the housing bubble despite many warnings.

Chairman Greenspan's attitude toward regulating banks was much like his attitude toward consumer protection. Instead of close supervision of the biggest and most dangerous banks, he ignored the growing balance sheets and increasing risk. You did no better. In fact, under your watch every one of the major banks failed or would have failed if you did not bail them out.

On derivatives, Chairman Greenspan and other Clinton Administration officials attacked Brooksley Born when she dared to raise concerns about the growing risks. They succeeded in changing the law to prevent her or anyone else from effectively regulating derivatives. After taking over the Fed, you did not see any need for more substantial regulation of derivatives until it was clear that we were headed to a financial meltdown thanks in part to those products.

The Greenspan policy on transparency was talk a lot, use plenty of numbers, but say nothing. Things were so bad one TV network even tried to guess his thoughts by looking at the briefcase he carried to work. You promised Congress more transparency when you came to the job, and you promised us more transparency when you came begging for TARP. To be fair, you have published some more information than before, but those efforts are inadequate and you still refuse to provide details on the Fed's bailouts last year and on all the toxic waste you have bought.

And Chairman Greenspan sold the Fed's independence to Wall Street through the so-called "Greenspan Put". Whenever Wall Street needed a boost, Alan was there. But you went far beyond that when you bowed to the political pressures of the Bush and Obama administrations and turned the Fed into an arm of the Treasury. Under your watch, the Bernanke Put became a bailout for all large financial institutions, including many foreign banks. And you put the printing presses into overdrive to fund the government's spending and hand out cheap money to your masters on Wall Street, which they use to rake in record profits while ordinary Americans and small businesses can't even get loans for their everyday needs.

Now, I want to read you a quote: "I believe that the tools available to the banking agencies, including the ability to require adequate capital and an effective bank receivership process are sufficient to allow the agencies to minimize the systemic risks associated with large banks. Moreover, the agencies have made clear that no bank is too-big-too-fail, so that bank management, shareholders, and un-insured debt holders understand that they will not escape the consequences of excessive risk-taking. In short, although vigilance is necessary, I believe the systemic risk inherent in the banking system is well-managed and well-controlled."

That should sound familiar, since it was part of your response to a question I asked about the systemic risk of large financial institutions at your last confirmation hearing. I'm going to ask that the full question and answer be included in today's hearing record.

Now, if that statement was true and you had acted according to it, I might be supporting your nomination today. But since then, you have decided that just about every large bank, investment bank, insurance company, and even some industrial companies are too big to fail. Rather than making management, shareholders, and debt holders feel the consequences of their risk-taking, you bailed them out. In short, you are the definition of moral hazard.

Instead of taking that money and lending to consumers and cleaning up their balance sheets, the banks started to pocket record profits and pay out billions of dollars in bonuses. Because you bowed to pressure from the banks and refused to resolve them or force them to clean up their balance sheets and clean out the management, you have created zombie banks that are only enriching their traders and executives. You are repeating the mistakes of Japan in the 1990s on a much larger scale, while sowing the seeds for the next bubble. In the same letter where you refused to admit any responsibility for inflating the housing bubble, you also admitted that you do not have an exit strategy for all the money you have printed and securities you have bought. That sounds to me like you intend to keep propping up the banks for as long as they want.

Even if all that were not true, the A.I.G. bailout alone is reason enough to send you back to Princeton. First you told us A.I.G. and its creditors had to be bailed out because they posed a systemic risk, largely because of the credit default swaps portfolio. Those credit default swaps, by the way, are over the counter derivatives that the Fed did not want regulated. Well, according to the TARP Inspector General, it turns out the Fed was not concerned about the financial condition of the credit default swaps partners when you decided to pay them off at par. In fact, the Inspector General makes it clear that no serious efforts were made to get the partners to take haircuts, and one bank's offer to take a haircut was declined. I can only think of two possible reasons you would not make then-New York Fed President Geithner try to save the taxpayers some money by seriously negotiating or at least take up U.B.S. on their offer of a haircut. Sadly, those two reasons are incompetence or a desire to secretly funnel more money to a few select firms, most notably Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, and a handful of large European banks. I also cannot understand why you did not seek European government contributions to this bailout of their banking system.

From monetary policy to regulation, consumer protection, transparency, and independence, your time as Fed Chairman has been a failure. You stated time and again during the housing bubble that there was no bubble. After the bubble burst, you repeatedly claimed the fallout would be small. And you clearly did not spot the systemic risks that you claim the Fed was supposed to be looking out for. Where I come from we punish failure, not reward it. That is certainly the way it was when I played baseball, and the way it is all across America. Judging by the current Treasury Secretary, some may think Washington does reward failure, but that should not be the case. I will do everything I can to stop your nomination and drag out the process as long as possible. We must put an end to your and the Fed's failures, and there is no better time than now.
Title: Re: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: AlphaM on December 03, 2009, 08:55:07 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVwr-Nf0slQ
Title: Re: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: larsonstdoc on December 04, 2009, 12:08:37 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVwr-Nf0slQ


  The Jeckyll Island Quote at 11:50.  And the rat bastards in the room snicker.
Title: Re: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: 2Revolutions on December 04, 2009, 09:31:12 am
Damning speech. Look forward to watching the video later. 
Title: Re: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: jofortruth on December 04, 2009, 10:33:40 am
This is great! Bennie is getting his butt burned and deservedly so!
Title: Re: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: gEEk squad on December 04, 2009, 10:53:33 am
Looks like Bunning can still throw fastballs.

He's probably so candid because he is retiring and no running for re-election in 2010.
Title: Re: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: Mike Philbin on December 04, 2009, 12:04:57 pm
even more damning is Mr Dodd's summary.

wow!

er, "If we didn't pay off, they'd say YOU'RE BANKRUPT!"??




Title: Re: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: v on December 04, 2009, 02:41:29 pm
If he doesn't get reappointed, they'll replace him with another NWO drone. 
Title: Re: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: Omni1 on December 04, 2009, 03:10:04 pm
At 7:44-50, you can see a grin on Bernanke's face...

I want to strangle this man.
Title: Re: Sen Jim Bunning Rips Into Bernanke
Post by: jofortruth on December 04, 2009, 03:10:55 pm
At 7:50, you can see a grin on Bernanke's face...

That's the satanic influence in the little boy!  ::)
Title: Gerald Celente Bernanke is destroying the US economy
Post by: Matt Hatter on December 08, 2009, 11:02:24 pm
Again at his best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGi1r87-Apg

Celente just said Gold was $2112.... i think he ment 1212 or something.. OOPS lol

Maybe this interview takes place in March 2010 lol
Title: Re: Gerald Celente Bernanke is destroying the US economy
Post by: larsonstdoc on December 09, 2009, 01:10:16 am


  Bernanke is destroying the economy by design.
Title: Re: Gerald Celente Bernanke is destroying the US economy
Post by: Monkeypox on December 09, 2009, 03:01:05 am

  Bernanke is destroying the economy by design.

 :o  The Hell you say!
Title: Re: Gerald Celente Bernanke is destroying the US economy
Post by: chris jones on December 09, 2009, 05:23:40 am

  Bernanke is destroying the economy by design.

Hi L.

You hit on it, I like those one liners.
Title: Ignorance =bliss - Bernanke Who?
Post by: Letsbereal on December 10, 2009, 09:43:20 am
Bernanke Who?
9 December 2009
, by Pedro da Costa (Reuters - MacroScope)
http://blogs.reuters.com/macroscope/2009/12/09/bernanke-who/

When it comes to investing in a turbulent market, is ignorance bliss? According to a new survey by IBM, around half of U.S. investors have never heard of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.

This, despite the fact that 67 percent say the global financial crisis has prompted them to pay greater attention to financial news.

More than one-third could not identify the current unemployment rate. In case you missed it, the jobless rate eased to 10 percent in November after hitting a 26-1/2-year high of 10.2 percent in October.

(http://s3files.core77.com/blog/images/Ben-Bernanke-Money--35914.jpg)

Ignorance =bliss? Bernanke Who? http://tinyurl.com/yl98ubz
Title: Re: Ignorance =bliss - Bernanke Who?
Post by: EvadingGrid on December 10, 2009, 10:08:11 am
 ;D
Title: Peter Schiff My 7 years old son would be much Better FED Chairman than Bernanke
Post by: Theorist on January 22, 2010, 06:17:52 pm

"I do not like Ben Bernanke because he was too easy , The congress does not like him because he was not easy enough " says Peter Schiff ..."The reason why the greedy bankers were able to be greedy because Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke were too easy , they made money so cheap " .."The next crisis is going to be even greater .." "The government have poisoned the market with guaranteed bank accounts , we need more regulations to undo the effects of the regulations that already exist "

http://peterschiffchannel.blogspot.com/2010/01/schiff-better-fed-chairman-than-ben.html (http://peterschiffchannel.blogspot.com/2010/01/schiff-better-fed-chairman-than-ben.html)
Title: Re: Peter Schiff My 7 years old son would be much Better FED Chairman than Bern
Post by: larsonstdoc on January 22, 2010, 07:04:47 pm


  Get rid of Ben!

  After they audit the Fed, they need to
 
       AUDIT GOLDMAN SACHS
Title: Re: Peter Schiff My 7 years old son would be much Better FED Chairman than Bern
Post by: Theorist on January 22, 2010, 07:27:18 pm

  Get rid of Ben!

  After they audit the Fed, they need to
 
       AUDIT GOLDMAN SACHS
Dr. Ron Paul wants to audit the CIA too ( because of their false flag operations and their involvement in the drug trafficking ) I think they are even more dangerous than Goldman Sachs at this point...

http://ronpaul1.blogspot.com/2010/01/ron-paul-cia-and-fed-should-be-ousted.html
Title: ** Bernanke Reconfirmed for another Term by Senate! Bought or just stupid?
Post by: jofortruth on January 28, 2010, 08:29:35 pm
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704878904575031020105055604.html?mod=djemalertNEWS
http://www.infowars.com/despite-role-in-aig-bailout-senate-votes-to-reappoint-bernanke/

Did your Senator vote for Helicopter Ben? If so, he must be voted out of the Senate, if up for reelection. If not up for reelection this time, REMEMBER HIS/HER NAMES for a future election. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE! (70-30)
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/01/28/tally-of-senate-votes-on-bernanke/


Senators up for reelection: (This is why Boxer voted "NO" IMO, so boot her out of the Senate anyway for her support of the Bankers over the people)
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showtopic=7897
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showtopic=7648
Title: Re: ** Bernanke Reconfirmed for another Term by Senate! Bought or just stupid?
Post by: UKStewart82 on January 28, 2010, 08:39:07 pm
One of my Senators voted yes, the other no.  The one that voted yes IS THE FREAKING MINORITY LEADER MITCH McCONNELL!  Traitor!  The other senator, Bunning, who isn't even gonna run again because Rand Paul woulda kicked his butt, voted no.  How convenient.
Title: Re: ** Bernanke Reconfirmed for another Term by Senate! Bought or just stupid?
Post by: jofortruth on January 28, 2010, 08:42:16 pm
One of my Senators voted yes, the other no.  The one that voted yes IS THE FREAKING MINORITY LEADER MITCH McCONNELL!  Traitor!  The other senator, Bunning, who isn't even gonna run again because Rand Paul woulda kicked his butt, voted no.  How convenient.


Mitch McConnell needs to be kicked out then. No more chances! VOTE HIM OUT OF OFFICE! This is the last straw. Whether they are just stupid or bought, these are both good reasons for them to lose their jobs just like the people in this country!
Title: Re: ** Bernanke Reconfirmed for another Term by Senate! Bought or just stupid?
Post by: larsonstdoc on January 28, 2010, 09:36:38 pm


This is another outrage.  Bernanke will keep shoveling money to the Zionist bankers and Queen Elizabeth and the scum Rothschilds.  THIS COUNTRY IS DONE. 

   
Title: Re: ** Bernanke Reconfirmed for another Term by Senate! Bought or just stupid?
Post by: Kakumei on January 29, 2010, 12:06:56 am
Both of my state's senators did. F em. They won't have my vote in the upcoming election season.
Title: The U.S. Senate votes to give Ben Bernanke a second term as Chair of the Fed
Post by: ekimdrachir on January 31, 2010, 11:27:20 pm
The U.S. Senate votes to give Ben Bernanke a second term as Chair of the Federal Reserve.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/President_Barack_Obama_meets_with_Federal_Reserve_Chairman_Ben_Bernanke_4-10-09.jpg)

"So you keep printing the money and i'll keep reading the teleprompter, ok? ;)"
Title: Re: The U.S. Senate votes to give Ben Bernanke a second term as Chair of the Fed
Post by: usefulidiot,uselesseater on February 01, 2010, 01:37:54 am
(http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/kk200/muqtadatostada/bern2.jpg?t=1265008908)
 ;D
Title: Ken Lewis: If I’m Going Down, Paulson and Bernanke Are Coming Down With Me
Post by: TheHouseMan on February 06, 2010, 03:40:17 pm
Infowars Editor's Note: Mr. Lewis may experience a heart attack or one of those overnight cases of terminal cancer.

http://www.infowars.com/ken-lewis-if-i%E2%80%99m-going-down-hank-paulson-and-ben-bernanke-are-coming-down-with-me/

No WAY is Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis going to be the only one to answer for the acquisition of crappy Merrill Lynch and its crappy bonuses, “a person close to Lewis’s defense team” (who may or may not be Ken Lewis himself) tells Charlie Gasparino today on the Daily Beast. NO WAY will he be a scapegoat, alone, for the people who twisted his arm to go through with the Merrill deal by telling him he would be fired if he didn’t. “If this thing goes to trial you can expect both Paulson and Bernanke to be on the witness list.” If he’s going down, he’s bringing them down, too. Bringing them down to Chinatown. Order in the court!
Title: Re: Ken Lewis: If I’m Going Down, Paulson and Bernanke Are Coming Down With Me
Post by: larsonstdoc on February 06, 2010, 03:47:30 pm



  Lock them all up!!
Title: Re: Ken Lewis: If I’m Going Down, Paulson and Bernanke Are Coming Down With Me
Post by: jofortruth on February 06, 2010, 04:17:06 pm
The Banker boyz are fractured, and scared to death of this happening! They know they are toast if ONE starts squealing. I hope they do! It is beyond time to bring these thugs to justice!

Prosecutors, are you listening? It's time to be men and do your job instead of abiding by your secretive internal oaths of protecting each other (the good ole boyz motto that involves no integrity, but only turning a blind eye).





Title: VIDEO: Colts' Daniel Muir on Ben Bernanke: "He Looks Like a Crook" (CNBC)
Post by: SpeakUpFightBack on February 08, 2010, 03:41:00 pm
During the hoopla of Super Bowl media week, Colts' Daniel Muir was shown a picture of 'Helicopter' Ben Bernanke and was asked to identify him. Muir responded by saying, "He looks like a crook. He just got that look about him like he's out to take everything you own."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7EL3TN5oPc
Title: Bernanke:"Now that we gave illuminazis $28.3 T, you all are broke! F You!"
Post by: Nailer on February 26, 2010, 03:48:09 pm
The SH#T IS GOING TO HIT THE FAN VERY SOON!!!  Warning  the leaders that the fed reserve can't print any more money for debt!!!




Originally published 05:00 a.m., February 25, 2010, updated 04:00 p.m., February 25, 2010

Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt


Patrice Hill


With uncharacteristic bluntness, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke warned Congress on Wednesday that the United States could soon face a debt crisis like the one in Greece, and declared that the central bank will not help legislators by printing money to pay for the ballooning federal debt.

Recent events in Europe, where Greece and other nations with large, unsustainable deficits like the United States are having increasing trouble selling their debt to investors, show that the U.S. is vulnerable to a sudden reversal of fortunes that would force taxpayers to pay higher interest rates on the debt, Mr. Bernanke said.

"It's not something that is 10 years away. It affects the markets currently," he told the House Financial Services Committee. "It is possible that bond markets will become worried about the sustainability [of yearly deficits over $1 trillion], and we may find ourselves facing higher interest rates even today."

It was some of the toughest rhetoric to date about the nation's fiscal and budgetary woes from the Fed chief, who faces a second round of questioning Thursday before a Senate panel.

RELATED STORY: Fed to look at high-risk contracts on Greek debt

Mr. Bernanke for the first time addressed concerns that the impasse in Congress over tough spending cuts and tax increases needed to bring down deficits will eventually force the Fed to accommodate deficits by printing money and buying Treasury bonds — effectively financing the deficit on behalf of Congress and spurring inflation in the process.

Some economists at the International Monetary Fund and elsewhere have advocated this approach, suggesting running moderate inflation rates of 4 percent to 6 percent as a partial solution to the U.S. debt problem. But the move runs the risk of damaging the dollar's reputation and spawning much higher inflation that would be debilitating to the U.S. economy and living standards.

Rep. Brad Sherman, California Democrat, asked Mr. Bernanke directly whether the Fed would consider such a strategy, especially since IMF officials endorsed it.

"We're not going to monetize the debt," Mr. Bernanke declared flatly, stressing that Congress needs to start making plans to bring down the deficit to avoid such a dangerous dilemma for the Fed.

"It is very, very important for Congress and administration to come to some kind of program, some kind of plan that will credibly show how the United States government is going to bring itself back to a sustainable position."

Separately, Mr. Bernanke's predecessor, Alan Greenspan, told Bloomberg News that "fiscal affairs are threatening the outlook" for recovery from recession as Congress and the White House have been unable for years to make tough decisions to raise taxes or cut spending.

He said he is so concerned about a sudden sharp increase in interest rates that every day he checks the interest rate on 10-year Treasury notes and 30-year Treasury bonds, calling them the "critical Achilles' heel" of the economy.

Despite his gloomy testimony, Mr. Bernanke dismissed concerns that the United States will lose its gold-plated AAA credit rating any time soon. Moody's Investors Service recently said that the U.S. rating would come "under pressure" at some point if Congress does not rein in the budget deficit.

The Fed chairman said repeatedly that he understands how difficult it will be for Congress to tame deficits by curbing spending in popular programs like Social Security, Medicare and defense, while also considering tax hikes. But he said there would be an immediate payoff: lower interest rates.

"It would be very helpful, even to the current recovery, to markets' confidence, if there were a sustainable, credible plan for a fiscal exit," he said.

A plan that eases market worries by laying out how Congress will address the long-term insolvency of Social Security, Medicare and other entitlement programs also would give Congress more room to take the actions needed today to address the jobs crisis, Mr. Bernanke added.

"There could be a bonus there," he said. "To the extent that we can achieve credible plans to reduce medium- to long-term deficits, we'll actually have more flexibility in the short term if we want to take other kinds of actions."

Separately, the debate continued over whether Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two mortgage financing giants, should be included in the federal budget books now that the Obama administration has taken the limits off aid the Treasury Department is prepared to give the companies to keep them solvent.

Republicans, including Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the top Republican on the banking committee, have argued that the government is now effectively guaranteeing Fannie and Freddie's nearly $5 trillion of mortgage-backed securities and other debt, so their revenues and liabilities should be included in the federal budget as obligations of the government. Taking this step would greatly bloat the federal balance sheet.

Mr. Bachus said he worries that keeping Fannie and Freddie's status off the federal books is "the same sort of financial shell game that has brought governments like Greece to a crisis point."

But Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, who also testified on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, said the administration opposes including the quasi-government entities in the budget, although it lifted the limits on aid to Fannie and Freddie with the intent of assuring financial markets that the U.S. government stands behind their obligations.

"We do not think it is necessary to consolidate the full obligations of Fannie and Freddie onto the nation's budget. But we do think it's very important … that we make it clear to investors around the world that we will make sure that we will take the actions necessary" to keep the two entities stable, he told the House Budget Committee.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/25/bernanke-delivers-warning-on-us-debt/
Title: Re: Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt
Post by: foreverfree on February 26, 2010, 03:59:35 pm
sounds like the board is set up, the pieces have been moved into position, and the king has no place to turn.  checkma...
Title: Re: Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt
Post by: Nailer on February 26, 2010, 04:06:47 pm
sounds like the board is set up, the pieces have been moved into position, and the king has no place to turn.  checkma...

with Ron pauls speech on the GOV executing US Citizens and then   " Al Qaeda affiliate says his group was armed and assisted by U.S., Britain and Israel " ,   it looks like the GOV may be getting  scared ..
Title: Re: Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt
Post by: larsonstdoc on February 26, 2010, 04:08:11 pm



  No more printing of money =  inflationary depression  (Bob Chapman predicted this today--not good).
Title: Re: Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt
Post by: phosphene on February 26, 2010, 04:37:59 pm
PERFECT! nobody needs the fed.

The treasury can issue debt-free us notes, instead of borrowing federal reserve notes from the fed.
Title: Re: Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt
Post by: Nailer on February 26, 2010, 05:12:11 pm
yes , but did you catch that one comment:


He expects a democratic congress to show fiscal responsibility?!   hahahahaha  ( cough cough , gasp , cough ) hahahaha
Title: Re: Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt
Post by: larsonstdoc on February 26, 2010, 05:18:23 pm
yes , but did you catch that one comment:


He expects a democratic congress to show fiscal responsibility?!   hahahahaha  ( cough cough , gasp , cough ) hahahaha


  He is out of touch with reality.  There are only a few like Ron Paul that actually know what is going on.
Title: Re: Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt
Post by: foreverfree on February 26, 2010, 05:25:48 pm


  No more printing of money =  inflationary depression  (Bob Chapman predicted this today--not good).

could this be the way Lindsay Williams warned that the Dollar would lose 50% of it's buying power by years end??
Title: Re: Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt
Post by: Kilika on February 26, 2010, 05:48:28 pm
Quote
With uncharacteristic bluntness, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke warned Congress on Wednesday that the United States could soon face a debt crisis like the one in Greece, and declared that the central bank will not help legislators by printing money to pay for the ballooning federal debt.

And THAT is where things get sticky constitutionally. This is where the private company aspect of the Federal Reserve kicks in. Basically Bernake's handlers just said we won't do any more business with you, such as loaning money via printing currency till you pay down your debts to the Fed banking system. But what prevents the US from simply printing cash? Why are they having to go through the Federal Reserve Bank? Does the Fed own the printing presses?
Title: Re: Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt
Post by: Joseon on February 26, 2010, 06:15:14 pm
Bernanke was the same guy that said the economy was just doing fine in 2007? even when Bear Stearns collapsed. That Bernanke said that we were on recovering from the recession and good times were around the corner. This guy makes me sick.
Title: Bernanke:"Now that we gave illuminazis $28.3 T, you all are broke! F You!"
Post by: Dig on February 26, 2010, 06:48:01 pm
PERFECT! nobody needs the fed.

The treasury can issue debt-free us notes, instead of borrowing federal reserve notes from the fed.

EXACTLY!
Title: Re: Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt
Post by: ES on February 26, 2010, 07:44:45 pm
And THAT is where things get sticky constitutionally. This is where the private company aspect of the Federal Reserve kicks in. Basically Bernake's handlers just said we won't do any more business with you, such as loaning money via printing currency till you pay down your debts to the Fed banking system. But what prevents the US from simply printing cash? Why are they having to go through the Federal Reserve Bank? Does the Fed own the printing presses?

The treasury prints the money but the fed decides how much will go into circulation because they lend to the banks as well as the government. If we got rid of the fed we could print what we needed and the interest from the loans to the banks would go to the treasury and not the private owners of the fed.
Title: Re: Bernanke:"Now that we gave illuminazis $28.3 T, you all are broke! F You!"
Post by: chris jones on February 26, 2010, 08:03:08 pm

They have us where they want us!

