Time Person of the Year- Ben Bernanke
davidtrios
Posts: 9,732
He saved the US and World from another Great Depression. It seems like the economy is growing so this man 1000% deserves this distinction. I really hope he wins the Economic Nobel Prize.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
I think I heard that Tiger Woods is also up for the Nobel Prize for Husbandry, as well.
YESSSSS...I love a good facepalm.
Not as much as your Santa hat on the Judge though...
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
That's like saying the commander-in-chief of a military waging two wars deserves a nobel peace prize...oh, wait :roll:
Is it opposites year or what?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HurgeLexmHY
chalk this one up to funny but so true! ... although i must add that a tirade like that was executed with f-bombs ... most impressive ...
this guy is a moron. he doesn't realize that Bernake helped save the world economy. companies that got bailouts are able to pay them back and the jobs are slowly coming back. if he is so poor, why doesn't he start by selling his SUV and getting something more fuel efficient? that might save him some cash.
i'm posting a movie below, called "The Money Masters - How International Bankers Gained Control of America". i highly suggest checking it out.
it's long, and may look cheesy, but contains some vital information that they don't tell you in school about what money really is, how its value and availability are arbitrarily controlled, and by who. there's some great history here on central banks, including the oh-so-secretive fed. it will give you a whole new perspective on what's going on in the world today.
this thing is over 3 hours long, so you may want to break it up over a few days. but grab a beer, and check it out:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936#
If I were to set my house on fire, run outside, and use my garden hose to put out all of the flames in the front of the house (meanwhile, it's too early to tell whether the rear of the house is still burning), should I be instantaly declared "person of the year" on my block? Sure, at first glance my house appears to be still standing, but charred pretty band, and somewhat functional-- it's still smoking out the back, but I'll check on that later... As far as I CAN TELL, I don't know that there aren't any cinders that have hit my neighbor's houses or brush. Did I do anything positive, or did I just (possibly) avert a total disaster that I myself created?
Ben Bernanke helped "start the fire" under Greenspan where he earned his nickname "Helicopter Ben" on the Federal Reserve Board. Ben was there for Greenspan, and helped Alan make bad decisions well.
But I won't like any Fed chair, so I'm biased. He certainly is "Person of the Year" in some respects, but I don't think any of them are all that positive.
The guy in the video won't sell his car for a fuel-efficient car because a used car is nowhere near the cost of a fuel efficient car, and the payback isn't even in the 5-year loan to own it? Why? The fuel-efficient car is not in demand enough. The reason? Oil is unreasonably, and falsley CHEAP, because our tax dollars subsidize it. Take away those subsidies, and see what oil REALLY costs. The cost to fuel a combustion engine would eventually outweigh the benefits of buying oil. At that point, more people would not think twice about going green. But who writes the checks to the oil companies? The Fed, with counterfeit money, through the treausury and bills in congress. They never ever withold money that our elected officials ask of them. Why? Aren't they in charge of the economy? Couldn't they refuse to do it just once? Not one of them ever thought, "HEY CONGRESS, THIS IS A BAD IDEA!" You know, because they have so many great ones? Do these guys reall think that it's ALWAYS a good idea to borrow and print more money?
Free Market Economists estimate the enemployment to be around 20%. No real growth to be found here.
I actually thought your first post was sarcastic until I read this post. I'm still on the fence about whether you are being serious or not. If you are serious, then you know shit about economics, and should probably buy one of these: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0324224729/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0340947500&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=01H5N8A85319AJDBBFNE
Thanks for the laugh. I can't believe people actually fall for this crap.
Bernanke Made A 'Pig's Breakfast' Of the Financial Crisis: Christopher Whalen (VIDEO)
Did Ben Bernanke deserve to be named Time's "Person of the Year"?
"Absolutely not," Christopher Whalen, managing director of Institutional Risk Analytics told Yahoo's Tech Ticker yesterday. "On a personal level I have great sympathy for Chairman Bernanke but he's made such a pig's breakfast of this whole situation."
