• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Person of the year 2009- Ben Bernanke

Yes, I have heard both names mentioned more then I have heard the name "bernanke"

Then you simply haven't been paying much attention to the economy.

Jackboot said:
That said, this is not the point, just what has this man done, that we should applaud him, much less name him "person of the year"?:confused:

Person of the Year is not an honor, so whether or not he should be "applauded" is completely irrelevant (although he should be). As for what he's done...he's kept interest rates at effectively 0% and flooded the economy with cash, which is exactly what it needed.
 
When Bush was president and the stock market was at record levels,Liberals insisted that the stockmarket was a false indicator ;)

Regardless of what you believe "liberals" insisted when Bush was president, the stock market is a very important indicator of economic health. It's not the only indicator by any means, but it's definitely an important one.
 
You continue to ignore a weak dollar, of course the dow is rising, people are being raped in this country. So again, is the dow really at 10,000, or is this just an illusion?

Can you please explain to the class why a weak dollar is a bad thing? No cheating by using Wikipedia or Google. ;)
Personally I hope the dollar gets even weaker. It'll create lots of jobs for Americans.
 
Can you please explain to the class why a weak dollar is a bad thing? No cheating by using Wikipedia or Google. ;)
Personally I hope the dollar gets even weaker. It'll create lots of jobs for Americans.

Or maybe more interestingly, how raising the value of the dollar would improve the economy. Bernanke could raise value of the dollar right now if he wanted to by raising interest rates.
 
Can you please explain to the class why a weak dollar is a bad thing? No cheating by using Wikipedia or Google. ;)
Personally I hope the dollar gets even weaker. It'll create lots of jobs for Americans.

The better question is are the benefits of a weak dollar greater then the costs of a weak dollar?

That I have don't have an answer to.
 
The better question is are the benefits of a weak dollar greater then the costs of a weak dollar?

That I have don't have an answer to.

I think so. As a nation where people don't travel abroad much, where most of our debt is in our own currency, and where we have a huge trade deficit, I see lots of upsides to having a weaker dollar and very few downsides.
 
Last edited:
Bernanke salvaged a flawed system, effectively saving the corporatist oligarchy from a lynch mob.
 
I'd just like to here the argument for everything falling apart. Everyone throws this around but I haven't heard an actual argument for it. How would everything have fallen apart without intervention?
 
I'd just like to here the argument for everything falling apart. Everyone throws this around but I haven't heard an actual argument for it. How would everything have fallen apart without intervention?

The day after Lehman died, what happened Tony?
 
Can you please explain to the class why a weak dollar is a bad thing? No cheating by using Wikipedia or Google. ;)
Personally I hope the dollar gets even weaker. It'll create lots of jobs for Americans.

"The Labor Department said Thursday that the number of new jobless claims rose to 480,000 last week, up 7,000 from the previous week. That was a worse performance than the decline to 465,000 that economists had expected."

Yes, things are just gangbusters up to this point.:doh

A weak dollar is terrible for this country, and we will soon understand why, very soon. This argument about exports is nonsense, as we do not export much of anything anymore, as the left has pushed out manufacturing, and the unions are destroying what little we have left. Sure, we will see short term success, but this short sighted thinking is what has us in this horrible hole we find ourselves in, today.

Those who want to see a weaker dollar, I do not believe they understand the importance of the dollar around the world. There is a reason that the dollar has been the global currency of choice, and we are threatening that world wide trust and respect. When inflation comes, and it will, we will not be hearing this happy talk, believe that!
 
Not exactly a proof. Can you offer anything more than a one-liner?

I will give you Ben's own words.

Bernanke's crisis started in 2007 with the mortgage meltdown; lenders began to fail. Bernanke cut interest rates repeatedly. In 2008, the Fed stopped the collapse of Bear Stearns by arranging a sale to another firm.

But then came the end of Wall Street as we knew it. Mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were seized by the government. On Sept. 14, Merrill Lynch was sold in distress. The next day, the 158-year-old investment bank Lehman Brothers failed

"You didn't rescue Lehman Brothers. It set off a worldwide panic when it went bankrupt. And I wonder, looking back, whether you think that was a mistake," Pelley asked.

"There were many people who said, 'Let 'em fail.' You know, 'It's not a problem. The markets will take care of it.' And I think I knew better than that. And Lehman proved that you cannot let a large internationally active firm fail in the middle of a financial crisis. Now was it a mistake? It wasn't a mistake for the following reason: we didn't have the option, we didn't have the tools. All the Federal Reserve can do is make loans against collateral," Bernanke replied.

The day after Lehman, Bernanke's Fed did something astounding: it loaned $85 billion to a company that wasn't a bank at all - American International Group (AIG), the global insurance giant that was also involved in backing risky mortgage investments. Bernanke says, unlike Lehman, the Fed could make the loans based on good collateral in AIG's portfolio.