After all their planning, deceptions , lies, manipulations and multiple wars, does anyone truly beleive that our elected officials will begin to back up the people of this nation..
The treaury can issue debt free notes, YES, will they?
  Do they truly want recovery or was this abomination a portion of their plan.
   I may be off base her by a longshot, but I have this deep down gut feeling combined with my loss of faith in our elected officials that yells in my ears, this is a definitive portion of their plan, it has been nurtured for decades.
   The elites ae on top of the world, their supercoprs , CIO's are swimming in fortunes, will they now decide to allow competion.
    They detest our freedoms and our rights, the base of this nation, in fact I beleive the 10,000 detest us. They are not in our world, we are at best worms in our breeding grounds.
     The upper middle classes will be feeling this soon enough, the poor have been struggling with this and will now be fighting for survival.

Ranted again damnit, my blood is boiling. I'm shutting up.
Title: Re: Bernanke:"Now that we gave illuminazis $28.3 T, you all are broke! F You!"
Post by: Pierce2378 on February 26, 2010, 09:08:04 pm
It absolutely amazes me how in the face the NWO is now to the people and they still can't see it.  Coming hard and fast now, I suspect that 2010 is going to be one hell of a roller coaster ride.
Title: Re: Bernanke:"Now that we gave illuminazis $28.3 T, you all are broke! F You!"
Post by: flaming_red_pill on February 26, 2010, 09:29:45 pm
(http://rlv.zcache.com/hit_the_fan_card-p137320542449020883tra8_210.jpg)
Title: Re: Bernanke:"Now that we gave illuminazis $28.3 T, you all are broke! F You!"
Post by: sc10000 on February 26, 2010, 11:21:39 pm
Rot in Hell Bernanke.
Title: Re: Bernanke:"Now that we gave illuminazis $28.3 T, you all are broke! F You!"
Post by: Volitzar on February 26, 2010, 11:32:15 pm
Him and Geithner both.
Title: Re: Bernanke:"Now that we gave illuminazis $28.3 T, you all are broke! F You!"
Post by: able on February 27, 2010, 04:10:45 am
this can all be flipped....

right not (for lack of a better analogy) we are living in the matrix... 95% of us do not have a stinking clue how this world is really run.

if the world as a whole wakes and refuses to pay one more red sent to the 13 families who have worked so tirelessly to make us feel like slaves then the game is over.

in the end the debt is a carefully nurtured mental condition and does not (in reality) exist. its that simple....

world wide wake up and its over... they know this and a small % of us already know this....

end the illusion and all the other evil they put us through to entertain ,scare and herd us will disappear with it.

there is no spoon!
Title: Re: Bernanke:"Now that we gave illuminazis $28.3 T, you all are broke! F You!"
Post by: shy69iskrazy on February 27, 2010, 03:31:48 pm
We are the broke ones for generations to come.  They already printed the new money so yeah they won't be printing anymore dollars.
Title: Re: Bernanke:"Now that we gave illuminazis $28.3 T, you all are broke! F You!"
Post by: Joe(WI) on February 27, 2010, 06:06:21 pm
This will not end well, without currency THEY accept, foreclosures will continue. Sure, we'll be able to barter all we like, but unless we force THEM to accept non-fiat wealth based currency, they will take their toys and go home.

We have known this time would come, gold and silver being the only exchange transferring the most wealth. The reason why they confiscated gold in the 40's. Someone have a ready to go article about that? Even a Wiki post would be worth a read. >.<
Title: Bernanke: "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it."
Post by: Ryujin on May 30, 2010, 11:58:35 am
Ok, I'm trying to win over a guy who thinks that a one world government would be a good idea (it would be more efficient as he put, he also said that he doesn't think of the moral implications of these things), that the states are below the federal government (I told him the constitution said otherwise but it looks like its just a piece of paper to him, I don't get that logic; by that way of thinking ALL laws are such) and that the state sovereignty moment is just cover for racism (yep he drank that Kool Aide too).

Now the thing is I brought up that Federal Reserve caused the Great Depression and he said he wanted me to to show him the proof of this the next time we meet so here comes my problem: given his way of thinking I need some hard almost bullet proof evidence off such (i.e. newspaper articles, official paper, "trusted sources" ectra.). I thought of explaining how fractional reserve banking works (which is shows clear signs of a fraud) but he would want me to prove very step which would take forever and even if I did that he could just play the "you're not an economist so you can't possibly understand this" card and to top it off I don't think he would be smart enough to get it anyways.

So in short if any of you info ninjas with mad search engine-fu can dig up (or at lest show me a good way to do so myself) some hard hitting evidence that the Fed caused the Great Depression I would appreciate it greatly. Just keep in mind this guy ain't too bright, tends to use what I call "ignorance be my shield" where he used his lack of knowledge on something to "prove" that your either lying or mistaken and tends to see his view on things are "correct" and anyone else's (who isn't an "expert")is wrong, childish or misinformed.

Oh and if you wonder why I'm even bothering there's two reasons. First it's because if I can wake someone up that's another mind free form the matrix and secondly it's because there's also going to be a group of people I know there who I have woken up and trust me since I've always shown hard evidence and facts to support my claims and have defeated people like this before (just not to the level of sheer ignorance this guy's got) so I don't want to risk having them slip by losing to this guy in a debate

So once again to anyone who help's me out thanks in advance
Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: Dok on May 30, 2010, 12:06:20 pm
Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=59405

Despite the varied theories espoused by many establishment economists, it was none other than the Federal Reserve that caused the Great Depression and the horrific suffering, deprivation and dislocation America and the world experienced in its wake. At least, that's the clearly stated view of current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.

The worldwide economic downturn called the Great Depression, which persisted from 1929 until about 1939, was the longest and worst depression ever experienced by the industrialized Western world. While originating in the U.S., it ended up causing drastic declines in output, severe unemployment, and acute deflation in virtually every country on earth. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "the Great Depression ranks second only to the Civil War as the gravest crisis in American history."

What exactly caused this economic tsunami that devastated the U.S. and much of the world?

In "A Monetary History of the United States," Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman along with coauthor Anna J. Schwartz lay the mega-catastrophe of the Great Depression squarely at the feet of the Federal Reserve.

Here's how Friedman summed up his views on the Fed and the Depression in an Oct. 1, 2000, interview with PBS:

 
PBS: You've written that what really caused the Depression was mistakes by the government. Looking back now, what in your view was the actual cause?
Friedman: Well, we have to distinguish between the recession of 1929, the early stages, and the conversion of that recession into a major catastrophe.

The recession was an ordinary business cycle. We had repeated recessions over hundreds of years, but what converted [this one] into a major depression was bad monetary policy.

The Federal Reserve System had been established to prevent what actually happened. It was set up to avoid a situation in which you would have to close down banks, in which you would have a banking crisis. And yet, under the Federal Reserve System, you had the worst banking crisis in the history of the United States. There's no other example I can think of, of a government measure which produced so clearly the opposite of the results that were intended.

And what happened is that [the Federal Reserve] followed policies which led to a decline in the quantity of money by a third. For every $100 in paper money, in deposits, in cash, in currency, in existence in 1929, by the time you got to 1933 there was only about $65, $66 left. And that extraordinary collapse in the banking system, with about a third of the banks failing from beginning to end, with millions of people having their savings essentially washed out, that decline was utterly unnecessary.

At all times, the Federal Reserve had the power and the knowledge to have stopped that. And there were people at the time who were all the time urging them to do that. So it was, in my opinion, clearly a mistake of policy that led to the Great Depression.

Although economists have pontificated over the decades about this or that cause of the Great Depression, even the current Fed chairman Ben S. Bernanke, agrees with Friedman's assessment that the Fed caused the Great Depression.

At a Nov. 8, 2002, conference to honor Friedman's 90th birthday, Bernanke, then a Federal Reserve governor, gave a speech at Friedman's old home base, the University of Chicago. Here's a bit of what Bernanke, the man who now runs the Fed – and thus, one of the most powerful people in the world – had to say that day:

 

I can think of no greater honor than being invited to speak on the occasion of Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday. Among economic scholars, Friedman has no peer. …
Today I'd like to honor Milton Friedman by talking about one of his greatest contributions to economics, made in close collaboration with his distinguished coauthor, Anna J. Schwartz. This achievement is nothing less than to provide what has become the leading and most persuasive explanation of the worst economic disaster in American history, the onset of the Great Depression – or, as Friedman and Schwartz dubbed it, the Great Contraction of 1929-33.

… As everyone here knows, in their "Monetary History" Friedman and Schwartz made the case that the economic collapse of 1929-33 was the product of the nation's monetary mechanism gone wrong. Contradicting the received wisdom at the time that they wrote, which held that money was a passive player in the events of the 1930s, Friedman and Schwartz argued that "the contraction is in fact a tragic testimonial to the importance of monetary forces."

After citing how Friedman and Schwartz documented the Fed's continual contraction of the money supply during the Depression and its aftermath – and the subsequent abandonment of the gold standard by many nations in order to stop the devastating monetary contraction – Bernanke adds:

 

… Before the creation of the Federal Reserve, Friedman and Schwartz noted, bank panics were typically handled by banks themselves – for example, through urban consortiums of private banks called clearinghouses. If a run on one or more banks in a city began, the clearinghouse might declare a suspension of payments, meaning that, temporarily, deposits would not be convertible into cash. Larger, stronger banks would then take the lead, first, in determining that the banks under attack were in fact fundamentally solvent, and second, in lending cash to those banks that needed to meet withdrawals. Though not an entirely satisfactory solution – the suspension of payments for several weeks was a significant hardship for the public – the system of suspension of payments usually prevented local banking panics from spreading or persisting. Large, solvent banks had an incentive to participate in curing panics because they knew that an unchecked panic might ultimately threaten their own deposits.
It was in large part to improve the management of banking panics that the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. However, as Friedman and Schwartz discuss in some detail, in the early 1930s the Federal Reserve did not serve that function. The problem within the Fed was largely doctrinal: Fed officials appeared to subscribe to Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon's infamous 'liquidationist' thesis, that weeding out "weak" banks was a harsh but necessary prerequisite to the recovery of the banking system. Moreover, most of the failing banks were small banks (as opposed to what we would now call money-center banks) and not members of the Federal Reserve System. Thus the Fed saw no particular need to try to stem the panics. At the same time, the large banks – which would have intervened before the founding of the Fed – felt that protecting their smaller brethren was no longer their responsibility. Indeed, since the large banks felt confident that the Fed would protect them if necessary, the weeding out of small competitors was a positive good, from their point of view.

In short, according to Friedman and Schwartz, because of institutional changes and misguided doctrines, the banking panics of the Great Contraction were much more severe and widespread than would have normally occurred during a downturn. …

Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.

Best wishes for your next ninety years.

Today, the entire Western financial world holds its breath every time the Fed chairman speaks, so influential are the central bank's decisions on markets, interest rates and the economy in general. Yet the Fed, supposedly created to smooth out business cycles and prevent disruptive economic downswings like the Great Depression, has actually done the opposite.



Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: Dok on May 30, 2010, 12:11:08 pm
You really dont need anything other than this.

America: Freedom to Fascism - Director's Authorized Version
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173#

Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: Ryujin on May 30, 2010, 12:13:40 pm
Thanks Dok! Cool man, this looks really good though I think he'll just shrug off the doc but I don't think I've seen the Director's Authorized Version so it's cool either way.

Alright I got to go to my kid sisters graduation ceremony so I'll be back to check on this later 
Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: Freeski on May 30, 2010, 12:15:57 pm
You really dont need anything other than this.

America: Freedom to Fascism - Director's Authorized Version
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173#



Excellent, mindblowing film.
Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: grapecrusher1 on May 30, 2010, 12:59:55 pm
So in the likely event a PolPot, Pinochet, or Hitler took power, that would be cool with him?  Exactly what checks and balances does he figure would prevent this inevitable event from occurring?  His preempted assertion "that wouldn't happen because it would be a democratic choice" denies world history.
Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: jofortruth on May 30, 2010, 01:10:33 pm
Now the thing is I brought up that Federal Reserve caused the Great Depression and he said he wanted me to to show him the proof of this the next time we meet.


Straight from the horse's mouth - Bernanke:

Bernanke Admits what Caused the Great Depression: (Remarks by Governor Ben S. Bernanke At the Conference to Honor Milton Friedman, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois - November 8, 2002 - On Milton Friedman's Ninetieth Birthday)
http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SP...108/default.htm (http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm)


Quote
Last pg Bernanke says: "Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again."


There's your proof!
Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: Ryujin on May 30, 2010, 05:16:20 pm
So in the likely event a PolPot, Pinochet, or Hitler took power, that would be cool with him?  Exactly what checks and balances does he figure would prevent this inevitable event from occurring?  His preempted assertion "that wouldn't happen because it would be a democratic choice" denies world history.

Yeah I tried that on him and that's when I got the "I'm not concerned about the moral of it." comment out of him. He seems to have the mind set that those in power are "professionals" and know best for us and Governments never turn on their own (though he also admits that there are corrupt politicians, once again it's that double-double think where they both hold that the gov is and is not corrupt flip flopping when it's convenient for them as well as holding on to the though that even when you catch them admitting that the gov is corrupt you're a crazy is you tel them how and why the gov is corrupt). So my plan is to hit him with so stuff he can't refute with out looking like an idiot so that even if I can't turn him  the others watching the debate will see I'm in the right.

But anywho thanks guys, this is sum good sh!t and hell I think I'll even hit him with America from Freedom to Fascism; if he don't want to watch the it'll be there for the others  

Also like the retitle Sane, that should draw more attention here so thanks
Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: Freeski on May 30, 2010, 06:35:34 pm

Straight from the horse's mouth - Bernanke:

Bernanke Admits what Caused the Great Depression: (Remarks by Governor Ben S. Bernanke At the Conference to Honor Milton Friedman, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois - November 8, 2002 - On Milton Friedman's Ninetieth Birthday)
http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SP...108/default.htm (http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm)



There's your proof!

Get out of town!
Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: Ryujin on May 30, 2010, 06:56:32 pm
Get out of town!

From the mouth of babes eh? I couldn't believe what I was reading myself but man, this si sum gold; All we need to let them do is run their mouths and they'll defeat themselves
Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: Freeski on May 30, 2010, 06:59:06 pm
From the mouth of babes eh? I couldn't believe what I was reading myself but man, this si sum gold; All we need to let them do is run their mouths and they'll defeat themselves

But they can run their mouth off all they want but too many people still don't give a shit. We're in a pickle!
Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: Ryujin on May 30, 2010, 07:07:07 pm
But they can run their mouth off all they want but too many people still don't give a shit. We're in a pickle!

That's why we're here, to make sure that when they do run their mouths we let it be known. Granted they're always going to be those who go "Oh I can't believe THAT."  even when you show them sh!t like but we can't let the few who are unable to see with their own eyes blind us to those who still can
Title: Re: Need a little help from you info ninjas
Post by: Freeski on May 30, 2010, 07:09:55 pm
That's why we're here, to make sure that when they do run their mouths we let it be known. Granted they're always going to be those who go "Oh I can't believe THAT."  even when you show them sh!t like but we can't let the few who are unable to see with their own eyes blind us to those who still can

Let's roll! ;D
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it."
Post by: Ryujin on May 30, 2010, 07:48:33 pm
(http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/9100/letsroll.jpg)
Indeed
Title: ** 1929 Great Depression History & Bernanke Admits Federal Reserve Responsible!
Post by: jofortruth on May 30, 2010, 08:27:00 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA8oSicn5aI
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it."
Post by: Freeski on May 30, 2010, 08:35:12 pm
Check out this video:
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=173035.0

Of course, it's entirely fixed.
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it."
Post by: Ryujin on May 30, 2010, 08:42:17 pm
Great vid jofortruth though the forum link you posted is dead
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it."
Post by: jofortruth on May 30, 2010, 08:43:28 pm
Great vid jofortruth though the forum link you posted is dead

Thx! Yeah, Sane merged them. I guess he will come along and clean this up eventually. :)


Direct link to video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA8oSicn5aI
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it."
Post by: Ryujin on May 30, 2010, 08:52:51 pm
Yeah but it's doing it's job, right now I'm waiting for the guy to pop on the IRC so hopefully I'll be able to post word of victory soon (right now going over the oil spill with another guy on it linking him to all sorts of useful stuff, he doesn't even doubt for a second that it wasn't a FF)
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it."
Post by: jofortruth on May 30, 2010, 08:56:42 pm
Yeah but it's doing it's job, right now I'm waiting for the guy to pop on the IRC so hopefully I'll be able to post word of victory soon (right now going over the oil spill with another guy on it linking him to all sorts of useful stuff, he doesn't even doubt for a second that it wasn't a FF)

You are armed with good information. Can't wait to hear what he says!   ;)
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it."
Post by: Optimus on May 30, 2010, 09:13:02 pm

Federal Reserve Caused The Great Depression - Bernanke Apoligizes
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=76774.0
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it."
Post by: Ryujin on May 30, 2010, 09:51:50 pm
Good stuff Route, still waiting for the guy. Oh well had a chance to talk to someone else about this stuff (he's not a fan Of Rand Paul but outside of that he's always felt that there was a group messing with things he dubbed the Shadows but just couldn't prove it so I've been showing him the facts)
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it."
Post by: Ryujin on May 31, 2010, 01:19:28 am
Well I gave him the info and then nothing, not a word about it. He's still logged on but hasn't said anything but it's late and I got to go so thank you everyone for your contributions, you'll rock! 
Title: Bernanke Warns Congress Not To Cut Spending
Post by: Letsbereal on June 09, 2010, 03:05:50 pm
Bernanke Warns Congress Not To Cut Spending, Cautions About 'Fragile' Recovery
9 June 2010
, by Shahien Nasiripour (The Huffington Post)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/09/bernanke-warns-congress-n_n_606232.html

While the conventional wisdom in Washington appears to focus largely on the need to lower the federal government's budget deficit, rather than on reducing the nation's nearly 10 percent unemployment rate, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke sent a message Wednesday to lawmakers: Now's not the time.

"Right now I don't think is the time -- this very moment is not the time -- to radically reduce our spending or raise our taxes because the economy is still in recovery mode and needs that support," Bernanke testified before the House Budget Committee.

Bernanke referred to the nascent economic recovery as "still pretty fragile" and cautioned that the economy "may need more assistance."

Though the nation's output is growing, jobs are still scarce; nearly eight million jobs have been lost as a result of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Since January the private sector has created about 480,000 jobs, Labor Department data show. At that rate, the economy won't return to its pre-recession employment level of about 115.6 million jobs until about 2016.

The lack of jobs accompanying the ascent out of the "Great Recession" has led economists and commentators such as regional Federal Reserve Bank presidents to term this a "jobless recovery." Others, while not making that claim outright, worry that's what the recovery will end up being unless current stimulative measures -- such as the Fed's policy of a near-zero main interest rate -- continue.

The Fed is "doing its part," Bernanke said of the central bank's "supportive monetary policy." The main interest rate stood at 0.20 percent in May, Fed data show.

The nation's central banker added that government's fiscal policy, like the nearly $800 billion stimulus bill passed last year, "is helping" and that it's "needed."

Congressional Republicans have focused on reducing the federal government's budget deficit rather than on taxpayer-financed job creation efforts; Democrats have begun to follow.

Bernanke, however, pushed back against House Republicans' claims that the stimulus, pushed by the Obama administration, didn't bolster the economy. He said it "did increase growth" and "add to job creation."

But the economy's slow recovery has been a "disappointment," Bernanke said. He added that there wouldn't be a "V-shaped recovery," a term to describe a rapid economic expansion following a downturn.

Despite the slow recovery and potential need for additional stimulus, though, Bernanke warned Congress to develop a credible plan to deal with the government's budget deficits.

Obama's 2011 budget forecasts a $1.6 trillion hole, or about 10.6 percent of the nation's total output, a post-World War II high.

Bernanke said ongoing deficits of that size aren't sustainable, and called on Congress to create a plan in the "medium term" to bring deficits to a more manageable level. Economists say deficits of about 3 percent of total GDP are sustainable.

The plan, he said, needs to have the confidence of the markets. If it has that, "I think we'll be okay," Bernanke said. But if investors in U.S. debt don't find the plan "plausible," the nation faces a risk of a "potential loss of confidence" by investors.

A loss of confidence could entail investors demanding higher rates of return in order to buy Treasuries, which would drive up the government's borrowing costs. Funds for government programs would instead be diverted to bondholders.

Investors are demanding about 3.3 percent interest from the U.S. government in order to buy 10-year Treasury bonds, a level near historic lows. Ten years ago, investors demanded double that rate.

But it's important to note that Bernanke didn't say Congress needs to cut spending now; he simply said Congress needs to begin developing a plan in the "medium term" to bring down the government's budget deficit. In response to a question about whether Congress should focus on job creation (which would entail more spending) or reducing the deficit, Bernanke said it needs to do both.

Congress needs to "show" that it's "serious" about the deficit, he said.

Meanwhile, the muscular jobs bill that progressive groups, unions, and labor economists clamor for has yet to materialize.

The private sector created 20,000 jobs last month. Nearly 15 million unemployed workers continue to look for work.

Watch Vid (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/09/bernanke-warns-congress-n_n_606232.html)
Title: Bernanke turned the FED into a Pawn Shop : Jim Rogers
Post by: Theorist on August 13, 2010, 12:09:34 pm
Bernanke turned the FED into a Pawn Shop : Jim Rogers

http://jimrogers1.blogspot.com/2010/08/bernanke-turned-fed-into-pawn-shop-jim.html

 ;D
Title: Re: Bernanke turned the FED into a Pawn Shop : Jim Rogers
Post by: TahoeBlue on August 13, 2010, 12:57:03 pm
This is what brought the 1930's depression.

What I bring up in the 1920's wealth thread below is that the 20 billion in WWI war debt (which tptb Rockefeller/Rothschild bought the 20 billion in treasuries) ultimately was repudiated by France/England in the early 30's following the stock bubble, dried up all liquidity and brought us down. I would also say that the stock market collapsed because the fed/banks pulled liquidity beginning in 1929 (the war debt was supposed to begin being repaid at the start of 1930) which in turn created the margin calls and collapsed the market.

This is all very similar to what we saw with the current situation of the housing loans and CDO's etc...

Wealth Disparities in U.S. Approaching 1920's Levels   (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=160659.0)
Title: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: oyashango on September 04, 2010, 06:28:20 pm
Bernanke issues the warning: This year, US public debt could reach end game



Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke issues the warning. Asian nations, China and India first, are no longer willing to purchase securities issued by the US Treasury, which this year has about US$ two trillion short-term debt to refinance. Beijing is buying gold instead.

Milan (AsiaNews) – For at least four years, AsiaNews has sounded the alarm bells against the risks due to the huge size reached by speculative finance[1]. In 2008, we said that the attempt to save US banks could push the US debt beyond the point of solvency (see Maurizio d’Orlando, “US debt approaches insolvency . . .,” in AsiaNews 19 December 2008) [2]. Back them it could appear a bit overblown, but now even US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S Bernanke is warning the US Congress about the danger. In a statement before the House Financial Services Committee,[3] he said that the US public debt might no longer be sustainable very soon. Financial jargon aside, the subtitle of an article by The Washington Times—Stage is set in U.S. for a Greek tragedy—says it all. Interviewed for the article, Bernanke says the United States is likely to face a debt crisis like the one in Greece sooner than later, “not something that is 10 years away”.
In 2008, the size of the debt was such that it was quite clear that it was not sustainable. Now we have a timeframe to measure the likelihood of insolvency for the US public debt, and it is this year. The reason for that is described in an article whose title needs no explanation: “The bankruptcy of the United States is now certain”.[4]
 
The abyss of debt
 
By the end of 2010, the US Treasury will have to refinance US$ 2 trillion in short-term debt, plus additional deficit spending for this year, estimated to be around US$ 1.5 trillion (US$ 1.6 trillion today two months after the original article was published). Together, the US Treasury will need to borrow US$ 3.5 trillion (US$ 3.6 according to this writer) in just one year.
 