Whalen's been a vocal critic of banks like Citigroup, which he called "the queen of the zombie dance party" and has been adamant about the disparity between Wall Street's rebounding profits and the larger economy. He also certainly has no love for the Fed Chairman, who will face a Senate vote today for confirmation for a second term.
Arguing that Bernanke has politicized the Federal Reserve and done little other than rescuing the banking sector, Whalen said:
"He hasn't changed the underlying financial reality inside the banks and he hasn't done anything for the real economy. So where have you helped us? The only thing I see is inflation. For the average American the message they should take away from this year is this: Bernanke's policy has insured we'll see the purchasing power of Americans' savings dwindle."
Whalen also suggested that by keeping debt levels high and interest rates at historic lows, Bernanke is actually exacerbating the financial crisis:
You saw the way the bubble was during '05, '06, '07, do you think all of that GDP was real? Of course not, it was financed with debt. I think we're closing to the real economy now in terms of GDP. You have to deflate in order to fix the economy."
Though he believes Bernanke will win enough Senate vote to be reconfirmed, Whalen said Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd could be in trouble if he supports Bernanke. "Every member of the Senate who is running for reelection next November would love to vote no," he added.
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Putin got it a few years back, Hitler and Stalin in their time and so on.
It's not a clap on the shoulder, just a "this guy's been at the front a lot this year and made important decisions". With a US/European bias of course.
So in a year marked by financial crisis, well, he's a very obvious choice really. No matter what you think of his policies and actions. Time gets to highlight the crisis, which is fitting, by naming the leader of the central bank.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
"Government unwinds its stake in Citigroup posting a $12 billion profit on $45 billion bailout"
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ ... 7226.story
Bailing out businesses (by buying their stocks) that THEN fail and bankrupt, would be a waste of public money. Thing is, if they dont fail, the government can sell out it's shares again at the opportune time later and either take away a profit, or at the very least cover a lot of the investment.
A lot of the hubbub has been about "That money's as good as lost already!", when it seems to be the case that they weren't lost, and that propped up companies survived, thus not really incurring any cost to the public.
The point isn't how much money is slammed on the table to avert disaster. The point is how much you've lost (or even gained) once the storm passes. Money made available does not equal money spent. Investments is just that, and not an expenditure.
Will be interesting to see though what the loss or gain will be when the state pulls out of all the troubled firms.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
But I might as well chime in that bailouts were pretty necessary. The structure and so forth can be discussed, and certainly well connected men got as sweet a deal as possible. Which they always will mind you. For the government, there is no good deal. Allowing big businesses to fail without any intervention, not to speak of letting the financial system collapse has humongous costs either way. Let the automakers bankrupt, would have earned the state a million or two unemployed extra, for instance. All of which would qualify for benefits from the state funds and various social assistance. You let people go out of work in the middle of a crisis, they are very hard to reintegrate into the labour market after a while. So that will be a net loss to the economy on the longer term. So for the state in such direct bailouts, the cost must be weighed against the cost of benefits that would be the alternative, and the potential loss to the work force unless they can be reemployed within some months.
As for saving banking, that's an absolute no-brainer, as the consequences would be far too shattering to contemplate. Show me the responsible politician who wouldn't take some years of protracted recession over financial armageddon that would drag everything down with it.
Anywho, my point was only to show what bailouts really are, and especially, that money promised/invested do not equal money spent. Although one might be forgiven for thinking that for all the rhetoric in the media and various politicians...
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Considering I loaned GM money will I now be getting an interest check?
As I see it:
The problem that the US brewed is an aversion from politicians to "meddle in business". Problem is, that if business behaves irresponsibly, the problem is again the state's, since the consequences exceed the individual businesses and have a societal effect. Only thing to avoid bailouts and such in the future is to ensure decent checks and balances in the system from now on (which had eroded away over the years), and not slowly revert to letting the big boys in business take care for themselves again. Do away with the self-regulating market fantasy, and instead ensure a market that works for the good of us all.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965