"There have now been four rescues of AIG, $160 billion. Why is that necessary?" Pelley asked.

"Let me just first say that of all the events and all of the things we've done in the last 18 months, the single one that makes me the angriest, that gives me the most angst, is the intervention with AIG. Here was a company that made all kinds of unconscionable bets. Then, when those bets went wrong, we had a situation where the failure of that company would have brought down the financial system," Bernanke said.

"You say it makes you angry?" Pelley asked.

"It makes me angry. I slammed the phone more than a few times on discussing AIG. I understand why the American people are angry. It's absolutely unfair that taxpayer dollars are going to prop up a company that made these terrible bets, that was operating out of the sight of regulators, but which we have no choice but the stabilize, or else risk enormous impact, not just in the financial system, but on the whole U.S. economy," Bernanke explained.

By September, Bernanke and then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson went to Capitol Hill to urge a massive bailout of the banking system.

Asked how close of a call it was, Bernanke said, "It was very close. It was very close. The Congress passed the bill that gave Treasury the right to put capital into the banks in the first week of October. And it was in the second week of October that the crisis reached its peak. If we had not had those powers, we could have had a much, much worse outcome. So it was a very dangerous situation."

"Was anyone on Capitol Hill skeptical? Did they push back at all, you know, 'Mr. Chairman, it's probably not quite that bad'?" Pelley asked.

"Well, I do remember one conversation I had where I was addressing a caucus of congressmen. And a congressman said to me, 'Mr. Chairman, you know, I'm talking to bankers in my town. I'm talking to shopkeepers in my town. And they say things are normal. Nothing's going on. We don't see any problem.' And I turned to him and I said, 'You will,'" Bernanke recalled.

Ben Bernanke's Greatest Challenge - 60 Minutes - CBS News

You can continue on your own.
 
Last edited:
All I see is him stating that everything would have gone to hell without the bailouts, but I don't see any argument for why that is so.
 
The fed created this problem with their unreasonably low interest rates, the government then made this worse by forcing banks to share this wealth with the people, many of whom were not credit worthy. The banks, through insurance giants like AIG, then made terrible bets on these bundled mortgages, and this spread through the financial world like wildfire, creating the mother of all bubbles.

This problem was building with Greenspan, and Bernanke knew exactly what the dangers were, as he had been in the fed before taking the lead, since 2002. He continued this practice all through his term, even knowing the dangers we faced with Fannie and Freddie, still he did nothing. I am sorry, I cannot imagine praising someone who either ignored all of these obvious danger signs, or was simply incompetent.
 
Last edited:
Bernanke salvaged a flawed system, effectively saving the corporatist oligarchy from a lynch mob.

If the people did not string them up when AIG sent taxpayer funds to foreign banks, they never will!:doh
 
All I see is him stating that everything would have gone to hell without the bailouts, but I don't see any argument for why that is so.

Ill give you the short version.

Our financial system (and many others) is primarily dependent upon "cash flow". Meaning, everyone has to pay their bills on time or pay interest/go bankrupt for default.

Of derivatives and swaps arm of Lehman, they were leveraging in excess of 30:1 on Aaa rated securities (of which various bundles where comprised of sub prime loans to "ease the pool"). Once the cash flow's began to offset Lehman would have to sell assets, borrow money, or default (AIG). Eventually (with assets modeled to market value) you cannot issue anymore debt, and cannot borrow anymore... you go under; and that's what Lehman did. Such an act can spark a massive sell off in the mbs market, of which has dire consequences. Under mark to market, financial firms had to model their assets at market value; when the value begins to fall at enormous rates, there is an ever bigger bolt to capital. By the end of the month, the market begins to realize its first $1 trillion evaporation in wealth... in one day.

And there was AIG, who was the worlds largest insurer against such risky investments unable to make the payments on the defaults. Now, even "supposed" strong firms like Goldman Sachs becomes short on its cash flow liabilities and could be forced to borrow. You read the article right?

In comes TARP. Along with basically eliminating the existence of large scale investment banks, the ones that survived or did not get bought were then able to borrow all they will need to ease credit availability. Remember, banks get their loans first, and if they were hogging all the action, it could be unbelievably expensive (rates begin to rise :shock:) for everyone else. But TARP could only last so long, and with new facilities being ushered by the Fed, in steps Bernanke with his promise. For the first time since the 1930's the yield on the 3 month goes to zero, which is a signal that more default and uncertainty is coming.

But it did not. The Fed expanded their balance sheet 3x's over, and provided the market with the ample amount of liquidity to prevent asset devaluations. Combined with a global effort to enact stimulus (to make up for the massive drop in velocity), we see the reversal in asset devaluation.