In 1999, two well-known economists—Alan Greenspan and Pablo Guidotti—published a formula in an academic paper. Kept secret for a long time, it is designed to predict with precision when a country’s public debt will lead it to be insolvent. Called the Greenspan-Guidotti rule, it says that to avoid a default, countries should maintain hard currency reserves equal to at least 100 per cent of their short-term foreign debt maturities.
 http://www.asianews.it/news-en/This-year,-US-public-debt-could-reach-end-game-17781.html
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: agentbluescreen on September 04, 2010, 06:33:30 pm
Debt? What debt?

We have to start a new war with Iran...

To "save Israel"...
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: chris jones on September 04, 2010, 07:26:03 pm
Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game.
                         Hey Berny-?/ Hasn't it allready??
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: Joe(WI) on September 04, 2010, 07:54:26 pm
Well, isn't this EXACTLY what Ron Paul was complaining for 30 years? Need a solid currency. "Oh, NOW we get why we shouldn't have raised the debt ceiling! We so dumb, byeseeyasuckers!"

And isn't it AMAZING how the Chinese are supposed to support OUR debt? If we Nationalize the debt, it means China would take a nasty hit. Any guesses who would be angry if we default? And to who would we owe such a thing to? and how would we be able to say no with all these foreign troops on OUR U.S. bases if we wanted to? Sounds like they want us hung out to dry, blame us, and milk the last pools of blood out of us before they depart for sunny Acapulco.
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: charrington on September 04, 2010, 07:58:27 pm
Debt? What debt?

We have to start a new war with Iran...

To "save Israel"...
and to defend against terrorists and tyranny!
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: larsonstdoc on September 04, 2010, 08:16:57 pm



  A laughable article about an incompetent Fed Chairman.  Bernanke needs to be fired.
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: Guns Equal Freedom on September 04, 2010, 08:37:07 pm
Why do high ranking officials try and go against history itself?

I will never get it, you will never change history itself no matter how hard you try, period.

Printing more money is never the answer, and history already has shown it to be wrong too.

The Nazis were for burning books, they should burn all the history books because nobody is learning from them, and society is already too dumb down anyway with materialist things that nothing is going to help it.

Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: citizenx on September 04, 2010, 08:52:15 pm
SO let me get this straight, Bernanke is implying the government shouldn't borrow one more red penny from the Fed?
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: able on September 04, 2010, 09:15:32 pm


  A laughable article about an incompetent Fed Chairman.  Bernanke needs to be fired.

i would argue that he is completely competent.... its his job description that is the lie that makes him seem incompetent. ;) 
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: jwages on September 04, 2010, 10:06:59 pm
He is not incompetent, that is the facade for public consumption. If he/ the Fed truly gave a damn the banks would have crashed, and we would be on the exit of the greatest depression.
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: ekimdrachir on September 04, 2010, 10:08:30 pm
warnings
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: Monkeypox on September 04, 2010, 10:18:46 pm
Well gee, since we don't manufacture anything anymore, and we aren't allowed to use most of our natural resources, how are we supposed to create wealth?  Through our "service sector" jobs at Starbucks?

Anyone with even half a brain saw this coming decades ago.
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: charrington on September 05, 2010, 09:44:41 am
SO let me get this straight, Bernanke is implying the government shouldn't borrow one more red penny from the Fed?
He's saying it's over for the US economy and it's just a matter of time. The article says this year.
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: agentbluescreen on September 05, 2010, 10:32:22 am
Well, isn't this EXACTLY what Ron Paul was complaining for 30 years? Need a solid currency. "Oh, NOW we get why we shouldn't have raised the debt ceiling! We so dumb, byeseeyasuckers!"

And isn't it AMAZING how the Chinese are supposed to support OUR debt? If we Nationalize the debt, it means China would take a nasty hit. Any guesses who would be angry if we default? And to who would we owe such a thing to? and how would we be able to say no with all these foreign troops on OUR U.S. bases if we wanted to? Sounds like they want us hung out to dry, blame us, and milk the last pools of blood out of us before they depart for sunny Acapulco.

Owning a convenience store in the Cayman Islands is the only remaining growth sector in their global corporate-monopoly "system". Now it's our fault for spending all their money on all of their conquests that they forced us to spend it on for them, and their corporatist job exporting, tax loophole and junk paper ponzi schemes that bankrupted us into slavery were just "mistakes".
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: winthorp on September 05, 2010, 11:04:47 am


  A laughable article about an incompetent Fed Chairman.  Bernanke needs to be fired.

Good luck firing him.  he doesn't work for us. 
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: larsonstdoc on September 05, 2010, 11:39:26 am
Good luck firing him.  he doesn't work for us. 

  Like we don't know that fact.
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: citizenx on September 05, 2010, 04:25:35 pm
He's saying it's over for the US economy and it's just a matter of time. The article says this year.
I got that, I just though this was all juicily ironic, coming from his mouth.
Title: Re: Bernanke warning:This year, US public debt could reach end game
Post by: Joe(WI) on September 05, 2010, 06:11:05 pm
Ian Punnet(of all people!) interviewd someone Saturday about the FED ball of wax! Woodrow Wilson being blackmailed about a mistress to get it passed, and not having a lick of business sense, gets a lucrative (Stanford?) ivy league presidency, oh my my!

Can someone post archive(youtube, etc.) links? This guy was a real deal DESPITE Ian being weaselwonk.
Title: Bernanke: "Get ready to get raped hard, long and dry with pumice stone powder"
Post by: Anti_Illuminati on October 09, 2010, 07:40:59 am
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2010/10/bernanke-tells-truth-united-states-is.html

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Bernanke Tells the Truth: The United States is on the Brink of Financial Disaster

Yesterday, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke delivered a speech before the the Annual Meeting of the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council in Providence, Rhode Island. In the speech, he warned about the current state of the government finances. His conclusion, the situation is dire and "unsustainable".

It is remarkable that mainstream media has given this speech no coverage. I repeat, the central banker of the United States says in his own words:

    Let me return to the issue of longer-term fiscal sustainability. As I have discussed, projections by the CBO and others show future budget deficits and debts rising indefinitely, and at increasing rates. To be sure, projections are to some degree only hypothetical exercises. Almost by definition, unsustainable trajectories of deficits and debts will never actually transpire, because creditors would never be willing to lend to a country in which the fiscal debt relative to the national income is rising without limit. Herbert Stein, a wise economist, once said, "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop."9 One way or the other, fiscal adjustments sufficient to stabilize the federal budget will certainly occur at some point. The only real question is whether these adjustments will take place through a careful and deliberative process that weighs priorities and gives people plenty of time to adjust to changes in government programs or tax policies, or whether the needed fiscal adjustments will be a rapid and painful response to a looming or actual fiscal crisis.

This is as close as you are ever going to see a central banker admit that his country's financial situation is so dire that it could breakup at any time.

Here's more from Bernanke's remarkable speech:

    The recent deep recession and the subsequent slow recovery have created severe budgetary pressures not only for many households and businesses, but for governments as well. Indeed, in the United States, governments at all levels are grappling not only with the near-term effects of economic weakness, but also with the longer-run pressures that will be generated by the need to provide health care and retirement security to an aging population. There is no way around it--meeting these challenges will require policymakers and the public to make some very difficult decisions and to accept some sacrifices. But history makes clear that countries that continually spend beyond their means suffer slower growth in incomes and living standards and are prone to greater economic and financial instability.

Now, get this, he warns that it is not only the Federal government that has financial problems, but also states and local governments:

    Although state and local governments face significant fiscal challenges, my primary focus today will be the federal budget situation and its economic implications.

Does Bernanke see the tsunami hitting or what?

Then, he put things in historical perspective:

    The budgetary position of the federal government has deteriorated substantially during the past two fiscal years, with the budget deficit averaging 9-1/2 percent of national income during that time. For comparison, the deficit averaged 2 percent of national income for the fiscal years 2005 to 2007, prior to the onset of the recession and financial crisis. The recent deterioration was largely the result of a sharp decline in tax revenues brought about by the recession and the subsequent slow recovery, as well as by increases in federal spending needed to alleviate the recession and stabilize the financial system. As a result of these deficits, the accumulated federal debt measured relative to national income has increased to a level not seen since the aftermath of World War II.

Then, he explains the deterioration and the problems it will create for the entire economy:

    For now, the budget deficit has stabilized and, so long as the economy and financial markets continue to recover, it should narrow relative to national income over the next few years. Economic conditions provide little scope for reducing deficits significantly further over the next year or two; indeed, premature fiscal tightening could put the recovery at risk. Over the medium- and long-term, however, the story is quite different. If current policy settings are maintained, and under reasonable assumptions about economic growth, the federal budget will be on an unsustainable path in coming years, with the ratio of federal debt held by the public to national income rising at an increasing pace.2 Moreover, as the national debt grows, so will the associated interest payments, which in turn will lead to further increases in projected deficits. Expectations of large and increasing deficits in the future could inhibit current household and business spending--for example, by reducing confidence in the longer-term prospects for the economy or by increasing uncertainty about future tax burdens and government spending--and thus restrain the recovery. Concerns about the government's long-run fiscal position may also constrain the flexibility of fiscal policy to respond to current economic conditions.

Then, he tells us how powerful the negative trends are and how the aging population and Obamacare are going to make things worse:

    Our fiscal challenges are especially daunting because they are mostly the product of powerful underlying trends, not short-term or temporary factors. Two of the most important driving forces are the aging of the U.S. population, the pace of which will intensify over the next couple of decades as the baby-boom generation retires, and rapidly rising health-care costs. As the health-care needs of the aging population increase, federal health-care programs are on track to be by far the biggest single source of fiscal imbalances over the longer term. Indeed, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the ratio of federal spending for health-care programs (principally Medicare and Medicaid) to national income will double over the next 25 years, and continue to rise significantly further after that...he aging of the U.S. population will also strain Social Security, as the number of workers paying taxes into the system rises more slowly than the number of people receiving benefits. This year, there are about five individuals between the ages of 20 and 64 for each person aged 65 and older. By 2030, when most of the baby boomers will have retired, this ratio is projected to decline to around 3, and it may subsequently fall yet further as life expectancies continue to increase. Overall, the projected fiscal pressures associated with Social Security are considerably smaller than the pressures associated with federal health programs, but they still present a significant challenge to policymakers.

Then he goes back to warn that the financial mess also exists at the state and local level:

    The same underlying trends affecting federal finances will also put substantial pressures on state and local budgets, as organizations like yours have helped to highlight. In Rhode Island, as in other states, the retirement of state employees, together with continuing increases in health-care costs, will cause public pension and retiree health-care obligations to become increasingly difficult to meet. Estimates of unfunded pension liabilities for the states as whole span a wide range, but some researchers put the figure as high as $2 trillion at the end of 2009.5 Estimates of states' liabilities for retiree health benefits are even more uncertain because of the difficulty of projecting medical costs decades into the future. However, one recent estimate suggests that state governments have a collective liability of almost $600 billion for retiree health benefits. These health benefits have usually been handled on a pay-as-you-go basis and therefore could impose a substantial fiscal burden in coming years as large numbers of state workers retire.

Bernanke then breaks the news that the problem is global:

    It may be scant comfort, but the United States is not alone in facing fiscal challenges. The global recession has dealt a blow to the fiscal positions of most other advanced economies, and, as in the United States, their expenditures for public health care and pensions are expected to rise substantially in the coming decades as their populations age. Indeed, the population of the United States overall is younger than those of a number of European countries as well as Japan.

Bernanke then re-emphasises, the damage this will do to the overall economy:

    Failing to address our unsustainable fiscal situation exposes our country to serious economic costs and risks. In the short run, as I have noted, concerns and uncertainty about exploding future deficits could make households, businesses, and investors more cautious about spending, capital investment, and hiring. In the longer term, a rising level of government debt relative to national income is likely to put upward pressure on interest rates and thus inhibit capital formation, productivity, and economic growth. Larger government deficits increase our reliance on foreign lenders, all else being equal, implying that the share of U.S. national income devoted to paying interest to foreign investors will increase over time. Income paid to foreign investors is not available for domestic consumption or investment. And an increasingly large cost of servicing a growing national debt means that the adjustments, when they come, could be sharp and disruptive. For example, large tax increases that might be imposed to cover the rising interest on the debt would slow potential growth by reducing incentives to work, save, hire, and invest.

He then states that we do not know how much time is left before all hell breaks loose:

    It would be difficult to identify a specific threshold at which federal debt begins to pose more substantial costs and risks to the nation's economy. Perhaps no bright line exists; the costs and risks may grow more or less continuously as the federal debt rises. What we do know, however, is that the threat to our economy is real and growing, which should be sufficient reason for fiscal policymakers to put in place a credible plan for bringing deficits down to sustainable levels over the medium term.

From there,Bernanke goes into a bit of wishful thinking by identifying ways Congress can rein in spending and make the tax system more efficient. Good luck with all of that.

The real important part of Bernanke's speech is the first half where he warns of the financial crisis just ahead.
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Get ready to get raped hard, long and dry with pumice stone powder"
Post by: larsonstdoc on October 09, 2010, 07:47:47 am


  Just my opinion but I think this will happen before the election so that the saviors (the banks and the Fed) can promise to get the economy on track---BY STEALING TRILLIONS MORE TO SAVE THEIR OWN BUTTS AGAIN---the derivatives are still out there (1.5 quadrillion).  And we the people, will be left holding the empty bag again.  You gotta love those saviors (sarcasm).
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Get ready to get raped hard, long and dry with pumice stone powder"
Post by: Anti_Illuminati on October 09, 2010, 08:02:31 am
http://www.nato-pa.int/Default.asp?SHORTCUT=2079

217 ESCEW 10 E - THE IMPACT OF THE FINANCIAL CRISIS ON CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE

ATTILA MESTERHAZY (HUNGARY)
RAPPORTEUR

I.  INTRODUCTION

    A.  HOW THE CRISIS SWEPT THE REGION

II.  ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

    A.  DOMESTIC ECONOMIC STRUCTURES 
    B.  INTERNATIONAL TRADE 
    C.  MACROECONOMIC (IM)BALANCES: CURRENT ACCOUNTS AND CAPITAL FLOWS 
    D.  INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS 
    E.  LABOUR, MIGRATION AND REMITTANCES

III.  IMPLICATIONS FOR FISCAL AND MONETARY POLICY

    A.  FISCAL POSITIONS BEFORE THE CRISIS
    B.  MEASURES IN THE MIDST OF CRISIS

IV.  THE LATVIAN AND BULGARIAN EXPERIENCES 

    A.  LATVIA 
    B.  BULGARIA

V.  IMPACT ON MILITARY EXPENDITURE

VI.  RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

I. INTRODUCTION

1.  Economic conditions in the 20 countries comprising Central and Eastern Europe1 (CEE) underwent an exceptional deterioration during the recent global financial and economic crisis.  While largely spared from the initial credit-tightening that stemmed from the sub-prime mortgage market collapse in the United States during the first half of 2008, none of these transition economies were able to avoid financial and commercial contraction following the September 2008 implosion of Lehman Brothers.  Indeed, the latest estimates of real gross domestic product for 2009 indicate that only Albania, Belarus and Poland avoided economy-wide contractions, while the region’s GDP as a whole shrank by 6.2% year-on-year (IMF, 2010c) These contractions occurred after nearly a decade of economic progress which in several cases, was characterized by spectacular growth. This vertiginous reversal of fortunes quickly generated concerns about the region’s fundamental economic vitality, raised the spectre of social unrest and has posed questions about the future direction of political and economic reform in many of these countries (World Bank, 2010).  Fortunately, by early 2010, a modicum of stability had returned to the region, although serious problems persist.  Indeed, the region as a whole remains vulnerable to yet another global downturn should such a scenario unfold.

2.  The late but dramatic onset of crisis in the CEE can be attributed respectively, to the crisis’s origin in Western capital markets, as well as the region’s heavy dependence on external markets and foreign capital. The distant epicentre of the crisis initially allowed foreign investors to keep capital committed to CEE markets.  With the exception of the Baltic States, the region enjoyed positive returns through the first three quarters of 2008.  The CEE, however, did not go unscathed during the first phase of the crisis: from July 2007 to September 2008 credit creation and foreign capital flows to the region, predictably, began to slow, but initially without a serious impact on economic growth.  According to the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), “the main reason why these signs did not manifest themselves in declining output in most countries before the second half of 2008 was the continued expansion of exports” (EBRD, 2009).  Quarterly data from the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) bears this out.  Although lending rates in the region slowed markedly during the first three quarters of 2008, exports as well as imports only began to contract in the fourth quarter.  Unfortunately, when the full force of the financial crisis finally struck Central and Eastern Europe, it struck the region’s financial and real economies in a devastating fashion as well as foreign capital and demand in tandem.  Thus, from late 2008 onward, “economic activity contracted rapidly, with almost no lag” (EBRD, 2009: 11).

3.  The financial and economic crisis has also affected Central and Eastern Europe to a greater degree than most other developing and emerging regions (World Bank, 2010).  This is largely due to the CEE’s unique economic structures, history and geo-political position. Indeed, the Communist legacy of these countries puts them in a special analytical category, although with the passage of time, that Communist legacy has become less burdensome.  Following the collapse of the Communist bloc, the CEE countries operated below 1992 output levels for between five and ten years, and in many cases their transitions were marked by sustained economic recession. This was virtually inevitable as central planners had so profoundly misallocated capital and labour. Turning around decades of poor policy was inevitably going to be a painful process.  By the turn of the century, however, the prospect of joining the European Union (EU) had both hastened economic integration with advanced Western markets and served as a catalyst for critical structural reforms.  While liberal reforms assumed different forms in each of the new EU members (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia), all experienced substantial growth from 2000/01 onwards as barriers to intra-regional trade and finance were lowered and domestic economic structures were rationalized and rendered more internally logical and internationally competitive.

4.  The transition narrative for the other ten CEE countries, however, has been less consistent.  In the 1990s, most of South Eastern Europe continued to operate with relatively under-developed economies, which were further weakened by wars linked to the break-up of Yugoslavia and all the attendant problems that violence precipitated - corruption, closed borders and command economies.  Yet, with the return of stability to the Balkans, the region’s governments embarked upon substantial reforms designed to pave the way to eventual EU accession.   Meanwhile, the four Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) countries in the CEE region – Belarus, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine2 – adopted rather different approaches to economic reform and external economic relations.  Within the CIS, the State has assumed a much larger role in national economic life than has been the case in other CEE countries. Here the vestiges of the command economy are more apparent; autonomous economic actors enjoy less space in which to operate and these markets are generally less open to global economic opportunities.

5.  This readily apparent diversity of economic experiences, cultures and structures has meant that the impacts of the global economic crisis and the policy responses have varied widely throughout the CEE.

A. HOW THE CRISIS SWEPT THE REGION

6.  It has been well documented that the initial credit crunch began in the United States’ subprime mortgage market in the summer of 2007. As liquidity plunged and the cost of short-term borrowing surged, investors in highly leveraged positions were compelled to ‘deleverage’. They did so by withdrawing capital from higher-risk investments either to pay off other obligations or to place it in safe havens like the US dollar or commodities markets.  This generated enormous price volatility across a broad range of assets and financial markets.  Volatility quickly spread to European capital markets as many major European banks were holding assets in US securities markets.  Although Western banks with a strong presence in Central and Eastern Europe withdrew capital from the region in order to shore up their balance sheets at home, capital outflows initially remained relatively minor through the first half of 2008. The Baltic States, however, were exceptions in this regard. Their stellar growth rates had been largely financed by large inflows of foreign capital, which generated a financial bubble that had already begun to deflate by late 2007.  In any case, with the collapse of several major US firms in September 2008 (Lehman Brothers, AIG and Bank of America) the initial credit crunch turned into a full-blown global financial and economic crisis throughout much of the region.

7.  As financial markets around the world roiled with uncertainty during Q4 2008, the CEE region underwent a so-called ‘sudden stop’ of bank lending (EBRD, 2009).  To make matters worse, this occurred as import demand in the West struck production schedules for CEE goods.  The scarcity of existing capital and rising risk premia for new capital had also triggered a sharp rise in borrowing costs for the region’s governments and private sector.  From 2007 to 2009 net investment in the CEE declined precipitously from a record US$255 billion to roughly US$20 billion – a drop of over 90% (UNECE, 2010).3  Goods and services exports declined rapidly in late 2008 and early 2009.  The UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) reports that the CEE region’s value of exports contracted by 27.5% in 2009, while the total value of regional imports declined by an even greater 30% (UNECE, 2010).

8.  In a region highly dependent on foreign markets, it did not take long for these contractions to translate into severe hardship.  Unemployment soared with job losses greatest in the higher valueadded sectors.  For the 15 countries with available statistics, the unweighted average of official unemployment rose from 9.5% to 12.6% from the first quarter (Q1) of 2009 to Q1 2010 (EIU, 2010). These numbers, however, masked important regional differences.  For example, the three Baltic States saw their unemployment rates more than double from 6.3% in 2008 to 16.8% in Q1 2010 (unweighted average).  While there are now signs of recovery throughout the CEE region, unemployment has increased across the region, a development which generates both fiscal and political tensions.

9.  It is important to note where these job losses occurred.  Across the region industrial production and construction fell faster than any other sector and, accordingly, these sectors have shed the greatest number of workers.  While this follows logically from tightening export markets and credit availability, it means many skilled workers were among the most severely affected by the crisis.

10.  Indeed, the economic fallout leapt almost seamlessly from financial to export markets to industrial production.  Eventually no sector of the labour market was spared. National governments scrambled to cope with the crisis and to reignite the economic dynamism that defined the region over the past decade. Some began to correct the deficiencies that had left them so vulnerable in the recent global downturn.  The optimal policy responses throughout the European continent and in North America, however, were not always obvious and remain the subject of some dispute.  On the one hand, the collapse in private consumption and investment has fuelled calls for Keynesianstyle fiscal expansion to fill the gap in aggregate demand.  On the other hand, soaring debts have pointed to the need for fiscal austerity in order to reinvigorate the supply side of national economies, bolster foreign investor confidence, and to put national budgets on a sustainable foundation.  In fact, a mix of these policy goals has generally been adopted. The policy responses have been strongly conditioned by the particular economic frameworks in place as these countries entered the crisis and by the fiscal resources that were available to national governments at the onset of the crisis.


II. ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

A. DOMESTIC ECONOMIC STRUCTURES

11.  Over the past two decades various Central and Eastern European countries have variously undergone ‘shock therapy’ reforms, backlashes against liberalisation, war and strife in the Balkans, political and economic integration with the EU, WTO and NATO, the introduction of or tightening links to the euro, revivals of State control, and ‘colour revolutions’. No two national experiences have been identical and the past two decades have perhaps only exacerbated the heterogeneity in the CEE.  It was inevitable that the global crisis would strike countries operating in such variegated landscapes in very different ways. It was also inevitable that the policy responses to that crisis would diverge markedly.

12.  While the entire region has suffered as a result of the financial crisis and the precipitous decline in foreign demand, the Baltic States, Ukraine, Moldova and Russia underwent the steepest contractions in real GDP in 2009, ranging from a 7.9% decline in Russia to a staggering 18.0% fall in Latvia.  At the other end of the spectrum, Poland and Albania avoided contractions, growing by 1.8 and 3.0% respectively, while the Belarusian economy remained almost stagnant with a real increase of 0.2% (EIU, 2010).  Interestingly, the capacity of these economies to weather the financial storm hardly correlates with the EBRD’s transition scores - a rating system designed to gage the overall degree of transition toward free-market liberal systems.  The three Baltic States, for example, fare quite well in each transition category with average scores ranging from 3.7 to 3.93 of a possible 4; Poland received a lower score of 3.78.  These measures of economic modernisation and policy liberalisation are second only to Hungary (3.96) and Slovakia (3.78).4  In contrast, Albania, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine score at or slightly above the 3-point mark (from 3.0 to 3.07).5  These disparities roughly correlate with the 2009 rankings of political liberalisation that are published annually by Freedom House as well as the Heritage Foundation’s economic freedom rankings.  At first glance, variation in these countries’ respective capacities to weather the financial and economic crisis does not seem to relate to the degree of market liberalization.

13.  Moreover, while a large and diverse internal market generally seems to bolster resilience (IMF, 2009c), this alone seems insufficient to galvanise recovery.  Although the Russian economy is over three times the size of Poland’s, Russia’s seemingly inexorable embrace of ever greater State intervention and persistently poor relations with foreign investors has characterised national economic policymaking in recent years.  In 2009 the Russian economy shrank by 7.9% (EIU, 2010).   Poland, which has a relatively large internal market although hardly the size of Russia, performed the best in the EU over the initial 18 months of the crisis. Its macro- and micro-economic policies seem to be a critical part of the explanation.  The relative wealth of a society (measured by GDP per capita) also appears to bear only a minor relation to resilience in the face of crisis.  While Ukraine and Albania’s average incomes are the second and third lowest in the region (approximately US$7,000), Albania had the highest growth on the continent, while Ukraine’s ranked second worse, with a drop of 15.3% in 2009.

14.  The relative starting positions of these economies are also of some import.  Standard growth theory asserts that, ceteris paribus, economies with lower levels of capital and income per worker will grow more quickly than more advanced economies when capital is suddenly made available, until all economies reach their ‘steady state rate of growth’ (Solow, 1956).  In the CEE this ‘catchup’ effect can be observed in Albania, which started at a significantly lower level of GDP per capita than its neighbours, but not in Moldova where the average income level was comparable to Albania’s in 1992 but which has subsequently lagged behind (IMF, 2009a).  In terms of cumulative GDP growth since 2003, IMF projections for 2010-2014 suggest that relatively poorer countries in the 1990s, such as Ukraine, Moldova and Russia, will outperform Poland. While Albanian growth will trail that of Poland, it is set to achieve cumulative growth in 2010 higher than that of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania - countries where average income has grown rapidly over the past decade.  Surprisingly, the situation was not so different before the crisis.  In 2007 and 2008 Poland and Albania grew at their lowest pace since 2003, and the Baltic States were outperformed by Ukraine, Moldova and Russia.  Looking at cumulative growth since 1993, however, paints a different picture with Ukraine and Moldova growing the least in the CEE, while the fastest growing economy up to 2008 was Albania, followed by Estonia and Latvia, which only enjoyed average levels of GDP per capita throughout the 1990s.  All of this suggests that some of Europe’s poorer countries have grown more rapidly, and that some of this growth, for example, in Albania seem to be linked to progressive institutional reforms (SET, 2010) rather than a simple ‘catch-up’ mechanism.  In other words, government policies and institutions matter.

15.  In the final analysis the degree of liberalisation, economic size and the ‘catch-up effect’ of lower initial per capita income do not fully explain the region’s diverse growth patterns and the differentiated impacts of the crisis.  These structural factors certainly play an important role in setting the context for successful economic performance, but clearly the specific context in each country is quite varied.  This report will now discuss these different contexts and, in so doing, will highlight elements that have shaped the contours of a crisis that has severely undercut Central and Eastern European growth.

B. INTERNATIONAL TRADE

16.  A common feature of the CEE region is its dependence on external markets for domestic growth and prosperity.  Trade with Western Europe and Russia is crucial for all CEE economies.  Important differences emerge, however, with respect to their dependence on foreign finance.  The dizzying influx of foreign capital to the region in the years before the crisis ultimately generated large macroeconomic imbalances.  These capital inflows not only underwrote new and essential investment but also funded a consumption boom and current account deficits that were, in many cases, unsustainable (EBRD, 2009).  While the countries with more open financial structures posted impressive growth rates in the early 2000s (i.e., the Baltic States), these were also the economies hardest hit by the precipitous retrenchment of foreign capital and credit.  For those States operating in closed or tightly restricted capital markets, the crisis was transmitted through the contraction of export markets, while reduced financial inflows had a relatively smaller impact.

17.  In the eight years before the crisis, the CEE had posted exceptional rates of growth, especially when compared to their relatively dismal economic performance in the 1990s. Real GDP growth rates of 6 to 10% were common across the region in the middle part of this decade (IMF, 2010c). Increasing industrial output propelled much of this growth, particularly in those countries with the most ‘catching-up’ to do, including Albania, Belarus, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania and Ukraine.  During this same period exports expanded even more quickly and consistently than industrial production, with only Ukrainian exports undergoing real declines prior to the crisis (EBRD, 2009).6  This growth was obviously welcomed and generally seen as a sign of the region’s increasing modernisation and resilience.

18.  In the years following the 1998 Russian crisis, some 50 million people moved out of poverty in Eastern and Central Europe, the former Soviet Union and Turkey. This was driven by rising incomes and particularly increasing real wages among the working poor. The recent crisis, however, has put these gains at risk. According to a recent World Bank Study, in 2010 there will be 11 million more people in poverty in the region and another 23 million people living just above the international poverty line relative to pre-crisis projections (Sugawara et. al.). In other words, roughly one fifth of those who recently escaped poverty will have returned to it. Countries where households have been overly dependent on the construction sector and remittances will suffer the most. Secondary effects on social safety nets and education could have even longer-term effects.

19.  The expansion of exports, by definition, increased the region’s reliance on external markets, especially with regard to Western European markets.  From 2006 until 2008 a majority of the CEE countries were exporting of goods and services at a level equivalent to more than half of their GDP, revealing a remarkable degree of openness.  Indeed, the CEE is significantly more dependent on external markets than other emerging market regions.  (Darvas and Veugelers, 2009) The Czech and Slovak Republics, Estonia and Hungary led the region in export dependence, with each posting gross export values equivalent to approximately 80% of GDP.  These four cases also demonstrate the downside risks of export dependence (at least in a recessionary world), as the Czech and Slovakian economies contracted by over 4% in 2009 despite strong fundamentals.  Hungary’s weaker fiscal position and Estonia’s credit-fuelled growth, by contrast, exacerbated their steep declines.  As discussed above, a significant domestic market can be most helpful when international markets are deteriorating.  For example, although Albania does not have a large internal market, it is less open to trade and finance than other transition countries. Unlike the rest of the region, it maintained an admirable growth rate in 2009.  Obviously, interdependence can sometimes generate additional losses during downturns, but this hardly justifies even temporary protectionist measures. Over the long run, openness brings a welter of economic benefits and should continue to be encouraged.

20.  While most of the CEE economies have seen exports rise as a share of GDP, one group, led by Russia, has had quite a different experience.  Despite the strong growth of the Russian economy from 2000 to 2008, gross exports of goods and services declined over this period from 44 to 31% of GDP-equivalence.  Only Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine have experienced similar declines in the export share of GDP since 2000 – all of which are members of the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States). These countries are all relatively distant from Western markets, have some common institutional structures and political norms, and are less advanced in their transition toward liberal market structures and open societies.  These factors tend to reinforce existing trade and policy patterns within the CIS.  The CIS’s greater dependence on volatile primary resource exports is also a factor as this tends to discourage the kind of product diversification that might deepen their trading positions.  Moreover commodity crisis fell substantially during the crisis. Yet, for all their similarities, these economies have reacted in different ways to the global crisis.  Ukraine, for example, contracted by 15.2% against declines of 7.9% in Russia, 6.5% in Moldova, and a 0.2% increase in Belarus (UNECE, 2010).  In terms of net exports, Moldova suffered trade deficits of over 50% of GDP in 2007-08 (by far the largest in the CEE); Belarus had smaller trade deficits approaching 5%; Ukraine’s trade was balanced over the 2000-08 period, while Russia enjoyed consistently large trade surpluses stemming from its role as a major energy supplier.  Thus, even within this sub-group sharing several important characteristics, major differences are evident.

C. MACROECONOMIC (IM)BALANCES: CURRENT ACCOUNTS AND CAPITAL FLOWS

21.  The high volume of Central and Eastern European exports has been a critical factor in the region’s impressive growth over the past decade.  The pattern of rapid, trade-driven growth followed by a crash in many ways mirrors the East Asian experience during the 1990s (BIS, 2009).  Yet, the CEE is distinct insofar as many of these countries have experienced unprecedented levels of current account deficits largely due to the ubiquity of finance-led growth patterns. This was not the case in Asia (EBRD, 2009). Although current account deficits often reflect developing economies’ requirements for imported capital and capital goods, sustained and rising current account deficits can undermine macroeconomic stability when failing to bolster productivity growth (IMF, 2009d).  They also put downward pressure on currencies and, if the exchange rate is not allowed to depreciate, can potentially generate fundamental internal disequilibria. On the other hand, depreciation can push up inflation and increase the cost of debt denominated in foreign currencies; it is precisely for that reason that governments sometimes resist depreciation despite the potentially positive effect it can have on the trade balance (IMF, 2009d). When maintaining a fixed exchange rate, however, there is no choice but to adjust internally which can mean real wage cuts, increasing unemployment and reduced consumption. In retrospect, the vulnerability that deepened the crisis in the CEE is not surprising given that the average regional current account deficit was 5% of GDP (10% if one excludes Russia) for several years before the crisis.

22.  The Asian financial crisis of 1997-98 revealed that even when coupled with strong growth, large and sustained current account deficits leave economies vulnerable to swift reversals of capital inflows, which directly impinge on both growth and investor confidence (BIS; IMF, 2009d).  Likewise, significant current account deficits stemming from large capital inflows were crucial factors in the early and precipitous contractions in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, as most foreign finance fled at the first signs of uncertainty (World Bank, 2010).  Current account deficits in the Baltic region were among Europe’s largest and most unsustainable.  At their peak in 2007, the Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian current account deficits stood at 17.8, 22.3 and 14.6% of GDP, respectively; two years later, these deficits had been completely reversed, and the three Baltic States had become the only current account surplus countries apart from Russia and Hungary in the CEE (IMF, 2010c).

23.  Current account deficits, however, only partially account for the region’s economic vulnerability.  Russia’s large surpluses, for example, did little to stem its contraction of 7.9% in 2009.  Moreover, while in 2008 Bulgaria and Montenegro posted the region’s largest current account deficits of 24 and 52% respectively, in 2009 their economies declined by 5.0 and 3.1%, relatively modest contractions compared to the Baltic States (IMF, 2010c).

24.  These narratives reveal significant differences between the boom and bust cycles in Central and Eastern Europe this decade and what transpired in East Asia eleven years prior.  First, the recent current account deficits and economic contractions in the CEE are much greater than those observed in East Asia in 1997-98 (EBRD, 2009).  Secondly, unlike East Asia in the 1990s, the CEE has been a net importer of goods and services this decade. While the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia and Ukraine shifted from net exporter to net importer positions, Russia held the only consistent net trade surplus position from 2000 to 2008.  For the remainder, net imports ranged from below 5% of GDP (Belarus, Poland, Slovakia) to around 20% (Albania, Bulgaria, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Latvia, Serbia) and to over 40 and 50% of GDP in the most extreme cases (Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Moldova).  Again excluding Russia from the calculation, the CEE saw aggregate net exports fall from -4.97% of GDP in 2006 to -5.76% in 2007, finally reaching its nadir in 2008 with net exports accounting for -6.25% of GDP (UNECE, 2010).  Clearly the economic success of the CEE was not simply rooted in export growth, domestic reform, finance driven growth and domestic consumption have also been key factors here (IMF, 2006).

25.  Over the past decade, gross capital inflows to most emerging market economies (EMEs) increased rapidly.  In a recent study of the potential sources of financial instability, the Bank for International Settlements reported that gross inflows into East Asia reached 15% in 2007, 5 percentage points higher than the pre-1997-98 peak, whereas the CEE region enjoyed gross capital inflows of over 20% of GDP. Spurred by closer integration with the European Union, these huge inflows were largely intermediated by foreign-owned banks, which reduced solvency risks while increasing credit risks (BIS, 2009).  In other words, foreign banks’ large capital bases ensured that subsidiaries had access to affordable capital, but the decision-makers’ distance from local market conditions and lending practices weakened their oversight capabilities. Credit risk proved an important factor in the rapid collapse of Central and Eastern Europe, as demonstrated by the steady increase in the proportion of non-performing loans (World Bank, 2010).  Although delayed payments and defaults are to be expected in downturns, the data on CEE arrears demonstrates patterns symptomatic of a more acute problem (EBRD, 2009; BIS, 2009; World Bank, 2010).

26.  In sustainable growth patterns consumption trends are smoother than the more volatile trends in income growth.  This, however, was not the case during the CEE’s boom years.  From 2003 until 2008, only the economies of Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Poland, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia grew more quickly than the rate of private consumption growth. In the other ten economies with available data, people consumed increasingly more than they earned – a trend made possible through consumers’ ever-easier access to credit - oftentimes denominated in foreign currencies. Through the current crisis, these six countries generally performed better than Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Romania, Russia and Ukraine, all of which underwent a significantly higher expansion of private consumption over GDP. Moreover, much of the credit to households and to businesses was euro-denominated, considerably increasing credit risks linked to exchange rate movements (World Bank, 2010).  Unsurprisingly, exposure levels tended to be greater in countries with a larger foreign-bank presence.

27.  This phenomenon was particularly evident in the Baltic States, Moldova and Romania. Consumption in Albania and Belarus expanded more quickly than GDP, but these countries suffered comparatively less than the Baltic States, Moldova, Romania, Russia and Ukraine where consumption rates increased at an even quicker pace.  One explanation for this is that, for various reasons, Albania and Belarus are more insulated from international capital markets (EBRD, 2009). Russia and Ukraine represent another exception as both had generated large current account surpluses prior to the crisis, but this offered insufficient protection in the face of unsustainably rising private consumption (particularly for Ukraine where private consumption grew annually by roughly 10 percentage points more than did GDP).  In sum, while much of the inflowing foreign capital was destined for fixed capital formation (the fastest growing component of investment across the region), those countries that indulged in unsustainable rates of private consumption growth were particularly vulnerable when the global economy turned downward.

28.  As a final note, the IMF recently highlighted the fact that certain Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) (i.e., those between parent banks and their subsidiaries) flows are far more volatile than previously thought. Such capital flows conform to patterns more akin to short-term debt than to long-term investments (IMF, 2010). While fixed capital investments were comparatively more stable, remittances appear to have contracted the least.

D. INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS

29.  The remarkable growth in the CEE over the past decade was also driven by the region’s mounting integration with international institutions, and with the European Union in particular.  Some of the countries that have acceded to the EU since 2004, however, have faced serious institutional problems. In some cases there were difficulties in properly employing available EU structural and cohesion funds. But with strong support and encouragement from the European Commission (EC) and with capable domestic leadership, the absorption capacity of these economies increased markedly from 2007 onwards (Euractiv, 2008).  These funds combined with fundamental institutional reforms, which were an essential element of the accession process, enabled growth and stability in the region (Schnabl, 2009).  Membership in liberal inter-governmental organisations and even associate status with them has been a primary catalyst for pro-growth reform. Currently, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia have each signed and are implementing EU Stabilisation and Association Agreements, which have driven economic reforms in a manner to encourage institutional and policy convergence.

30.  The Commonwealth of Independent States plays a similar role in trying to unify regional policies, although liberal reform has hardly been a top priority for that body.  Led by Russia, this political and economic group also engages Belarus and Moldova along with Ukraine, which has not ratified the CIS Treaty but which participates as a full member.  Despite attempts to strengthen the CIS, it has yet to establish inter-governmental institutions with clear policy goals that support the members in times of need.  Its orientation, moreover, is not nearly as liberal as that of the EU or other regional institutions like ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) or NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), nor does the CIS have established legal relations regulating the convergence of policies.

31.  Most CEE countries are also members of the IMF and the WTO.  WTO membership has provided a crucial economic advantage to it newer European members, as it has both advanced domestic reforms needed to bolster international competitiveness and helped open markets for these countries’ exports.  Indeed, the accession of Estonia and Latvia in 1999, and Lithuania in 2001, was an important factor in the Baltic export boom of the past decade.  Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia have all been working hard to join the WTO, and each is now approaching the final stages of accession talks (WTO, 2010).  In contrast, Russia, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia are continuing in the accession processes.  While there had been conflicting signals regarding Russia’s drive for membership, President Medvedev had appeared to win the internal struggle over whether Russia ought to join the organisation sooner rather than latter (FT, 2009).  President Obama endorsed this goal at a USRussian summit in June 2010 and vowed to make progress on the outstanding technical issues that the US government believes need to be resolved before Russia can be admitted. (Kaufman)  However, the outcome of Russia’s entry to the WTO remains uncertain given Prime Minister Putin’s continued commitment to protectionist measures, most recently in the automotive industry (FT, 2010d). The apparent difference between Russia’s two leaders in this regard is revealing.

32.  Participation in IMF programs has also helped vulnerable CEE countries to weather the downturn. The IMF has been instrumental in supporting the economies that were in free fall at the height of the financial crisis through the disbursement of loans necessary to cover current account deficits and to restore international investor confidence.  The IMF granted emergency assistance to Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Hungary, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Serbia and Ukraine.  With the exception of Poland, each country was extended a Stand-By Agreement (SBA), which has long been the central lending facility of the IMF. Stand-By Agreements are designed to help recipient countries address macroeconomic imbalances and, in particular, large current account deficits.  The loans, however, are disbursed in tranches, with each new issuance released if and only if the recipient country reforms its fiscal and macroeconomic policies in accordance with the conditions established in the agreement.

33.  This ‘conditionality’ incentivizes governments to take what are often unpopular decisions, which are nonetheless needed to restore economic stability.  In Latvia, both emergency assistance and fiscal consolidation were inescapable.  The SBA funded by the IMF, the EU and Scandinavian governments imposed requirements for tax hikes and wage cuts to curb a runaway budget deficit (FT, 2010a).  The programme has proven a tempting target for the opposition parties appealing to popular resentment.  However, when tough austerity measures become the criteria for bailouts, the pressure on governments is somewhat eased. In some cases, however, the IMF can become the target of government wrath as has occurred in Hungary, where the current government has put a halt to bail-out loan talks after the IMF claimed Hungary was not acting with sufficient alacrity to make durable cuts in State spending. (Fairclough)  In Ukraine, the Stand-By Agreement proceeded on course from November 2008 until the presidential electoral campaign inspired a series of populist spending measures. Following the establishment of the new government, the IMF formally approved a new Stand-By Agreement on 28 July 2010 worth US$15.2 billion over two and a half years (EIU Country Report, 2010). Although IMF conditionality has long been a contentious issue, there is little doubt that the quick delivery of emergency funds was fundamental in keeping, for example, the Latvian currency peg from breaking and in covering Ukraine’s foreign loan payments – two outcomes that would have seriously exacerbated the social and economic fallout of the financial crisis. The IMF has thus helped to ensure policy stability in the region through its role as the lender of last resort, while both the WTO and the EU have provided a longer-term context for advancing macro- and micro-economic reforms.

34.  Poland’s recent dialogue with the IMF has differed from those conducted by its neighbours.  Like Ukraine, Poland’s exchange rate was allowed to float freely, but the government has pursued sound macroeconomic policies and strong regulatory oversight. Its current account deficit stood at a manageable 5% of GDP in 2008 (IMF, 2009e). Currency depreciation endowed it with a degree of flexibility that fixed-exchange rate regimes did not enjoy (i.e. the Baltic States, Bulgaria and eurozone members). Poland also qualified for the IMF’s new ‘Flexible Credit Line’ (FCL) facility - a preemptive and optional loan that aims to restore confidence in the recipient’s economy (IMF, 2009f). Remarkably, Poland did not draw on the Special Drawing Rights SDR13.69 billion available before the contract expired in May 2010.  Poland and the IMF have now rolled-over the loan for another year (until July 2011), but it seems unlikely that Poland will need to access these emergency funds.

E. LABOUR, MIGRATION AND REMITTANCES

35.  The social impact of the global crisis, of course, has been enormous.  Falling real wages and rising unemployment have placed enormous burdens on both the people of the region and national institutions.  The shock has curbed what were often unsustainable levels of consumption, but those suffering job losses as a result are among the greatest victims of the crisis.  In addition to job losses, remittances coming into poorer countries and poorer communities have declined as the labour markets in host countries have also tightened.  Thus, with worsening prospects at home and abroad, many potential migrants are staying at home, while some of the diaspora return home looking for work in their communities. Unfortunately data on migration flows during the crisis remain imprecise. There are nevertheless signs that migration from the region decelerated or, in some cases, may have reversed.  All of these factors have increased demands for government social support.  Yet, government finances have deteriorated to such an extent that, in many cases, social services have not been able to keep pace with the rising demand for them.  While there is little evidence of a broad ideological shift against liberal capitalism either in the public or in national political parties, mounting public anger cannot be discounted, and this could set back reform processes (World Bank, 2010).  High unemployment could also increase criminal activity, which obviously has high social and economic costs.

36.  Job losses in part of Central and Eastern Europe have already reached unprecedented levels.  Based on the EIU’s estimates for 14 of the CEE countries,7 the number of officially unemployed persons increased from about 9.33 million in 2008 to 12.05 million in 2009 – a 30% jump in one year. The largest increases have been in the Baltic States.  In 2007, the unemployment rates were, respectively, 4.7, 6.0 and 4.3% in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania; these figures for Q12010 reached 14.4, 20.4 and 15.6% – a three-fold increase in people actively looking for work (EIU, 2010).  Quarterly data from the Economist Intelligence Unit shows that unemployment rates in the CEE rose in each quarter in 2009 and have continued upward in the first two quarters of 2010.  A recent World Bank study (Arvo Kuddo) suggested that from 2008 to 2009 the official unemployment rate would skyrocket in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Ukraine (an increase of > 30%), Russia (> 40%) and Moldova (> 60%).  While the rest of the region fared slightly better, there is clearly a risk that part of this rise in joblessness may become structural rather than cyclical, which will place greater long-term burdens on CEE governments and societies. The young working population and marginal groups, such as minorities and immigrations, have been hit hardest (Kuddo, 2009), a factor which could also increase the risk of social unrest in Central and Eastern Europe.

37.  Unemployment surveys cover only those persons who are registered as actively looking for work. They exclude those who have given up the search or who have never registered. To better fathom changes in the job market, therefore, it is useful to also look at total employment figures.  In the 11 countries with available data (the EU members plus Croatia), total employment fell in every country at the beginning of 2009.  While employment levels began to increase as Western stimulus measures kicked in the second and third quarters of 2009, the sluggish growth of export markets and the launching of fiscal consolidation measures led to decreases in total employment in Q4 2009 and Q12010 (Eurostat).

38.  While these absolute declines are stark, of even greater concern are the sector-specific declines.  Sectoral data for the CEE EU members reveals that the manufacturing sector has been the hardest hit.  Despite the slight rebound in total employment in mid-2009, employment in manufacturing has been declining in every country in almost every quarter: from Q1 2009 to Q1 2010, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Hungary, Slovenia and Croatia each had one quarter in which manufacturing employment increased – all other quarters showed reductions in the number of employed people.  In aggregate, this amounts to 705,000 fewer manufacturing jobs in Q12010 compared with the beginning of 2009 – or a loss of 1.8 million manufacturing jobs since Q12008.  As the manufacturing sector in these countries accounts for a greater share of employment than any other sector, it is a critical generator of wealth for the CEE countries and its workers (Eurostat).

39.  Adding to the social and economic consequences of greater unemployment and reduced wages are, respectively, the reversal of migration flows and declining remittances, which are a particularly important source of foreign exchange earnings in a number of CEE countries.  With fewer people moving to the advanced economies (particularly to Western Europe) and with increasing numbers returning to the CEE, competition for jobs and for social support has been a source of some social, political and economic tensions.

40.  Remittance flows to Central and Eastern European countries declined from their 2008 peak of US$57.2 billion to US$46.7 billion in 2009 – a drop of 18.3% (World Bank, 2010).  This is a significant reversal given the 20 to 30% year-on-year growth of remittance inflows during the preceding decade.  While this is indeed a heavy loss for many people in Central and Eastern Europe, the 2009 remittance receipts are still significantly higher than the US$38.8 billion received in 2006. In Serbia, Albania, Moldova and Bosnia and Herzegovina, remittances are economically crucial as they account for over 10% of GDP in each country.  It is important to note that remittances tend to flow to the lower echelons of society and thus provide an important degree of social support, even when not accounting for a large share of a given national economy.  For example, in 2008 inflowing remittances generated a mere 0.4% of Russia’s GDP (the lowest in the region), but this provided an extra US$6 billion in household income.


III. IMPLICATIONS FOR FISCAL AND MONETARY POLICY

41.  For obvious reasons the condition of public sector finances has deteriorated during the crisis.  Across the board, CEE governments have recorded their largest deficits in years. In several cases these represented the largest deficits since the initiation of transition.  They are not unique in this as most Western governments are also experiencing very serious fiscal pressures arising out of the global crisis, falling revenues and rising outlays linked to automatic stabilisers and stimulus packages.  In aggregate, the CEE’s deficit level rose from -1.8% of GDP in 2008 to 5.3% in 2009.  This is particularly worrisome as the region’s real GDP declined by approximately 6.2%.  Increasing expenditure is largely due to the onset of ‘automatic stabilisers’ including unemployment benefits and social services that kick in as an economy turns downward.  Although CEE countries have engaged in some discretionary spending to bolster demand, such countercyclical efforts are limited by thin reserves and borrowing limits which reduce the fiscal space for maneuver.
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Get ready to get raped hard, long and dry with pumice stone powder"
Post by: Anti_Illuminati on October 09, 2010, 08:02:58 am
A. FISCAL POSITIONS BEFORE THE CRISIS

42.  A central question all governments in Europe and North America must address today is: what government policies can most quickly put national economies on a sustainable growth path?  Of course, there are no easy answers to this question.  Rapid and sustainable growth depends on a multitude of factors, many of which are non-economic. These include institutional histories, social cleavages and political cultures.  Some serious faults have been identified in certain government policies during the ‘good times’ (IMF, 2010a), and there are discussions about which particular policies would have been more appropriate at particular points throughout the business cycle (Lewis, 2009). Indeed, the unprecedented nature of the financial and economic crisis has triggered a renewed appraisal of the foundation of macroeconomic policies which, among other things, has resurrected Keynesian approaches (IMF, 2009d; BIS, 2009).  Many analysts, including those from the IMF, now agree that fiscal policy should have, and could have, been tighter during the boom years.  Had greater prudence been exercised, governments would have had more fiscal space to combat the economic and social consequences of the crisis as it broke.  Of course, this is also true for a number of Western countries burdened with sustained fiscal deficit problems, but their ability to borrow internationally provides some fiscal flexibility that transition countries simply do not enjoy.

43.  Some critics (e.g. Darvas, 2009) have blamed many CEE governments and others in the OECD for pursuing pro-cyclical fiscal policies – that is, for over-zealously expanding government spending during periods of growth – which subsequently limited their capacity to engage in discretionary spending when it was truly needed during the downturn.    However, a recent study by John Lewis (2009) tests the cyclicality of CEE governments’ fiscal policies with real time data.8  Lewis’s empirical testing demonstrates that “the total response of fiscal policy is roughly the same size as external estimates of automatic stabilisers”, which suggests that the stance of discretionary policy is, on the whole, acyclical (Lewis, 2009).  Regardless of these spending trends, budget deficits were common during the boom years and, as a result, many governments squandered an opportunity to build up stronger financial positions during the boom.

44.  Interestingly, most CEE governments fared better in this area than the EU-27 average.  EU member States are obliged to keep government finances in line with the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) criteria, in which deficits are to remain below 3% of GDP and total government debt is to be no higher than 60% of GDP. Only Bulgaria, Estonia (up to 2008), and Russia ran consistent budget surpluses during the five years leading up to the crisis (EBRD, EIU).  The stories behind these surpluses, however, vary considerably.  Impressive structural reforms in Estonia and Bulgaria, for example, reinforced their austere fiscal posture – policies that are essential to sustainability in small States with open economies and tightly pegged currencies (see below).  Russia’s budgetary surpluses were, by and large, the product of the high oil and gas prices, which account for a significant proportion of Russian exports and government revenues. Bosnia and Herzegovina also ran budgetary surpluses up to 2006.  However, this position began to weaken during the political stalemate following the parliamentary elections in Bosnia’s entity Republika Srpska held in October 2006.  Bosnia and Herzegovina’s finances rapidly deteriorated in 2007 and 2008 perhaps because the weakened influence of the EU’s High Representative removed an “external” source of fiscal discipline in that divided country.  While perhaps an extreme example, Bosnia’s recent history demonstrates how expedient policymaking can negatively affect a State’s long-term economic stability in a very short amount of time.

45.  The remaining 16 CEE countries ran deficits as well and the bulk of these were above the 3% floor.  As discussed in the previous section, the attraction of EU membership provides positive incentives for economic reforms, yet these seem to wane once membership is secured.  Indeed, although several CEE government budgets relaxed in recent years, this is not associated with entry into the EU but appears to begin once entry is ‘in the bag’ (Lewis, 2009).  Similarly, this was shown to be the case for the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary in the years prior to NATO accession (Berger et al., 2007).  However, the deficits of the Czech and Slovak Republics were significantly reduced in 2007 and 2008, which somewhat eased the budgetary burden during the crisis.  In contrast, since 2003 Albania, Poland and Hungary each ran deficits well in excess of the -3% benchmark (EBRD, 2009; EIU).  Since 2006, Hungary has had a general government debt exceeding 60% of GDP.  For Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine – where the desire to join the EU is less clear – government finances have been conditioned somewhat by financing and reform agreements with the IMF, with only Ukraine running consistent, albeit modest, deficits prior to the crisis.

46.  By comparison, in 2008 the EU-27 average government deficits stood at -2.3% of GDP, while the average debt load was 63.2% (equivalent figures were slightly worse for the euro-zone).  The latest data shows that the unweighted average of balances for EU members  in the CEE was 2.5% in 2008 and only 0.7% for the non-EU members.9  More impressive is the region’s average debt level, which stands at a mere 26.5%, with only Albania (55.9%) and Hungary (72.6%) as significant outliers.  On the whole, CEE government deficits before the crisis (including non-EU members) were lower than those of the advanced economies of Europe, North America and Japan.  Indeed, several of the EU’s southern members generated particularly high levels of debt in the run up to the crisis, in part, because their position in the eurozone significantly reduced interest spreads, and this encouraged significant capital inflows. These inflows proved unsustainable once the crisis struck.  As these governments lack the flexibility to devalue their currencies to kick start growth, they are compelled to choose between painful domestic austerity or the high-risk option of (partial) default.  To date the former solution has been chosen and Europe has scrambled to make the second option untenable.

47.  A similar dynamic is also apparent among some eurozone aspirants although they, theoretically, are in a position to devalue their currencies before joining.  However, this course has been avoided in the Baltic countries and in Bulgaria in favour of the long-term stability that eurozone membership should bring (Soros). In several countries very tight austerity measures have recently been introduced to address fiscal shortfalls as quickly and stringently as possible. Indeed, the discretionary fiscal space available to the CEE is much reduced because their access to foreign finance is now significantly restricted.  The unfortunate lesson is that despite high levels of growth, stability, and the myriad benefits of NATO and EU membership, the CEE governments will likely remain more fiscally austere than advanced economies as they face a greater need to assuage market foreign investors’ perceptions of default risk.

B. MEASURES IN THE MIDST OF CRISIS

48.  During 2009 most of the region’s governments, save Bulgaria, implemented expansionary fiscal and monetary measures aimed at buoying aggregate demand (Darvas, 2009).  Fiscal policy expansions came in the form of support for the most vulnerable, and for the unemployed in particular.  However, many countries provided credit to businesses, finance for infrastructure projects and income tax reductions (Darvas, 2009). There is not sufficient space here to assess all of these spending programmes.  What can be said is that due to the limited fiscal space the extra spending measures have generally been offset by consolidation measures. Consolidation was generally implemented through public-sector wage and/or hiring freezes, consumption tax increases as well as cuts in any other ‘non-essential’ areas.  The silver lining is that the forced consolidation will further structural reforms needed to put national budgets on a more sustainable foundation (IMF, 2009b).  There are concerns among some economists that European leaders have moved too quickly to embrace austerity and that there is a general risk of inducing a double dip recession should Europe’s governments radically reduce expenditure at what is still a economically vulnerable moment.  Indeed, the timing of the withdrawal of stimulus measures has been a matter of great debate this year. Clearly, each country must consider its unique circumstances, but it is crucial to recognise that, across the world, weak demand remains a fundamental hindrance to a strong recovery.

49.  Banking system insolvency has also been a concern. Following the European Commission directive, 12 CEE countries10 increased government-guaranteed deposit insurance. The EU members raised insurance to the recommended €50,000 level, while Albania and Croatia doubled and quadrupled deposit guarantees, respectively. Liquidity injections and bank re-capitalisation policies were also introduced, although at levels lower than in the more mature open-market economies. This was largely due to the prominent position of foreign-owned banks in the CEE (EBRD, 2009).  Of the six countries that engaged in banking sector support, Russia and Ukraine offered the largest and most direct support to their respective banking systems. This is not particularly surprising as both are among the CEE countries with the lowest shares of foreignowned banks and two of the highest shares of state-owned banks (EBRD, 2009). Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro are small, relatively open economies but with significant foreign-bank presence (foreign banks owned 84.6% and 95% of banking assets in 2008). Yet, their liquidity injection (and, for Bosnia and Herzegovina, bank recapitalisation) programmes were implemented under the IMF and other international bodies in order to reduce widespread uncertainty.  Finally, Hungary and Latvia stand out as the most advanced economies of the six; yet their fiscal positions entering the crisis were particularly weak.  Although Latvia had strong fundamentals in 2008, its banking system was seen as more vulnerable than its neighbours, in part because foreign banks owned only 65.7% of Latvian assets, against 91.8 and 98.1% in Lithuania and Estonia respectively. Furthermore, Latvian state-owned banks accounted for almost 20% of banking assets in 2008, second to only Belarus and Russia.

50.  Indeed, the clear and committed support of foreign institutions, including the IMF, the EIB and foreign-owned banks operating in the CEE, played decisive roles in the crisis (EBRD, 2009).  The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development helped stabilise the region’s banks by orchestrating an orderly deleveraging process among the region’s banks which helped avoid a panic. The EU provided low interest loans to help countries maintain repayment schedules and the IMF provided vitally needed credit without imposing the kind of conditionality that proved problematic in past crises.

51.  Finally, extraordinary measures have been taken by many countries attempting to defend their currency’s exchange rate.  Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania’s pegged currencies came under immense pressure due to the sudden reversal of capital flows.  In February 2009, the cost of insuring these governments’ five-year bonds against default each rocketed above 600 basis points (peaking at almost 1,200 bps for Latvia).  Defending currency pegs required that their central banks expend a significant proportion of their foreignexchange reserves. For those countries with large outstanding debts denominated in foreign currency, devaluation was not seen as a desirable option, compelling governments to engage in austerity measures to defend the exchange rate. This was particularly the case in the Baltic States which saw growth, wages and employment plummet as a result.   Even more costly was Russia’s failed defence of its managed float: after spending one third of its enormous stockpile of reserves, sterilisation measures were ultimately abandoned and the rouble was allowed to depreciate by 20% (Darvas, 2009).  Ukraine also failed to defend its managed float, but when the default-insurance market spread surpassed 5,000 basis points the country shifted to a free-floating policy under the auspices of an IMF Stand-by Agreement.  Of course, those countries with floating currencies (i.e., Czech Republic and Poland) were not obliged to defend costly pegs, and resulting depreciated currencies will bolster exports in 2010 and 2011.


IV. THE LATVIAN AND BULGARIAN EXPERIENCES

A.  LATVIA

52.  This Committee has had the opportunity to visit both Latvia and Bulgaria this year and will visit the Czech Republic after this report goes to press. The Latvian case is particularly interesting as it suffered Europe’s greatest economic contraction. After contracting by 4.2% in 2008, Latvia’s gross domestic product shrunk by an astounding 18% in 2009 and will likely fall another 2.3% in 2010 before finally returning to growth in 2011 (IMF, WEO).  In the decade preceding the crisis, Latvia and the other Baltic States were the fastest growing economies in Europe.  Latvia consistently recorded real growth rates of over 10%.  Rising levels of trade and investment during a global era of easy credit fed expectations for future growth.  As foreign capital flowed in and credit rapidly expanded, prices edged upwards. Inflation reached nearly 18% by mid-2008 (BoL presentation).  But wage levels were rising far more quickly than workers’ productivity rates (Vilipisauskas, Rose-Roth).  Average nominal wages more than doubled between 2000 and 2008, while productivity rose by less than 50% (BoL). Cheap euro-denominated credit fuelled what proved to be an unsustainable pace of wage hikes. Yet it was politically difficult to advocate a slow down in credit expansion in the face of the country’s unparalleled growth. Indeed, credit bubbles are easiest to detect after they have burst; but there were nevertheless clear signs of trouble. The current account deficit rose nearly fourfold, from 6.6% of GDP in 2002 to 22.3% in 2007.  Paradoxically, as the economy lost its competitive advantage in labour costs terms, economic growth c, , , ontinued to soar as credit-fuelled consumption and investment compensated for the worsening trade balance. This, of course, was not sustainable and was a central factor in the country’s economic collapse.

53.  Along with Estonia and Lithuania, Latvia had been considered to be on an inside track for euromembership.  The Bank of Latvia had dedicated itself to maintaining a stable exchange rate with the euro (at 0.703 lats/1 €).  For all intents and purposes, this deprived it of exercising an independent monetary policy.  When the crisis struck, however, foreign capital fled the country - a development that immediately squeezed businesses and consumers who had relied on cheap credit.  Had the exchange rate been flexible, the central bank would have been in a position to lower the interest rate or engage in quantitative easing to increase the availability of credit.  Under a fixed exchange rate regime, however, there is no leeway to do so.  The Bank of Latvia was determined to maintain the pre-crisis exchange rate despite the massive ‘internal devaluation’ that resulted. This was a key factor in the plummeting growth and soaring unemployment that ensued, but the authorities felt that given the high level of foreign currency-denominated debt, a devaluation would have had more adverse effects over the long run and rendered eventual euro membership all the more elusive.

54.  The Governor of the Bank of Latvia argued that devaluation would have damaged the country’s credibility and increased the level of bankruptcies.  Moreover, it would have generated fewer incentives for improving productivity and still would not have been sufficient to reverse the huge current account deficit (NATO PA, spring).  In effect, Latvia’s decision to maintain its fixed exchange rate required a high degree of suffering over the short term in order to lay the foundations for longer-term growth.  There are some signs that this shock therapy strategy is beginning to work.  This summer the EBRD revised its growth forecast upwards (from  3.0% to 2.0% for 2010), and the Economist Intelligence Unit notes that since January 2010 year-on-year industrial output has been increasing at respectable rates. And, as of June 2010 the Latvian economy reached industrial output levels equivalent to peak output in 2008 (EIU, 6 July 2010) and there are signs that its competitiveness is being restored.

55.  The response to the economic collapse in Latvia was further hindered by restricted fiscal leeway.  Latvia had been running relatively minor budgetary deficits in the years before the crisis, but even in 2008 falling tax revenue and increasing demands for social services generated a deficit equivalent to 4% of GDP. To support the overwhelmed social system and to regain some economic stability Latvia turned to the IMF, the EU and the Scandinavian governments in December 2008 for a €7.5 billion rescue package (FT, 2010a).  Under the agreement, Latvia’s budget deficit was set to reach 8.5% of GDP in 2010. This gave it leeway to provide some protection for the poorest and to finance active labour market policies and temporary jobs programmes (IMF, 2010d).  The World Bank has also offered support for these emergency programmes (World Bank, 2010b).  This unprecedented Stand-by Agreement runs until the end of 2011. But with the pick up in economic activity, the Latvian government now feels that it can avoid drawing upon the rescue capital put up by Scandinavian donors. This would be a very welcomed sign of a stable recovery.

B. BULGARIA

56.  Bulgaria experienced less of a downturn than Latvia over the course of the global economic crisis, but it has had to cope with other structural problems posing important potential barriers to long-term economic growth. Although the country underwent a rapid transition to prepare itself for EU membership, the problems of corruption and persistent inadequacies in its judicial system have been of great concern to the European Union and to Bulgaria’s domestic reformers. In other areas, its reforms have been more successful and, as a result, the country was less vulnerable than it otherwise would have been as the global economy slowed.  Even prior to joining the Union in 2007, Bulgarian public finances remained within the bounds of the SGP (Stability and Growth Pact). Indeed, the State was generating budgetary surpluses and public debt had begun to fall (reaching 14.1% of GDP in 2008).  Like Latvia, Bulgaria has pegged to the euro and that peg was maintained during the recent crisis.  This policy helped encourage significant capital inflows during the past decade but credit conditions were significantly tight in Bulgaria due to regulatory measures arising out of the 1997 financial crisis. During the boom years, Bulgaria’s GDP grew by a relatively moderate 6 to 7% and it underwent a comparatively minor but nonetheless very painful contraction of 5% in 2009 (IMF, 2010c).

57.  Bulgaria’s fiscal caution is rooted in the inflationary crisis in 1997 (BNB Meeting). The economic havoc that resulted informed successive governments’ efforts to rein in spending and ensure as much stability and predictability as possible.  Although pegging the currency to the euro deprived the central bank of monetary autonomy, tight financial regulation helped rein in the banks.  For example, when credit growth reached 45% in 2007 the authorities responded by increasing the capital adequacy ratio to 17% - far higher than the Basel II requirements (BNB Meeting).  This capital buffer proved very useful in 2008 and 2009 as foreign investment dried up. Capital inflows fell by 54% from 2008 to 2009, but domestic capital stocks generated through these regulatory measures helped keep the economy from falling off a cliff (UNECE, 2010). Bulgaria was hardly unique in this regard. The Czech Republic is another country that ensured that its banking practices and its budget were operating on a sustainable basis.  (The Economist, 20 March 2010)

58.  The government also maintained an admirable degree of fiscal discipline in the years before the crisis. This, in turn, accorded it a degree of flexibility in the recent downturn. The budget deficit for 2010 is estimated at 4% of GDP – the first time in over a decade that Bulgaria’s shortfall will exceed 3% (EIU, 2010). Yet infrastructure and social outlays have partly counteracted some of the worst aspects of the crisis and headed off potential social disruptions that the downturn might have otherwise induced. Bulgaria, however, continues to confront competitiveness challenges.  A large share of Bulgaria’s exports is in the textile sector and it is directly competing with China and other low-cost East Asian producers (BNB Meeting). Corruption continues to burden the national economy and weakens the effectiveness of the State. Addressing this will be essential to improving the country’s competitiveness and Committee members learned that doing so has become a top priority of the current government.
 
V. IMPACT ON MILITARY EXPENDITURE

59.  As governments across the region consolidate their budgets through spending cuts and tax increases, there are concerns in NATO circles about the impact on military expenditure.  Even before the crisis, several countries of the former Yugoslavia had been scaling down their military budgets, as had the Czech Republic and Hungary; nevertheless the region’s overall military spending increased roughly 7 to 8% in the three years before the crisis struck (SIPRI, 2010).  The latest data from SIPRI shows that, as an unweighted average, military spending increased by 4.2% in 2008 and declined by 1.2% in 2009.  When considered as a proportion of GDP, however, the region’s large contraction in 2009 meant that military spending increased from 1.8% to 2.1% of GDP (with each country, save Montenegro, maintaining or increasing their proportional allocation).  It is important to consider that there is less flexibility to adjust defence spending in the short term so the impacts of the crisis on defence spending may only be evident later.

60.  Of course, these averages hide important differences within the diverse region which are driven by threat perceptions and strategic ambitions as much as by economic factors.  Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Lithuania, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Ukraine all cut real military spending by no less than 5.8% in 2009 (most cuts are in the 7 to 10% range).  Quite remarkably, Latvia and Russia both increased their respective defence budgets in 2008 and 2009.  In light of its large economic contraction, estimates are that Latvia’s military budget increased from 1.7% in 2007 to 2.6% of GDP in 2009. Russia’s spending increased from 3.5% to 5.0% (by far the largest proportional spending increase in the CEE since the Balkan wars).  This will obviously be of some concern to Russia’s neighbours.  Russia’s immense size means that total military spending in the region increased from US$90.8 billion in 2008 to US$93.1 billion in 2009 – with Russia accounting for over 65% of this figure.

See word document for table.


VI. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

61.  In the aftermath of the worst global economic crisis since the Great Depression, it is crucial that all governments refrain from protectionist measures.  The longterm costs of protectionism far outweigh short-term and narrowly construed benefits.  In particular, nothing about the current crisis changes our understanding of open trade, the benefits of which include higher growth, increased consumer choice and international solidarity.

62.  CEE governments will continue to face daunting social, political and economic challenges as a result of this crisis.  With this in mind, the region’s governments will need to recognise that fiscal consolidation is inevitable, but it must facilitate the kinds of structural reforms and investments that will encourage long-term growth as well as budgetary sustainability.

63.  Neither euro-membership nor flexible currency regimes will insulate countries from the impact of global crisis. Appropriate monetary policies ultimately hinge not only on the economic fundamentals, institutions and practices of each country, but also on their unique economic cultures and their political, diplomatic and economic priorities.

64.  Over the long run, governments in the CEE as well as those throughout the OECD must adjust their approach to fiscal policymaking to ensure that savings are generated during boom periods to provide the necessary funds needed to finance spending measures during downswings. Doing so will help moderate rather than exacerbate the business cycle.  This is not always easy to do, and institutional change as well as a frank public discussion about fiscal matters is essential. An important lesson of this crisis is that many governments have pursued pro-cyclical fiscal policies that triggered financial bubbles and ultimately deprived governments of the resources needed to deal with the bursting of the bubbles. This must change.  That said, most of the governments have managed very well in adjusting to new economic conditions, and some like Latvia and Hungary have had to make massive adjustments to deal with large current account and budget deficits.  In some respects, this response might be a model for more timid policymakers in the West who sometimes have been slow to react to these conditions. Finally, the courage and patient sacrifice of the people of many CEE countries should be recognized as they have endured difficult times with a remarkable degree of stoicism. These countries have generally maintained political and social stability as a result.  This is a testament to the strength of these democracies and their civil societies.

65.  Fiscal reforms should protect pro-growth programmes that improve human capital, encourage innovation, and build infrastructure.  Spending cuts, for example, should target inefficient State policies, while rationalizing pension plans and healthcare entitlements in order to make them sustainable over the long term, particularly given demographic trends. Much of the region needs to refine policies designed to cope with an ageing workforce, poor infrastructure and the emergence of powerful direct competitors in Asia. This makes reform all the more essential.  Some countries need to improve tax collection methods.  Any increased taxes ought to focus on consumption and natural resource use rather than penalising potential sources of growth.  Obviously, ensuring public health and high education standards should remain a priority, as both are essential to long-term economic success. Moreover, several countries could increase revenues through more progressive tax regimes, which might lower the burden on the most vulnerable segments of society.  Again, many such reforms are also needed more broadly throughout the OECD.

66.  A reconsideration of the secular benefits of full capital account liberalisation is in order. Short-term capital movements into and out of emerging economies can be highly destabilising, and some measure of control may be in order to help insulate fragile market structures from the whims of the international investor community. Transition governments must be mindful of the foreign currency-denominated debt that households are taking on. When this exceeds certain thresholds, the economy as a whole becomes highly vulnerable in a downturn.

67.  At the time of writing, it is not entirely clear if the world is headed for a second recession or if the current relatively weak rate of growth can be sustained. There are signs though that conditions for the poor could grow worse. Food prices, for example, are now rising and this hits the poor disproportionately.  The solutions to this particular problem must include multilateral measures and more open trade in food products. In this light, Russia’s decision to impose grain export restrictions will only exacerbate rather than improve the region’s food security and represents a step backwards for Russia’s food industry which has great potential to play an important role in world markets.

68.  Defence budgets are vulnerable in the kind of downturn that is coursing through Europe. New NATO members are going to be under strong political pressure to cut defence budgets. Generating some degree of savings may be necessary and one way to do so is to create new efficiencies through enhanced European defence integration and defence industrial co-operation. Of course, more open transatlantic defence trade and co-operation can be particularly helpful in this regard.

BIBLIOGRAPHY


Berger, H., G. Kopits and I. Székely (2007), “Fiscal Indulgence in Central Europe: Loss of the External Anchor?” Scottish Journal of Political Economy, vol. 54, no. 1.

BoL presentation – Governor of the Bank of Latvia, Spring Session 2010

BNB Meeting – trip to Sofia, meeting with head of Bulgarian National Bank

Bhagwati, Jagdish (1998), “The Capital Myth: the difference between trade in widgets and dollars”, Foreign Affairs, vol. 77, no. 3, May/June: 7 – 13.

BIS (2009), Dubravko Mihaljek, “The financial stability implications of increased capital flows for emerging market economies”, BIS Papers No. 44. http://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap44.htm

CEPR (2010), Mark Weisbrot and Rebecca Ray, “Latvia’s Recession: The Cost of Adjustment with an ‘Internal Devaluation’”, Center for Economic and Policy Research, February 2010. http://www.cepr.net/index.php/publications/reports/latvias-recession-cost-of-adjustment-internal-devaluation/

Coulibaly, Brahima (2009), “Currency Unions and Currency Crises: An Emprical Assessment”, International Journal of Finance and Economics, vol. 14: 199 – 221.

Darvas, Zsolt (2009), “The Impact of the Crisis on Budget Policy in Central and Eastern Europe”, Bruegel Working Paper vol. 5, July.
http://www.bruegel.org/uploads/tx_btbbreugel/wp_cesee_crisis_310709.pdf

Darvas, Zsolt and Reinhilde Veugelers (2009), Bruegel, “Beyond the crisis: Prospects for Transition Economies”, mimeo, October.

EBRD (2009), Transition Report 2009: Transition in Crisis? European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

EIU (2009), “Saying ‘no’ to the WTO”, Business Eastern Europe, Economist Intelligence Unit, 29 June: 2, box.

EIU (2010), Country Report: Bosnia and Hercegovina, Bulgaria, etc….

EIU (2010), Country Reports: September: Bulgaria, Moldova and Slovakia; August: Albania, Bosnia and Hercegovina, Croatia, Estonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; July: Montenegro

Euractiv (2008), “New members in EU funds spending frenzy”, Euractiv.com, 13 February.  http://www.euractiv.com/en/innovation/new-members-eu-funds-spending-frenzy/article-170251

Eurostat (2010), Statistics Database. Accessed on 19 February 2010.

Freedom House (2009), Nations in Transit 2009: Tables.
http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=485

Gordon Fairclough, “Hungary sets own path on economy,” Wall Street Journal, 2 August 2010.

Financial Times (2009), “Russia scraps WTO customs union bid”, 15 October.

Financial Times (2010a), “Latvia vote keeps IMF talks on track”, 21 January.

Financial Times (2010b), “Doubts emerge about Ukraine reform,” 9 February.

Financial Times (2010c), “Slovaks Mark fist year behind euro ‘shield’” 7 January.

Financial Times (2010d), “Russia plans tariff rise on car imports” 30 August.

“Fingered by Fate,” The Economist, March 20, 2010.

Heritage Foundation (2010), Terry Miller and Kim R. Holmes, 2010 Index of Economic Freedom.  http://www.heritage.org/index/

IMF (2006), M. Ayhan Kose, Eswar Prasad, Kenneth Rogoff and Shang-Jin Wei, “Financial Globalization: A Reappraisal”, IMF Working paper, WP/06/189, August.
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2006/08globaleconomics_rogoff/20060823.pdf

IMF (2009a), World Economic Outlook Database.  Accessed on 28 January 2010.
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2009/02/weodata/index.aspx

IMF (2009b), World Economic Outlook: Sustaining the Recovery, October.
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2009/02/index.htm

IMF (2009c), Camilla Andersen, ‘”Multi-Speed Recovery Seen for Europe”, IMF Survey Online, 28
December. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2009/car122809a.htm

IMF (2009d), Roberto Cardarelli, Selim Elekdag, M. Ayhan Kose, “Capital Inflows: Macroeconomic Implications and Policy Responses”, IMF Working Paper, WP/09/40, March. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2009/wp0940.pdf

IMF (2009e), Delia Velculescu, “Poland: Bright Spot in Recession-Hit Europe”, IMF Survey Magazine: Countries & Regions, 13 August.
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2009/CAR081309A.htm

IMF (2009f), Selected Countries, Financial Position in the Fund, Accessed on 8 February.
http://www.imf.org/external/country/UKR/index.htm

IMF, (2010a), Olivier Blanchard, Giovanni Dell’Ariccia and Paolo Mauro, “Rethinking Macroeconomic Policy”, IMF Staff Position Note, SPN/10/03, 12 February. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/spn/2010/spn1003.pdf

IMF (2010b), Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Press Conference, 14 January, Washington, DC.
http://www.imf.org/external/np/tr/2010/tr101410.htm

IMF (2010c), World Economic Outlook Database.  Accessed on 23 August 2010.
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2009/02/weodata/index.aspx

IMF (2010d), Press Brief, IMF Completes Review under Stand-by Arrangement with Latvia and Approves €105.8 Million Disbursement, no. 10/297.  July 21.
http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/pr/2010/pr10297.htm


Kaufman, Stephen “Obama: US Strongly Backs Russia’s World Trade Organization Bid”, America.gov,
 http://www.america.gov/st/business-english/2010/June/20100624165723esnamfuak0.6859247.html

Krugman, Paul (1999), “O Canada: A neglected nation gets its Nobel”, Slate, 19 October.
http://www.slate.com/id/36764/

Kuddo, Arvo (2009), “Employment Services and Active Labor Market Programs in Eastern Europe and Central Asian Countries”, Social Protection & Labour, World Bank, SP Discussion Paper no. 0918, October.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/SOCIALPROTECTION/Resources/SP-Discussion-papers/Labor-Market-DP/0918.pdf

Lewis, John (2009), De Nederlandsche Bank, “Fiscal policy in Central and Eastern Europe with real time data: Cyclicality, inertia and the role of EU accession”, DNB Working Paper, No. 214, July. http://www.dnb.nl/en/binaries/Working%20paper%20214_tcm47-220404.pdf

Lucas, Robert E. (1990), “Why Doesn’t Capital Flow from Rich to Poor Countries?” American Economic Review, vol. 80, no. 2, May: 92 – 96.

Naotaka Sugawara, Victor Sulla, Ashley Taylor and Erwing R. Tiongson, “The crisis hits home: Stress Testing households in Europe and Central Asia, Economic Premise, May 2010, Number 12.

Schnabl, Gunther (2009), “Exchange Rate Volatility and Growth in Emerging Europe and East Asia”, Open Economies Review, 20: 565 – 587.

SET (2010), “US Report: Albania tops economic freedom scale in the Balkans”, SETimes.com, 3 March. http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2010/02/03/feature-03

Solow, Robert (1956), “A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 70: 65 –94.

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2010), SIPRI Military Expenditure Database. Accessed 31 August 2010.
http://www.sipri.org/databases/milex

UNECE (2009), United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Statistical Database.  Accessed on February 10. http://w3.unece.org/pxweb/Dialog/

UNECE (2010), United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Statistical Database.  Accessed on 22 August 2010. http://w3.unece.org/pxweb/Dialog/

The Economist, “What went right,” March 20, 2010.

World Bank (2009), Remittances Data, Accessed on 19 February 2010. November.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPROSPECTS/Resources/334934-1110315015165/RemittancesData_Nov09(Public).xls

World Bank (2010a), “Global Economic Prospects 2010: Crisis, Finance, and Growth” IBRD/WB. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTDECPROSPECTS/GEPEXT/EXTGEP2010/0,,contentMDK:22438006~menuPK:6665268~pagePK:64167689~piPK:64167673~theSitePK:6665253,00.html

World Bank (2010b), Press Release. World Bank Group President Zoellick Visits Latvia to Discuss Support During Global Economic Hard Times, 2011/066/ECA. 13 August.

WTO (2010), “Members and Observers”, WTO.org, Accessed on March 1.
http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/org6_e.htm

Vilipisauskas, Rose-Roth seminar in Helsinki 2010
1   These are Albania, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia*, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine.

  * Turkey recognises the Republic of Macedonia with its constitutional name.
2   Ukraine is technically not a member of the CIS, as the Ukrainian Parliament has not ratified the CIS Treaty.  However, it participates as a de facto full member.
3   These data are for the 17 reporting countries in the CEE.  Up-to-date data was not available for the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia.
4   The Czech Republic is even more modernised according to the EBRD’s assessment, as it has ceased providing development assistance as of 2009. Therefore, the country is no longer part of the Transition Report.
5   Only Belarus (2.04), Bosnia and Herzegovina (2.78), Montenegro (2.85) and Serbia (2.89) rank lower than these three extreme cases.
6   The EBRD does not report this information for all countries. Omitted are Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Czech Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia.
7   Excluding Albania, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Moldova and Montenegro.
8   That is, data that was actually available at the time of budget making, rather than the more accurate revisions that are generally used in econometric studies.
9   For non-EU members in the CEE Albania, Belarus and Montenegro are excluded, as the latest data from the EIU does not include their revised budgets.  With the EBRD’s data from November 2009, the non-EU member’s fiscal balance is -1.0% of GDP, unweighted.
10   Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia.
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Get ready to get raped hard, long and dry with pumice stone powder"
Post by: larsonstdoc on October 09, 2010, 08:07:06 am


  Great research Anti_Illuminati
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Get ready to get raped hard, long and dry with pumice stone powder"
Post by: Anti_Illuminati on October 09, 2010, 08:10:31 am
http://www.nato-pa.int/Default.asp?SHORTCUT=1928

178 ESC 09 E rev 1 - INFORMATION DOCUMENT* - THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS AND ITS IMPACT ON DEFENCE BUDGETS

HUGH BAYLEY (UNITED KINGDOM) - RAPPORTEUR
* this is an information document only

I.  INTRODUCTION

II.  BACKGROUND

III.  NATIONAL DEFENCE BUDGETS: A SURVEY OF KEY ISSUES IN NATO MEMBER COUNTRIES

A.  Albania
B.  Belgium
C.  Bulgaria
D.  Canada
E.  Croatia
F.  Czech Republic
G.  Denmark
H.  Estonia
I.  France
J.  Germany
K.  Greece
L.  Hungary
M.  Iceland
N.  Italy
O.  Latvia
P.  Lithuania
Q.  Luxembourg
R.  Netherlands
S.  Norway
T.  Poland
U.  Portugal
V.  Romania
W.  Slovakia
X.  Slovenia
Y.  Spain
Z.  Turkey
AA.  United Kingdom
BB.  United States

IV.  CONCLUSION

 

I. INTRODUCTION

1.  In 2008, it was estimated that global military expenditures totalled $1,464 billion, representing an increase of 4% in real terms compared to 2007, and a 45% increase since 1999. Despite the overall growth of governments’ defence budgets in the past decade, the global financial crisis has had a significant and far-reaching impact that will eventually compel governments to reassess national budgets. Economically burdened nations are now compelled to restructure budgets to cope with the current crisis and reflect new fiscal realities. Government efforts to stabilize and reinvigorate their national economies raises the question of how these adjustments will affect defence expenditures and the manner in which governments will seek to achieve national and international security goals.

2.  In a discussion following a presentation by Neil Davies, Chief Economist and Head of Division for Economic Statistics and Advice at the UK Ministry of Defence, to the Economics and Security Committee (ESC) in Oslo, Norway, several ESC members noted that it would be useful to have a detailed assessment of envisioned defence spending in NATO countries in the coming years. Members of the committee further inquired how these cuts would be managed and whether this would affect their future commitment to NATO missions. This document is not intended to provide a detailed account of the various defence ministries’ spending budgets. Instead, it will survey the landscape of recent defence budgetary trends and shifts the 28 NATO member countries are contemplating as a consequence of the global financial crisis. The profiles below are thus snapshots of highly complex situations and are intended only to point to several key factors shaping those situations.   


II. BACKGROUND

3.  To avert recession and the possibility of complete economic collapse in the wake of the global financial crisis, most NATO governments pursued expansionary economic policies and adopted significant fiscal and monetary stimuli packages. This survey will suggest that NATO members have generally increased their defence budgets, and continue to contribute financial aid and forces to NATO expeditionary missions, such as Afghanistan.

4.  While this may initially seem surprising, most defence spending involves long-term commitments, which are often difficult and expensive to reverse over the short run. Defence budgets for 2009 were already in place prior to the financial crisis, while planning for 2010 has limited governments’ ability to alter drastically their defence budgets. In light of increasing government debt, rising social welfare demands, and plummeting GDPs, maintaining current defence spending may prove difficult over the medium term. Experts agree that regardless of near-term funding streams, the nations’ defence ministries and military services all face tough budgetary decisions in the coming years. Though the document’s findings will demonstrate how defence budgets have not yet been drastically affected, governments have, however, started to restructure their budgets in anticipation of coming budgetary pressures. The document concludes that so far member countries have not sacrificed their obligation to national and international security, as well as their commitment to NATO’s mission. While current concern for these matters is warranted, this document suggests that governments may feel both politically and financially compelled to reduce defence outlays after 2011 if the economic situation does not improve substantially. The footnotes obviously point readers to more detailed accounts. The author would like to thank all those Parliaments that provided information for this information document.


III. NATIONAL DEFENCE BUDGETS: A SURVEY OF KEY ISSUES IN NATO MEMBER COUNTRIES

A. ALBANIA

5.  According to the Implementation Plan for Transformation of the Armed Forces (2002-2010), Albania plans to increase spending by 0.1% GDP every year until 2010. Though Albania’s defence budget for 2009 is $270 million1 and the Ministry has pledged to spend 2% of GDP on defence in 2009, under-funding remains the primary challenge for Albania’s armed forces. Albania’s armed forces consist of 11,020 troops, but the current restructuring efforts will force the reduction of troops to roughly 10,000 men by 2010. Defence officials admit that Albania will continue to need bilateral assistance and international support to increase local force levels for international expeditionary forces, strengthen logistical support, and acquire military hardware.

B. BELGIUM

6.  Belgium spends just over 1% of its GDP on defence (half of NATO’s suggested level), and NATO criticized its armed forces modernisation plan for 2000-2015 for not meeting the expected military expenditure threshold of member states. The 2000-2015 defence modernisation programme anticipates personnel reductions of over 16%. The government will channel resulting savings into funds for international peace operations, procurement investment, and spending for about 24 major modernisation projects.2

7.  Despite the global financial crisis, Prime Minister Herman A. Van Rompuy has also announced that Belgium would double its civilian aid to Afghanistan. In 2009 and 2010, Belgium’s budget for Afghanistan will reach €12 million ($17 million) per year.3 Moreover, the Belgian Defence Minister, Pieter de Crem, has stated that the government has increased its ground troop strength in northern Afghanistan and continued to provide F-16s in the south. In regards to the Belgian government’s current €200 million deficit on the account of the Treasury,4 Defence Minister DeCrem has promised to sell outdated materials to bring much needed funds into the MoD.

C. BULGARIA

8.  The Bulgarian economy has and continues to be significantly affected by the economic crisis. Economists predict that Bulgarian GDP is set to contract by around 6% in 2009, and according to Fitch Ratings, Bulgaria has $26.2 billion of debt due in 2009, equal to 6% of the GDP. Furthermore, the latest NATO press release criticized Bulgaria for only allocating $12,384 per capita for defence (in comparison, the Czech Republic allocates $24,476 per capita, Denmark $36,891, and the US $46,941). These are worrisome numbers, and raise concern for how the global financial crisis will affect the limited amount of funds already budgeted for defence.

9.  Bulgaria's Defence Ministry is working to make its forces interoperable with other NATO forces and is seeking to standardise and codify its military hardware to comply with NATO standards. The new Defence Minister, Nikolay Mladenov, recently reported that the Ministry is now operating almost like a construction firm. He made it clear that his top priorities would be to prevent cuts in the salaries of the military, and to guarantee sufficient funds for Bulgarian military missions abroad. Mladenov further noted that the Ministry staff was too large (currently employing 1,440 people and its Social Agency maintains about 800), and personnel cuts would be necessary to achieve optimization.

D. CANADA

10.  The economic slowdown in Canada has compelled the government to impose a freeze on new defence programmes. It has announced that spending would remain in line with the 2007 budget.  In 2008, however, the Prime Minister laid out the Canada First Defence Strategy, a 20year programme designed to enhance force capacity by investing in ‘four pillars’: personnel, equipment, readiness, and infrastructure. It will increase force size to 100,000 (70,000 regular and 30,000 reserve); replace core equipment fleets; strengthen readiness to deploy and sustain troops once deployed; and improve and modernise defence infrastructure. Over the next 20 years, the Canada First Defence Strategy will expand the annual defence budget from approximately $18 billion in 2008-09 to over $30 billion in 2027–28.5

11.  In the 2008-2009 budget round, the Finance Minister announced plans to increase defence spending by 1.5% a year until 2011. After which increases of 2% per year could be expected until 2020, amounting to an additional CAD 12 billion for defence for over a 20-year period.6 Despite the global economic downturn and a $50 billion deficit, in May 2009, Defence Minister Peter MacKay reassured the elite of the defence industry that the crisis would not prevent the Canadian government from spending $60 billion on new equipment.7

E. CROATIA

12.  Although Croatia initially anticipated spending 2% of its GDP on defence by 2010,8 because of the economic crisis this benchmark will unlikely be achieved. Croatia now anticipates cutting its military budget by about €74 million. After a meeting on 6 March 2009 amongst Ministers of Defence from southeast European countries, Croatian Defence Minister Branko Vukelic reassured the international community that Croatia would continue to participate in NATO, UN and EU missions in Afghanistan, Chad, and the Golan Heights, and would strive to adopt NATO equipment standards. Croatian President Stjepan Mesic has also reaffirmed the country’s commitment to NATO, while noting that modernizing and equipping the army would continue, although at a slower pace than originally anticipated.9

13.  Croatia currently has 270 troops in northern Afghanistan as part of the NATO-led ISAF forces,10 and plans to dedicate to NATO operations a motorized infantry company, an engineering platoon, and a nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons defence platoon.

F. CZECH REPUBLIC

14.  The Czech Republic’s defence spending has been constrained by competing government priorities, and will unlikely meet NATO’s suggested defence spending of 2% GDP before 2014. The Defence Ministry estimates that between 1.5 and 1.7% of GDP will be spent on defence over the next four years. According to the approved state budget for 2010, the Czech Defence Ministry’s budget will fall by CZK 7 billion ($364 million). Whereas the defence sector was allocated CZK 56 billion ($2.9 billion) in 2009, it will be reduced to CZK 49 billion ($2.5 billion) in 2010.

15.  The Czech Republic has reassured the international community that major modernization projects are unlikely to be affected. The Defence Ministry will likely proceed with the purchase of 107 Pandur II armoured personnel carriers (APCs) and four Casa C-295M transport aircrafts. The budget reduction will also not affect foreign missions, which cost around CZK 3 billion ($182 million).

G. DENMARK

16.  The Danish government is currently working on its National Defence Bill, which will establish a framework for Danish Armed Forces spending until 2015. Despite the economic crisis, the Danish government has indicated plans on increasing defence spending. The annual increase could be as high as $100 million. This, however, contradicts figures provided by Danish National Statistics, which predicts defence spending will likely fall in 2010 from $4.72 billion to $4.67 billion. Several opposition parties, including the Social Democrats (SDP), oppose increases in defence spending, especially the purchase of aircrafts. The SDP also opposes increases in funding for Denmark's military operations in Afghanistan, and wants the government to cut the overall defence budget in the face of serious economic challenges.11

17.  In April 2008, Denmark increased its force level in Afghanistan to 698. The Parliament of Denmark projected that spending in Afghanistan for 2009 is about DKK 745 million to defence and about DKK 400 million to development.

H. ESTONIA

18.  As a result of the global financial crisis, in June 2009, the Estonian Ministry of Defence revealed a $3 million cut in the defence budget from $414 million in 2008 to $411 million in 2009.12 The economic crisis has also spurred movement towards joint defence procurement among Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia. Officials from the three countries are seeking to harmonize their national procurement plans in order to eliminate differences in the armament and equipment contributed by each country.13

19.  In January 2009, the new Defence Development Plan for 2009-2018 was adopted, which seeks to strengthen Estonia’s national defence capability and that country’s capacity to contribute to international security. The 2007-2010 budget plan identifies the following procurement priorities: EEK 10 billion ($887 million) for the development of modern, multipurpose and quickly reacting military components; EEK 1.2 billion ($106 million) for two multipurpose ships, renovation of the Kati, a spill response vessel, and other critical equipment; and, EEK 1.9 billion ($168 million) to participate in NATO integrated air safety system and to develop an air-policing airport in Amari that meets minimum requirements.14

20.  Estonia has also participated in NATO-led operations in Afghanistan since 2003. Estonia currently has 150 personnel stationed there,15 and deployed additional troops for the elections in August 2009.


I. FRANCE

21.  In response to the global financial crisis, France has pursued an expansionary economic policy.  It will increase its defence budget for 2009 and 2010 by €1.8 billion to reach €32.02 billion. The 2009 budget included increased allocations for spending in R&D (€110 million), materiel procurement (€1,425 million), and infrastructure and transport work (€220 million). For foreign operations France will increase spending from 2008 by €50 million to roughly €888 million in 2009, of which €115 million will be dedicated to NATO operations in 2009.

22.  Defence Minister Herve Morin recently noted that the six-year plan will inevitably require equipment cuts and procurement delays because a 40% increase in investment would be needed to pay for planned programmes and those funds may not all be available.16 The Ministry of Defence, however, has been authorized €500 million in supplementary funding. Total supplementary spending amounts to €1,485 million for 2009 and €770 million for 2010.17

23.  In order to underwrite the €1.8 billion ($2.3 billion) rise in defence spending, France intends to close bases around the country and sell property and radio frequencies. Over three years, defence officials hope to acquire €4.5 billion from asset sales and savings, which will subsequently be utilized for equipment modernizations and pay rises for military and civilian staff. Defence spending from 2009 to 2020 is estimated to total €377 billion.18 Defence spending would be held constant in real terms until 2012, after which it would increase annually by 1% above the inflation rate.19

J. GERMANY

24.  Germany’s defence budget for 2009 rose by €1.6 billion, a 5.6% increase over 2008 levels20.  The budget for 2010 has already been set at €31 billion.

25.  Despite an increase in the defence budget, Germany has begun restructuring current defence programmes and commitments in anticipation of the latter implications from the global financial crisis. In order to finance the wide-ranging structural changes and capability requirements, the Ministry of Defence has announced a series of measures intended to save €26 billion by 2015: personnel cuts will continue with a further 17% reduction in military personnel and 40% reduction in civilians by 2010; the number of military bases will be reduced from over 600 to roughly 400; and several procurement programmes will be cancelled or scaled back. There are concerns that tight budgetary conditions may prompt Germany to pull out of its partnership with the US and Italy on the Medium Extended Air Defence System (MEADS).21

K. GREECE

26.  In 2008, the Greek government made significant improvements in the transparency and oversight of the national defence budget. The 2008 budget increased 6.9% from 2007 to €5.97 billion.

27.  Though Greece hopes to restructure substantially its domestic defence industries and upgrade its technological infrastructure, the economic downturn will likely impair this effort. The 2010 defence budget is slated for a 15% cut, in order to husband resources needed to weather the economic crisis. Estimates put Greece’s military spending between €6-10 billion (3-4% GDP per year).22 The defence budget will be further cut by 10% through to 2015 in an attempt to reduce the Greek deficit.23 Over the next five years, Greece will allocate roughly €15.5 billion for procurement: 26% of the funds will be allocated for upgrading and modernization of existing systems, 19% for naval operations, 19% for air operations, 15% for ground operations, and 5% for air defence.24

L. HUNGARY

28.  Hungary has been hit particularly hard by the global financial crisis, with GDP falling 6.7% this year alone.25 In response, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the European Union assembled an emergency financial rescue package of $25.1 billion. In March 2009, the Hungarian government reaffirmed its commitment to NATO operations in Afghanistan, as well as its ongoing effort to modernise national defence forces in compliance with NATO standards.

29.  Military expenditure has fallen substantially over the last decade, due to pressures on government finances and the need to reduce the overall budget deficit. Among the Central and East European countries Hungary has one of the smallest defence industrial sectors. The Hungarian National Assembly has held a series of debates on budgetary planning in light of the financial crisis.

M. ICELAND

30.  Although a long standing and important member of NATO, Iceland does not have a standing army although it maintains a coast guard and a Crisis Response Unit. Because of the severe economic crisis in Iceland, which has been made all the more trying due to the failure of the country’s banking system, the government will have to radically change the funding and structure of the Icelandic Defence Agency. Some of the Defence Agency’s tasks include: participation in coordinated NATO Air Surveillance and Policing operations; preparation and execution of defence exercises in Iceland; execution of the US-Iceland bilateral defence agreement from 1951; and, cooperation with international institutions in the field of defence.26There have been calls to save money by merging different operations of the Agency with that of other institutions. According to the 2009 budget, ISK 1.2 billion ($11 million, €8 million) will be allocated to the Iceland Defence Agency.27

N. ITALY

31.  The restructuring of the Italian defence budget reflects the current three-year spending reduction plans imposed by Finance Minister Giulio Tremonti on all Italian ministries. The 2009 defence budget was characterized by a 4% decrease in spending from €21.13 in 2008 to €20.29 billion in 2009. As a result of this contraction, Italian defence spending will account for just 1.24% of the GDP in 2009.

32.  Future spending plans suggest that forces will be further reduced to 141,000 by 2012 (in 1995 force levels were 330,000). The 2009 functioning budget includes a decrease of 24.9% in training expenditures, a 36.7% decrease in maintenance expenditures and a 45.8% decrease in infrastructure expenditure.

O. LATVIA

33.  Latvia’s GDP is projected to contract by 18% this year, which has raised concerns about the sustainability of government spending. Latvia nevertheless remains committed to maintaining defence spending levels at 2% of the GDP until 2010. Its leaders see doing so as an expression of the nation’s strong commitment to NATO membership. The government has already ordered a 40% reduction on planned budget expenditures with the exception of EU budget payments, Defence Ministry payments to NATO and the UN, and other payments to international organisations. Once implemented, the budget amendment will result in the Defence Ministry’s budget being reduced by LVL 30.8 million ($60.8 million).28

P. LITHUANIA

34.  In light of the global financial crisis and its very serious impact on Lithuania and, faced with increasing debt and a collapse in economic growth, the Lithuanian government has reduced its 2009 defence budget to $430.8 million, a level 20% below the defence allocation for 2008. This marks Lithuania’s first defence cuts since 1999. The new budget will reduce spending for light arms and surveillance equipment by 8.5% (LTL 25.1 million), personnel supplies by 6%, maintenance by 16.7%, communications by 7.5%, transportations by 20.8%, and facilities maintenance by 68.8%.29 Lithuania will also look to co-operate with the other Baltic countries such as Latvia, Estonia, and Poland to establish a joint procurement plan to economize and reduce defence-operating costs.30

35.  The chairman of the National Security and Defence Committee for the Lithuanian Parliament, Arvydas Anusauskas, has admitted that cuts in defence spending could make it more difficult to fulfil all the country’s international commitments.  Defence spending will likely stand at 1.2% of GDP in 2009- the lowest of any NATO country31 but Lithuania is also in the midst of one of the steepest declines among NATO members.

Q. LUXEMBOURG

36.  Luxembourg has an army of approximately 450 professional soldiers, about 340 enlisted recruits and 100 civilians. The total budget stands at $369 million, or 0.9% of GDP. The Luxembourg government has been working on a package of economic and social measures to combat the global financial crisis, which includes the planning and development of infrastructure projects scheduled for 2011-2012.  In 2005 Luxembourg spent approximately $310 million on defence, or about 0.85% of the GDP. Luxembourg participates in the NATO ISAF mission in Afghanistan, takes part in EU and NATO sponsored missions in Africa, and has committed to sending a team of de-mining experts to participate in UNIFIL in Lebanon.

R. NETHERLANDS

37.  The Netherlands economy appears to be weathering the economic crisis and it does not face the kinds of fiscal pressures that several other NATO member states confront. Defence spending in 2009 increased from €8.1 billion to €8.5 billion. The Dutch government estimates a 1% budget surplus for 201132. It forecasts that the government will contribute $13.9 billion in 2012 to defence spending- an increase of 23.9% over spending levels in 2007.33

38.  In November 2007, the Dutch government agreed to remain an additional two years in Uruzgan, Afghanistan, beyond its original 1 August 2008. Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen indicated the government would slightly reduce overall Dutch military presence during this time, and that if troops were still needed in the region at the end of this timeline, NATO would need to find others to fill the void. The Dutch currently have 1,730 troops in Afghanistan.34 The Dutch mission in Afghanistan is thus slated to conclude on 31 July 2010.

S. NORWAY

39.  There has not been any political discussion within Parliament about reducing the defence budget as a consequence of the global financial crisis. Indeed, Norway increased 2009 defence spending by 2% to about $5.4 billion, mitigating fears among military leaders that the government would use the economic downturn to reduce defence outlays. In real terms, the 2% increase represents an additional $101 million for the Norwegian Armed Forces above what was distributed in 2008. Moreover, in January 2009, the armed forces had a budget increase of NOK 88 million, and in the revised national budget the government recently added NOK 505 million for international operations.

40.  Defence Minister Anne-Grete Strøm-Erichsen assserts that the increase in the defence budget affirms the government's intention to bolster its military capability as part of Norway’s long-term strategy to strengthen and participate to a greater extent in NATO and UN international missions. The strategy aims to increase the armed forces by 1,000, thereby boosting the overall force size to 17,000.  A budget increase of NOK 800 million is forecast over the next four years.

T. POLAND

41.  In the wake of Russia’s conflict with Georgia, Poland announced it would increase defence spending in 2009. It embarked upon a $22.7 billion 10-year modernization programme focused on air defence, helicopters, Navy, command and communications systems, and unmanned aerial reconnaissance equipment. The economic crisis, however, has compelled the government to announce a 7.8% cut in its defence budget for 2009 to PLN 22.6 billion ($6.5 billion) compared with the $7.5 billion budget on which it had originally planned. As Poland’s defence budget is pegged to its GDP, defence outlays hinge on national economic performance.35

42.  The Ministry of Defence intends to keep defence expenditure in 2010 in line with the legal minimum requirement of 1.95% of the GDP. As of April 2009, defence spending was expected to rise gradually from PLN 23.8 billion in 2009 to PLN 28 billion in 2013. As a result of the global financial crisis, Poland has been reassessing priorities and defence commitments. It withdrew Polish Military Contingents from three UN-led operations, while increasing the number of Polish troops to 2,000 in Afghanistan in May 2009.

 

U. PORTUGAL

43.  In 2008, the defence budget was set at €2.1 billion ($3.11 billion). The government stated that its priority would be the modernisation of equipment, the upgrading of infrastructure, and the continued reduction of personnel numbers. However, given the current economic climate, military spending is not a top priority for the current government, and it is unlikely to increase substantially over the short term.

V. ROMANIA

44.  The approved expenditures for the Ministry of National Defence for FY2009 were initially LEI 7,652 million, representing 1.32% of the GDP. In April 2009, after the state budget rectification, the new budget allocated to the Ministry of National Defence was reduced by LEI 696 million, which resulted in an adjusted budget of about LEI 6,955 million. As a consequence of the global financial crisis and fiscal pressures in Romania, the government has cancelled or postponed a series of new planned acquisitions. The only new expenditures and acquisitions involve NATO/EU related commitments or are absolute priorities such as those that might improve the protection of the deployed troops. The Ministry of Defence also suggests that Romania will maintain the current level of forces on foreign missions by withdrawing troops from Iraq and increasing the presence of Romania’s troops in Afghanistan.

W. SLOVAKIA

45.  Since defence expenditure levels are roughly correlated to economic performance in Slovakia, as long as economic growth is maintained the defence expenditure is expected to remain steady. In 2008, the budget increased by 11% from 2007; however, Slovakia’s reports to the UN revealed that the Defence Ministry had not spent its full budget. There has been some concern expressed about how the global financial crisis will shape Slovakia’s future defence budget. The Defence Ministry has already delayed plans to purchase new aircrafts, and the government recently announced it will seek savings of almost €332 million across the public sector. These could be signs that future defence spending might contract.

46.  Since mid-2008, Slovakia has steadily increased its share of deployable troops to the ISAF mission in Afghanistan, KFOR in Kosovo, ALTHEA in Bosnia and Herzegovina, UNFICYP in Cyprus, and the UNTSO observer mission at the Lebanese, Syrian and Israeli borders. Slovakia has made a concerted effort to increase troop strength in Afghanistan from 70 in June 2008 to the current level of 246.36 Slovakian defence funding will continue to focus this year on personnel, training readiness, and equipment and infrastructure modernisation.

X. SLOVENIA

47.  The economic downturn has compelled the Slovenian Defence Ministry to make draconian reductions in defence spending. The mid-term Defence Plan for 2007-2012 initially anticipated defence expenditures reaching 2% of Slovenia’s GDP by 2009; however, Slovenia will unlikely be able to achieve this mark before 2014. To reach that level of spending, the defence budget would have to be increased by between 8 and 16% over that period.

48.  In March 2009, Defence Minister Ljubica Jelusic announced that the defence budget would be further cut and would only grow by 5.36% from 2008. Slovenian defence spending is heavily concentrated on efforts to transform the military from a conscript-force to a fully professional NATO-compatible service. Efforts are also underway to bring procurement spending under the main budget. Recent ministry activity includes the purchase of new combat vehicles for €438 million; stabilising personnel costs at around €210 million; and increasing funds for operations from €70 million in 2005 to €180 million by 2010.

Y. SPAIN

49.  Between 2000 and 2007 Spanish military spending nearly doubled from €7.6 billion to €12.7 billion. Spain is the fifth highest defence spender in Europe, but political support for increased military spending is lukewarm. Budget increases ended in October 2008 when the global financial crisis shifted priorities away from military spending. The Spanish Ministry of Defence is preparing to decrease spending to €8.24 billion, which is a 3.9% decrease from the 2008 level of €8.49 billion.37 While spending on personnel is expected to rise by 2%, the Ministry of Science and Innovation announced that it would slash defence R&D outlays by 12% (to €1.45 billion) and investment is also likely to fall by 15% compared with 2008 levels. The Zapatero government’s commitment to tax cuts and increased social spending will place further pressure on the defence budget.38

50.  Despite the smaller budget, the MoD intends to supply the army with a new fleet of mineprotected armoured fighting vehicles. Spain’s professional military will be 81,000 strong in 2009.

Z. TURKEY

51.  On 11 December 2007, Turkey’s parliament approved a 1.7% increase in the MoD’s FY2008 budget, which was fixed at TRY 13.27 billion ($8.84 billion). Operations against the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) terrorist organisation in Iraq and a broad effort to bolster Turkey’s domestic defence industry by strengthening technological capacity are two factors which have increased military outlays.39

52.  Despite the serious impact of the global financial crisis on Turkey and a 35% depreciation of the Turkish Lira against the dollar, MoD officials insist that the economic downturn will not adversely affect current defence procurement expenditures.40 In late 2008 Turkey approved a budget increase from TRY 13.27 billion to TRY 14.5 billion ($9.3 billion) for 2009, and the defence budget is forecasted to rise to TRY 15.70 billion in 2010. Some independent analysts, however, foresee an eventual decrease both in Turkey’s defence budget and in its troop strength due to the weak economy, EU pressures, and evolving threats.

AA. UNITED KINGDOM

53. Published in 2007, the UK Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) for the financial years 2007/08-2010/11 provided defence with an agreed settlement of an average annual increase of 1.5% until 2010/11 (nearly £4 billion over the period in cash). The Core Defence budget was set at £32.6 Bn for 2007/08, £34.1Bn for 2008/09, £35.4Bn for 2009/10, and £36.9Bn for 2010/11. In 2009 the Defence Budget will be over 10% higher, in real terms, than in 1997, marking the longest period of sustained growth since the 1980s.

54. The cost of operations is additional to the Core Defence Budget and is met from the UK’s Treasury Reserve. In the financial year 2008/09, over £2.6Bn was spent in support of operations in Afghanistan and nearly £1.4Bn on Iraq - bringing the total spent on all UK operations since 2001 to over £14Bn. Included in this figure is £5.2Bn spent on Urgent Operational Requirements (UORs) in terms of equipment that could not have been anticipated through the normal procurement programme.

55. The UK Treasury does not put a limit on the amount of money available from the Reserve in support of the UK armed forces on operations. However, in recent years the Treasury and Ministry of Defence have agreed an estimate for the UOR funding - in financial year 2009/10, an estimate of £635 million was agreed for UORs. This estimate has subsequently been enhanced by £101 million to counter Improvised Explosive Devices, bringing the total UOR estimate to £736 million. Any expenditure over and above this estimate would initially be met by the Reserve, but would ultimately have to be repaid through the defence budget within two years.

56. While these defence spending levels have so far been sustained during the financial crisis, in January 2008 the Select Committee on Defence predicted that cuts in the defence programme are likely. In March 2008, the House of Commons Defence Committee concluded that the Government could not fund the MoD’s full-equipment programme and that it would need to make difficult decisions to compile a more realistic and affordable procurement programme. The next spending review will take place in 2010 during which time the future of the defence budget will become clearer.

BB. UNITED STATES

57.  In May 2009 President Obama requested $533.8 billion for the FY2010 base defence budget and $130 billion for overseas contingency operations (OCO) in Iraq and Afghanistan. Though the budget proposal does represent a cut in Bush Administration projections, it still amounts to a 4% increase overall from 2009. Though US defence spending is rising, albeit at a slower pace under the Obama Administration, a number of analysts suggest that defence budget cuts are likely to occur over the coming years due to serious fiscal pressures. Jane’s forecasts a 6% drop in the FY2011 defence budget (to $644.55 billion), and by 2013 defence outlays could fall as low as $606.6 billion. A recent assessment of Obama's defence policies conducted by Morgan Stanley suggested that Obama "will not cut the DoD budget within his first 18 months in office", but could "curtail defence spending growth, with an eye for a potential defence budget peak possibly in 2010 or the year after".

58.  There have already been important cuts in particular military programmes and hardware, which have been supported by US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates, who has continuously called for the curtailment of a number of big-ticket items in order to generate savings that could be applied to higher priority and more useable systems. Major weapons systems, especially those behind schedule, are under scrutiny. Secretary Gates has made compelling cases for ending programmes that significantly exceed their budgets or use limited tax dollars to buy more capability than the nation needs. Moreover, Secretary Gates wants to de-emphasize structures and spending for conventional warfare against larger enemies, and shift this money to programmes for “irregular” warfare against small and unpredictable adversaries.41

59.   The Pentagon is planning to increase the number of special operations forces by 5%, and will hire more than 30,000 new civilian officials over the next five years, by gradually reducing the number of contractors to 26% of the Pentagon work force. The DoD will also have to manage the bill for withdrawing 130,000 US soldiers from Iraq, along with enough military hardware and gear to fill over 450,000 shipping containers.
IV. CONCLUSION

60.  In summary, many NATO members in Central and Eastern Europe are finding it financially necessary to reduce defence budgets and military personnel. Many are also redoubling efforts to focus on niche capabilities in order to put their defence spending on a more financially sustainable level; it is an economic approach based on the theory of comparative advantage. However, this requires a strong and reliable alliance if it is to work over the long run.

61.  In Western Europe and the US, large procurement programmes are likely to be scaled back to free up spending for other policy priorities. Ballooning budget deficits is making this almost inevitable.

62.  While the above survey may not have illustrated a drastic change and reduction in defence spending, the future contraction of defence budgets may be inevitable, particularly if the current recession endures or the recovery is weak. The report suggests that governments have taken precautionary measures by altering spending habits, but economists widely believe that defence spending may well be reduced over the longer term – after 2010 – when the real cost of dealing with the financial crisis emerges. When governments start reducing spending again and are forced to repay massive debts from borrowing, public sector budgets will come under increasing pressure. As the British MoD’s chief economist Neil Davies told members of the Economics and Security Committee in May 2009, although few countries are making substantial real cuts in defence outlays at the present time, beyond 2011, inflationary and fiscal pressures could force cuts in real defence spending.

63.  This raises concerns in security circles, particularly as many feel that the global economic crisis has made the world a more dangerous place. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Michael Mullen, recently noted that “the degree that this financial crisis has an impact on us, and it will, I worry about an increased level of insecurity [and] instability around the world.”

64.  Since the potential impact of the financial crisis has yet to be fully understood, it is difficult to forecast how this will alter future defence spending. Nevertheless, defence ministries will be forced to make difficult decisions and assess the opportunity costs of their various operations and activities- sacrificing the lesser necessity over the greater, perceived need. Former US Undersecretary of Defence, Dov S. Zakheim, has warned that the lower rate of defence budget growth would manifest itself most sharply in acquisition accounts and procurement and R&D. He further warned that the economic crisis could have a major and deleterious impact on national defence budgets that would leave the West more vulnerable than it currently is. In the current era of economic scarcity, security is likely to be increasingly understood as a commodity and governments are going to be challenged once again to affix a value to it and ensure that their national budgets are sufficiently robust to make the necessary payments.

 

1   Jane’s Sentinel Country Risk Assessments (April 6, 2009)
2   Jane’s Sentinel Country Risk Assessments
3   Dawn Media Group http://www.dawn.com/fixed/group/group.htm
4   http://hln.be
5   http://www.forces.gc.ca
6   Jane’s Sentinel Country Risk Assessments
7   World News
8   “NATO enlargement: Albania, Croatia, and Possible Future Candidates.” Congressional Research Service
9   Croatian Ministry of Defence online. http://arhiva.morh.hr
10   “NATO enlargement: Albania, Croatia, and Possible Future Candidates.” Congressional Research Service
11   Defense News (May 2009)
12   Estonian Ministry of Defence
13 http://blog.icds.ee/contact/baltic-defence-cooperation-during-economic-crisis-between-symbolism-and-substance International Centre for Defence Studies
14   Jane’s Sentinel Country Risk Assessments
15   Estonian Review http://web-static.vm.ee/static/failid/352/ER_12_2009.pdf
16   International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance 2009
17   French Senate
18   http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7458650.stm
19   French Ministry of Defence.
20   “European Defense Spending Outlook, 2009” Center for Strategic & International Studies
21   International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance 2009.
22   Dimitris Karantinos, “Impact of the financial crisis upon the Economy,” EEO SYSDEM report by the European Commission.
23   “Defence budget to be cut”, Neoskosmos, 23 June 2009.
24   Jane’s Sentinel Country Risk Assessments
25   “Hungary’s 2009 GDP to drop 6.7 pct.”,  http://www.upi.com
26    Iceland Ministry of Foreign Affairs
27   Iceland Review
28   The Baltic Course (June 1 2009) http://www.baltic-course.com/eng/finances/?doc=14379
29   Jane’s Sentinel Country Risk Assessments
30   “Lithuania Cuts Defence Budget” (March 11, 2009) Defense News
31   Ibid.
32   Budget Memorandum 2009. Ministerie Van Financiën.
  http://www.minfin.nl/dsresource?objectid=58546&type=pdf
33   Data Monitor Industry Profiles: Defence Spending in the Netherlands.
34   Hendrickson, Ryan C. (2009) “What Options for NATO? Dutch Force Projection and Defense Capabilities,” Comparative Strategy, 28:1, 60-67
35   Jane’s Sentinel Country Risk Assessments
36   http://www.nato.int/issues/commitment/docs/090407-slovak-rep.pdf
37   “Spanish Military Expenditure 2009”, (October 2008) Centre Delàs d’Estudis per la Pau,
   http://www.centredelas.org/attachments/376_informe_despesa_2009-eng.pdf
38   Jane’s Sentinel Country Risk Assessments
39   Security Concerns and Local Industrialization Boost Turkish Military Budget, (December 2007) Jamestown Foundation,
40   “Undeterred by Financial Crisis, Turkish Defence Companies Plan to Increase Domestic Arms Production,” (February 2009) Jamestown Foundation
41   Epstein, Keith, (April 2009) “Defense Budget Reflects Shifting Priorities”, Business Week Online
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Get ready to get raped hard, long and dry with pumice stone powder"
Post by: chris jones on October 09, 2010, 08:21:26 am
Berny is in the know -NWO, a key player, yup, he admitted this only because it would be unacceptable to say otherwise to a group of intelligent human beings.
 What will happen if the dollar bites the dust. All kinds of shiiiit. Civil unrest, martial law, and the people will run to the GOV for food, and lodging FEMA, where else can they go... I can't see it happening any other way, the pantry is empty, the unpatriotic disenting citizenry who took to the streets are being dealt with, the wars prepetuate, creditor nations and NATO step in, and the fairy tale ends and the reality becomes evident to all.

Title: Re: Bernanke: "Get ready to get raped hard, long and dry with pumice stone powder"
Post by: larsonstdoc on October 09, 2010, 08:56:48 am
Berny is in the know -NWO, a key player, yup, he admitted this only because it would be unacceptable to say otherwise to a group of intelligent human beings.
 What will happen if the dollar bites the dust. All kinds of shiiiit. Civil unrest, martial law, and the people will run to the GOV for food, and lodging FEMA, where else can they go... I can't see it happening any other way, the pantry is empty, the unpatriotic disenting citizenry who took to the streets are being dealt with, the wars prepetuate, creditor nations and NATO step in, and the fairy tale ends and the reality becomes evident to all.



  They know that they can make the sheep do anything FOR FOOD.
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Get ready to get raped hard, long and dry with pumice stone powder"
Post by: chris jones on October 09, 2010, 09:17:04 am
  They know that they can make the sheep do anything FOR FOOD.
  You bet it is Larson, a fundamental for controlling the masses. The ruling class are still prepetuating a smokescreen,  (by means of deception). But I get the feeling they are knawing at the bit, drooling in anticipation of the time when they can  go balllls to the wall and gain supremacy over the seething masses of what they labe as the inferior humans.
  I heard a state pol say to his entourage, let the worms go back to their breeding grounds, kinda sums up their oppinion of us commoners.
Title: Re: Bernanke: "Get ready to get raped hard, long and dry with pumice stone powder"
Post by: okay on October 09, 2010, 04:37:00 pm
I so loooooove the title of this thread, Anti ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D
Title: Ben Bernanke's 30 Stupidest Quotes
Post by: larsonstdoc on December 11, 2010, 09:19:38 am
http://capoliticalnews.com/blog_post/show/7141

Read more at the link above.  LOL!!!!!

#2 (On 60 Minutes in response to a question about what would have happened if the Federal Reserve had not "bailed out" the U.S. economy) "Unemployment would be much, much higher. It might be something like it was in the Depression. Twenty-five percent."

#4 (January 10, 2008) "The Federal Reserve is not currently forecasting a recession."


#5 (When asked directly during a congressional hearing if the Federal Reserve would monetize U.S. government debt) "The Federal Reserve will not monetize the debt."

#6 "One myth that’s out there is that what we’re doing is printing money. We’re not printing money."


#8 (November 21, 2002) "The U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at no cost."



#27 "Not all information is beneficial."


Title: Paul versus Bernanke
Post by: bigron on January 03, 2011, 04:03:31 am
Jan 4, 2011 
http://atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/MA04Dj01.html 
 

Paul versus Bernanke



By Hossein Askari and Noureddine Krichene

The fascinating two-year "rumble" that has been threatening since the November 2010 mid-term United States elections will unfold after the new congress is seated this week. The feature bout on the card will pit: in the right corner, Ron Paul, the Texas Republican congressman, a graduate of Duke University Medical School, 1988 presidential candidate and author of the best-selling 2009 book End the Fed; and in the left corner, Ben Bernanke, chairman of the board of governors of the US Federal Reserve System, MIT PhD economist, former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors and Fed governor.

This dream prize fight should take place because the Republicans have "mischievously" nominated Ron Paul as the chair of an important sub-committee of the House Financial Services Committee, namely the sub-committee on domestic monetary policy and technology, which scrutinizes US monetary policy.

The two combatants, Paul and Bernanke, have sharply opposite views in ideology and policy-making.

Read More :

http://atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/MA04Dj01.html




 
 
 
Title: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: Catalina on February 07, 2011, 05:49:50 pm
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Thursday issued a stern warning to Republican lawmakers that delays in raising the United States' $14.3 trillion debt limit could have "catastrophic" consequences.

"Beyond a certain point ... the United States would be forced into a position of defaulting on its debt. And the implications of that on our financial system, our fiscal policy and our economy would be catastrophic," he told the National Press Club.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110204/bs_nm/us_usa_fed
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: Geolibertarian on February 07, 2011, 06:10:19 pm
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Thursday issued a stern warning to Republican lawmakers that delays in raising the United States' $14.3 trillion debt limit could have "catastrophic" consequences.

"Beyond a certain point ... the United States would be forced into a position of defaulting on its debt. And the implications of that on our financial system, our fiscal policy and our economy would be catastrophic," he told the National Press Club.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110204/bs_nm/us_usa_fed

Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and Bernanke's remarks are an obvious illustration of that fact.

To understand why, see:

       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=197548.0 (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=197548.0)
       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199144.0 (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199144.0)
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: freedom_commonsense on February 07, 2011, 06:18:43 pm
Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and Bernanke's remarks are an obvious illustration of that fact.

To understand why, see:

       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=197548.0 (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=197548.0)
       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199144.0 (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199144.0)

They're going with spending cuts instead in the UK, as well as increased taxation.

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/spend_index.htm
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: agentbluescreen on February 07, 2011, 06:30:27 pm
They will force Congress to borrow more money to continue to waste-finance the Likudnik's destructive, counterproductive foreign wars and to grease the Bernanke fraud ponzi-machinery at gunpoint if they have to. If they detect any hesitation there will be no more Sears Tower.

Does anybody have a Bernanke Joker Photo?
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: Anti_Illuminati on February 07, 2011, 06:43:37 pm
(http://dailybail.com/storage/bernanke-trillion.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1289801408192)(http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gawker/2009/09/bernanke.jpg)
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: agentbluescreen on February 07, 2011, 07:06:57 pm
"We have the Sears Tower, you know...."

(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2739/4219526631_a17ed88028.jpg)

Image is copyrighted - posters available
http://www.flickr.com/photos/uswgo/4220125612/
Title: Ben Bernanke Tells the Truth: The US is on the Brink of Financial Disaster
Post by: agentbluescreen on February 07, 2011, 08:10:48 pm
http://www.infiniteunknown.net/2010/10/07/ben-bernanke-tells-the-truth-the-us-is-on-the-brink-of-financial-disaster/

Ben Bernanke Tells the Truth: The US is on the Brink of Financial Disaster
Posted On Oct 07 Economy, Global News, Politics

If elite puppets like Ben Bernanke finally admit the truth, then we are getting very close to greatest financial collapse in history.

The US is totally bankrupt and the Greatest Depression is here.



Yesterday, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke delivered a speech before the the Annual Meeting of the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council in Providence, Rhode Island. In the speech, he warned about the current state of the government finances. His conclusion, the situation is dire and “unsustainable”.

It is remarkable that mainstream media has given this speech no coverage. I repeat, the central banker of the United States says in his own words:

Let me return to the issue of longer-term fiscal sustainability. As I have discussed, projections by the CBO and others show future budget deficits and debts rising indefinitely, and at increasing rates. To be sure, projections are to some degree only hypothetical exercises. Almost by definition, unsustainable trajectories of deficits and debts will never actually transpire, because creditors would never be willing to lend to a country in which the fiscal debt relative to the national income is rising without limit. Herbert Stein, a wise economist, once said, “If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.” One way or the other, fiscal adjustments sufficient to stabilize the federal budget will certainly occur at some point. The only real question is whether these adjustments will take place through a careful and deliberative process that weighs priorities and gives people plenty of time to adjust to changes in government programs or tax policies, or whether the needed fiscal adjustments will be a rapid and painful response to a looming or actual fiscal crisis.

This is as close as you are ever going to see a central banker admit that his country’s financial situation is so dire that it could breakup at any time.

Here’s more from Bernanke’s remarkable speech:

The recent deep recession and the subsequent slow recovery have created severe budgetary pressures not only for many households and businesses, but for governments as well. Indeed, in the United States, governments at all levels are grappling not only with the near-term effects of economic weakness, but also with the longer-run pressures that will be generated by the need to provide health care and retirement security to an aging population. There is no way around it–meeting these challenges will require policymakers and the public to make some very difficult decisions and to accept some sacrifices. But history makes clear that countries that continually spend beyond their means suffer slower growth in incomes and living standards and are prone to greater economic and financial instability.

Now, get this, he warns that it is not only the Federal government that has financial problems, but also states and local governments:

Although state and local governments face significant fiscal challenges, my primary focus today will be the federal budget situation and its economic implications.

Does Bernanke see the tsunami hitting or what?

Then, he put things in historical perspective:

The budgetary position of the federal government has deteriorated substantially during the past two fiscal years, with the budget deficit averaging 9-1/2 percent of national income during that time. For comparison, the deficit averaged 2 percent of national income for the fiscal years 2005 to 2007, prior to the onset of the recession and financial crisis. The recent deterioration was largely the result of a sharp decline in tax revenues brought about by the recession and the subsequent slow recovery, as well as by increases in federal spending needed to alleviate the recession and stabilize the financial system. As a result of these deficits, the accumulated federal debt measured relative to national income has increased to a level not seen since the aftermath of World War II.

Then, he explains the deterioration and the problems it will create for the entire economy:

For now, the budget deficit has stabilized and, so long as the economy and financial markets continue to recover, it should narrow relative to national income over the next few years. Economic conditions provide little scope for reducing deficits significantly further over the next year or two; indeed, premature fiscal tightening could put the recovery at risk. Over the medium- and long-term, however, the story is quite different. If current policy settings are maintained, and under reasonable assumptions about economic growth, the federal budget will be on an unsustainable path in coming years, with the ratio of federal debt held by the public to national income rising at an increasing pace.2 Moreover, as the national debt grows, so will the associated interest payments, which in turn will lead to further increases in projected deficits. Expectations of large and increasing deficits in the future could inhibit current household and business spending–for example, by reducing confidence in the longer-term prospects for the economy or by increasing uncertainty about future tax burdens and government spending–and thus restrain the recovery. Concerns about the government’s long-run fiscal position may also constrain the flexibility of fiscal policy to respond to current economic conditions.

Then, he tells us how powerful the negative trends are and how the aging population and Obamacare are going to make things worse:

Our fiscal challenges are especially daunting because they are mostly the product of powerful underlying trends, not short-term or temporary factors. Two of the most important driving forces are the aging of the U.S. population, the pace of which will intensify over the next couple of decades as the baby-boom generation retires, and rapidly rising health-care costs. As the health-care needs of the aging population increase, federal health-care programs are on track to be by far the biggest single source of fiscal imbalances over the longer term. Indeed, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the ratio of federal spending for health-care programs (principally Medicare and Medicaid) to national income will double over the next 25 years, and continue to rise significantly further after that…he aging of the U.S. population will also strain Social Security, as the number of workers paying taxes into the system rises more slowly than the number of people receiving benefits. This year, there are about five individuals between the ages of 20 and 64 for each person aged 65 and older. By 2030, when most of the baby boomers will have retired, this ratio is projected to decline to around 3, and it may subsequently fall yet further as life expectancies continue to increase. Overall, the projected fiscal pressures associated with Social Security are considerably smaller than the pressures associated with federal health programs, but they still present a significant challenge to policymakers.

Then he goes back to warn that the financial mess also exists at the state and local level:

The same underlying trends affecting federal finances will also put substantial pressures on state and local budgets, as organizations like yours have helped to highlight. In Rhode Island, as in other states, the retirement of state employees, together with continuing increases in health-care costs, will cause public pension and retiree health-care obligations to become increasingly difficult to meet. Estimates of unfunded pension liabilities for the states as whole span a wide range, but some researchers put the figure as high as $2 trillion at the end of 2009.5 Estimates of states’ liabilities for retiree health benefits are even more uncertain because of the difficulty of projecting medical costs decades into the future. However, one recent estimate suggests that state governments have a collective liability of almost $600 billion for retiree health benefits. These health benefits have usually been handled on a pay-as-you-go basis and therefore could impose a substantial fiscal burden in coming years as large numbers of state workers retire.

Bernanke then breaks the news that the problem is global:

It may be scant comfort, but the United States is not alone in facing fiscal challenges. The global recession has dealt a blow to the fiscal positions of most other advanced economies, and, as in the United States, their expenditures for public health care and pensions are expected to rise substantially in the coming decades as their populations age. Indeed, the population of the United States overall is younger than those of a number of European countries as well as Japan.

Bernanke then re-emphasises, the damage this will do to the overall economy:

Failing to address our unsustainable fiscal situation exposes our country to serious economic costs and risks. In the short run, as I have noted, concerns and uncertainty about exploding future deficits could make households, businesses, and investors more cautious about spending, capital investment, and hiring. In the longer term, a rising level of government debt relative to national income is likely to put upward pressure on interest rates and thus inhibit capital formation, productivity, and economic growth. Larger government deficits increase our reliance on foreign lenders, all else being equal, implying that the share of U.S. national income devoted to paying interest to foreign investors will increase over time. Income paid to foreign investors is not available for domestic consumption or investment. And an increasingly large cost of servicing a growing national debt means that the adjustments, when they come, could be sharp and disruptive. For example, large tax increases that might be imposed to cover the rising interest on the debt would slow potential growth by reducing incentives to work, save, hire, and invest.

He then states that we do not know how much time is left before all hell breaks loose:

It would be difficult to identify a specific threshold at which federal debt begins to pose more substantial costs and risks to the nation’s economy. Perhaps no bright line exists; the costs and risks may grow more or less continuously as the federal debt rises. What we do know, however, is that the threat to our economy is real and growing, which should be sufficient reason for fiscal policymakers to put in place a credible plan for bringing deficits down to sustainable levels over the medium term.

From there,Bernanke goes into a bit of wishful thinking by identifying ways Congress can rein in spending and make the tax system more efficient. Good luck with all of that.

The real important part of Bernanke’s speech is the first half where he warns of the financial crisis just ahead.

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Source: Economic Policy Journal (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2010/10/bernanke-tells-truth-united-states-is.html)
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: Catalina on February 07, 2011, 08:12:52 pm
Hill poll shows 62% opposed to raising the debt ceiling

    Only 27 percent of likely voters favor raising the nation’s $14.3 trillion debt ceiling, while 62 percent oppose it, according to an exclusive poll for The Hill.

    The poll found solid opposition from Republicans and also from independent voters, who are critical to President Obama’s re-election in 2012.

    Seventy-seven percent of likely GOP voters and 64 percent of independent voters said they don’t want the debt ceiling to be raised. Even among Democrats, more oppose raising the ceiling (46 percent) than support it (42 percent).


http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/07/hill-poll-shows-62-opposed-to-raising-the-debt-ceiling/

Despite the wishes of the people, they will follow the puppet masters.
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: Geolibertarian on February 08, 2011, 08:49:39 am
Despite the wishes of the people, they will follow the puppet masters.

If the people would familiarize themselves with the following, perhaps they'd be more careful about what they "wish" for:

       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=197548.0 (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=197548.0)  
       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199144.0 (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199144.0)

As to the fiscal crisis, if a critical mass of people would simply stop obsessing over mindless distractions and use their collective power to compel the government to (a) stop the wars and (b) stop handing out trillions of dollars in "bailout" money to criminal bankers, that alone would bring this engineered crisis to a screaching hault.

Unfortunately, it appears unlikely they'll do this, since that would mean having to put almost as much effort into political activism as they do into cheerleading their favorite sports teams.

Thus, what will probably happen instead is that they'll sheepishly let Congress cut the social safety net at the very time it's needed most (a typical form of "shock therapy"). And that, of course, is precisely what both the international bankers and their "opponents" from the austerity-promoting Austrian School (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=192293.0) want to happen.

So once again, the parasitic ruling elite are playing chess while everyone else plays checkers.
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: agentbluescreen on February 08, 2011, 09:07:51 am
This is the real "sports play-off" that's going on here...

(http://www.webdisplays.com/Bernanke_Joker.jpg)
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: larsonstdoc on February 08, 2011, 09:13:51 am


  This is such a non-story.  The only thing they can do is print more money.
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: Geolibertarian on February 08, 2011, 09:25:44 am
This is such a non-story.  The only thing they can do is print more money.

Contrary to what the monetary flat-earthers (http://monetary.org/refute.htm) from the Austrian School might have you believe, the banking cartel does not "print" money. Let me repeat that: it does not "print" money!

It loans money (or at least what most people believe to be "money") at interest (http://www.wealthmoney.org/articles/our-flawed-monetary-system/), and does so without ever creating the money needed to pay that interest.

----------------------------

"Have you ever wondered how everyone -- governments, corporations, small businesses, families -- can all be in debt at the same time and for such astronomical amounts? Have you questioned how there can be that much money out there to lend? Now you know: there isn't. Banks do not lend money; they simply create it from debt....Isn't it astounding that, despite the incredible wealth of resources, innovation and productivity that surrounds us, almost all of us -- from governments to companies to individuals -- are heavily in debt to bankers? If only people would stop and think: 'How can that be? How can it be that the people who actually produce all the real wealth in the world are in debt to those who merely lend out the money that represents the wealth?' Even more amazing is that once we realize that money really is debt, we realize that if there's no debt, there'd be no money. If this is news to you, you are not alone. Most people imagine that if all debts were paid off, the state of the economy would improve. It's certainly true on an individual level. Just as we have more money to spend when our loan payments are finished, we think that if everyone were out of debt, there would be more money to spend in general. But the truth is the exact opposite: there would be no money at all. There it is: we are totally depenedent on continually renewed bank credit for there to be any money in existence. No loans, no money."

-- Money As Debt (http://globalgulag.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,379.msg1156.html#msg1156)

----------------------------

Thus, any attempt to fix this mess that does not involve implementing the monetary reform measures called for here (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=98465.0) will amount to nothing more than rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: larsonstdoc on February 08, 2011, 09:42:03 am


  Well call it what you will Geo.  It is the scam of all scams.  I understand where you are coming from.  I am giving the macro point and you are close up giving the micro point. 
Title: Re: 'Fearmongering' Bernanke Warns of Catastrophe if Debt Limit not Raised
Post by: Catalina on February 08, 2011, 10:16:49 am
If the people would familiarize themselves with the following, perhaps they'd be more careful about what they "wish" for:

       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=197548.0 (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=197548.0)  
       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199144.0 (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=199144.0)

As to the fiscal crisis, if a critical mass of people would simply stop obsessing over mindless distractions and use their collective power to compel the government to (a) stop the wars and (b) stop handing out trillions of dollars in "bailout" money to criminal bankers, that alone would bring this engineered crisis to a screaching hault.

Unfortunately, it appears unlikely they'll do this, since that would mean having to put almost as much effort into political activism as they do into cheerleading their favorite sports teams.

Thus, what will probably happen instead is that they'll sheepishly let Congress cut the social safety net at the very time it's needed most (a typical form of "shock therapy"). And that, of course, is precisely what both the international bankers and their "opponents" from the austerity-promoting Austrian School (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=192293.0) want to happen.

So once again, the parasitic ruling elite are playing chess while everyone else plays checkers.

Geo your quote:

if a critical mass of people would simply stop obsessing over mindless distractions and use their collective power to compel the government to (a) stop the wars and (b) stop handing out trillions of dollars in "bailout" money to criminal bankers, that alone would bring this engineered crisis to a screaching hault.

Is absolutely right, but there's a problem. America loves war. This is an excellent article addressing this particular issue.

Secret China war plan: trillions in U.S. debt. Yes, Americans love war. Yes, wars cost money. And pile on debt, new taxes. Still, we love war. Why else let the military budget burn 48% of your tax dollars? But why is it “off the table” when the GOP talks “deficit cuts”?

Why? We love war. We’d rather attack with a macho battle cry like “damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!” than listen to a warning from historian Kevin Phillips: “Most great nations, at the peak of their economic power, become arrogant, wage great world wars at great cost, wasting vast resources, taking on huge debt, ultimately burning themselves out.”

Which dominates our Congressional deficit hawks? Which is China’s military strategy?

Admit it, we love war. Marine Corps posters grabbed me as a kid. Trained me as an aviation weapons system tech. So I couldn’t resist Erik Sofge’s edgy thriller, “China’s Secret War Plan,” about a China-U.S. war. Like a fast-paced Tom Clancy thriller. In Popular Mechanics: One of my favorites as a kid working in a small-town magazine store.

Yes, war’s popular. Locked in our DNA long ago. Sofge’s thriller was based on war games played by Pentagon generals and Rand Corporation strategists.


Americans love war. Can’t resist videogames, war movies: “Hunt for Red October,” “Platoon,” “Dirty Dozen,” “Star Wars,” “Terminator.” War turns us on, a testosterone virus in our brains. Our love blinds us to costs, collateral damage, unintended consequences, new debt for our kids. Besides, they’ll grow up loving war. DNA is passed on. Can’t resist.

That hot button was pushed recently with “secret” photos of China’s new stealth bomber exposed during the state visit of China’s President Hu Jintao. Sofge’s thriller begins:

Aug. 9, 2015, 0400. China’s war for “Taiwan starts in the early morning. There are no naval bombardments or waves of bombers … 1,200 cruise and ballistic missiles rise from heavy vehicles on the Chinese mainland ... Taiwan’s modest missile defense network. a scattered deployment of I-Hawk and Patriot interceptors, slams into dozens of incoming warheads … a futile gesture. The mass raid overwhelms the defenses as hundreds of Chinese warheads blast the island’s military bases and airports.”
Do taxpayers have a choice? Plan for big wars, get bigger deficits?

The GOP wants to cut America’s massive debt. But “off-the-charts” military spending is “off the table.” Back in the ‘40s, WWII consumed 57% of our GDP. Today, war eats up about half America’s budget.

We’re sinking under Iraq war debt. Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz estimates Iraq at $3 trillion, with $2 trillion for future costs, like VA medical. The Afghan war, maybe another $3 trillion. Plus endless terrorist threats. Future wars are “planned” years, even decades in advance, strategies based on Pentagon-Rand war games.

America talks peace. But deep inside our collective brain is a dark monster: We’re little kids who love playing war. Age 10 I had a collection of model fighter planes, played air wars. Age 15, owned three guns for hunting. Then the Corps. Like a moth to the flames, we cannot resist our destiny in war.
Sofge brings alive the action in our brains:

“Taiwan’s air force is grounded … Taiwanese troops mobilize in downtown Taipei and take up positions on the beaches facing China, just 100 miles to the west. But they know what the world knows: This is no longer Taiwan’s fight. This is a battle between an old superpower and a new one.” Games or reality, it’s all in our heads.

Or is this how WWIII starts? Between an aging America that loves war, won’t surrender without a fight, and the world’s rapidly emerging superpower, predicted to have a population one billion larger than America’s by 2050. Plus an economy 40% of the world’s GDP, dwarfing America’s GDP predicted to fall to just 14%. Yes, China’s the emerging new superpower, a crafty enemy laughing as we waste our economic resources.

Listen as Sofge quotes retired Rear Adm. Eric McVadon, former naval attaché in Beijing: “They are obsessed with Taiwan. On some given day, it’s entirely possible for people to be standing around a table in the Politburo in Beijing, and someone gets the ball rolling. And when it stops, we’re at war.”

Warning: That toxic thinking may well happen again when new neocons, a future Rumsfeld/Cheney team, gets the same paranoid itchings at the same time as China’s generals, all driven by inflated egos, irrational obsessions and a propensity to make the same kind of misjudgments that launched the Iraq War.
Warrior mindset sabotages our economy and superpower status

”Right now the Chinese seem to have taken the lead in this new arms race,” warns Sofge: “When Rand released a report in 2000 describing the potential outcome of a Sino-American conflict over Taiwan, the United States won the war handily. Nine years later, the nonpartisan think tank revised its analysis, accounting for Beijing’s updated air force, its focus on cyber warfare and its ability to use ballistic missiles to take out American satellites. Rand’s new conclusion: The United States would ultimately lose an air war, and an overall conflict would be more difficult and costly than many had imagined.”

Warning, just nine years from 2000 to 2009: The Iraq-Afghan Wars were supposed to make America stronger. Wrong. Those nine years are a perfect example of how war distorted America’s collective brain. Our neocon mindset about the Iraq war resulted in what’s now the “biggest foreign policy blunder” in history. Sofge captures this insanity:

”Ever since 1949, when Nationalist forces retreated to Taiwan following the Communist victory in the Chinese Civil War, Beijing has regarded the island as a renegade province of the People’s Republic. Now, in 2015, only the United States can offer Taiwan protection.” But “the nearest aircraft carrier is the U.S.S. Nimitz, which had just left the Japanese port of Yokosuka on Tokyo Bay … at least two days for the carrier to reach the strait … The closest other carrier group, near Pearl Harbor, is six days out.”

Yes, too late: The war’s over in less than 24 hours. Ironically, the Iraq/Afghan wars have not only weakened our economy and weakened our ability to fight future wars, they weakened America’s superpower status by indirectly handing the war-game victory to China. Worse, our irrational, neocon war brain is now demanding Americans “double down,” insisting defense cuts are “off the table.” Yes folks, America loves war; in that mindset, we will take on trillions new debt, even go down in flames.
Powerful new war strategy: China’s army of “cyber-attack” hackers

Suddenly, Sofge’s thriller exposes China’s fabulous new high-tech strategy: “Until the Nimitz arrives, it’s up to Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, 400 mi