Dow Jones:
 

Attachments

  • 111.jpg
    111.jpg
    19.9 KB · Views: 2
Why wouldn't Time select the American People? I mean, in second behind Ben, was Stanley McChrystal....that I get. Third place went to the Chinese worker.....uh....yeah. Ben prints money he don't have...cow tows to Obama(I bet most of you thought Obama was saving the economy, now we hear it was Ben B from the INDEPENDENT Fed) and wins Person of the Year?

The American People deserve Person of the Year. Why? Because 2008 is over and thus the election is over, we couldn't possibly give out the award last year, obviously, most people in this nation had a brain fizz upon entering the ballot. But this year.....we deserve the prize, our money being spent, our children being put into debt, our economy WE saved OURSELVES. By the hard work and cutting expenses it takes to keep business alive during this economy. Throw us a bone!
 
I'd just like to here the argument for everything falling apart. Everyone throws this around but I haven't heard an actual argument for it. How would everything have fallen apart without intervention?

One big bank collapses, and the government decides not to bail it out. It defaults on all its obligations to its creditors (e.g. other big banks). They are forced to write off the assets, which in turn weakens THEIR financial position. This causes the next-weakest banks to collapse, and the government decides not to bail them out. They default on all their obligations to their creditors (e.g. other big banks).

Rinse, repeat.
 
"The Labor Department said Thursday that the number of new jobless claims rose to 480,000 last week, up 7,000 from the previous week. That was a worse performance than the decline to 465,000 that economists had expected."

Yes, things are just gangbusters up to this point.:doh

A weak dollar is terrible for this country, and we will soon understand why, very soon. This argument about exports is nonsense, as we do not export much of anything anymore, as the left has pushed out manufacturing, and the unions are destroying what little we have left. Sure, we will see short term success, but this short sighted thinking is what has us in this horrible hole we find ourselves in, today.

Those who want to see a weaker dollar, I do not believe they understand the importance of the dollar around the world. There is a reason that the dollar has been the global currency of choice, and we are threatening that world wide trust and respect. When inflation comes, and it will, we will not be hearing this happy talk, believe that!

I notice you didn't offer any rationale why a weak dollar is a bad thing, or why a strong dollar is a good thing. ;)
 
I notice you didn't offer any rationale why a weak dollar is a bad thing, or why a strong dollar is a good thing. ;)

I certainly did, and as I said before, just wait until inflation hits, this one will be HUGE!:shock:
 
I certainly did,

Can you point me to the sentence in your incoherent rant about unemployment, "the left," and unions where you explain the benefits of a strong dollar and/or the problems of a weak dollar, so that I can address your point?

Jackboot said:
and as I said before, just wait until inflation hits, this one will be HUGE!:shock:

And now an incoherent rant about inflation? What are you referring to when you say "this one"? :confused:
 
Can you point me to the sentence in your incoherent rant about unemployment, "the left," and unions where you explain the benefits of a strong dollar and/or the problems of a weak dollar, so that I can address your point?



And now an incoherent rant about inflation? What are you referring to when you say "this one"? :confused:

A strong dollar means buying power, a weak dollar means less buying power, was this simplified enough for you?

If not, I can then go in to more complex problems, but I doubt you will be able to keep up. Shall we discuss what will happen when the world dumps the dollar, and how much it will cost for you to then fill your gas tank?

Who will you blame then?

How will you defend this ponzi scheme at that point?

When the price of milk and bread double, who will you point fingers at then?
 
A strong dollar means buying power, a weak dollar means less buying power, was this simplified enough for you?

Buying power for imports, yes. Why is it inherently a good thing to import more instead of producing it domestically? I'm not saying it's a BAD thing, but it's hardly an advantage. We also aren't able to export as much if the dollar is strong.

Jackboot said:
If not, I can then go in to more complex problems, but I doubt you will be able to keep up. Shall we discuss what will happen when the world dumps the dollar, and how much it will cost for you to then fill your gas tank?

If oil-producing nations stop using the dollar (which I think is inevitable anyway), it will cost whatever the exchange rate is. At that point, there would be more negative effects to letting the dollar get even weaker than it was at the moment they stopped using it. But there are no such effects as of now.

Jackboot said:
Who will you blame then?

How will you defend this ponzi scheme at that point?

Ponzi scheme? Huh? A weak dollar is a Ponzi scheme? Are you just throwing around buzzwords you read in Business Week and hoping they'll somehow connect to form a coherent thought?

Jackboot said:
When the price of milk and bread double, who will you point fingers at then?

Most of our milk and bread is produced domestically, not imported. :confused:
 
Last edited:
Person of the year 2009- Ben Bernanke

No, no, no... chance...

Person of the Year:

Barack Hussein Obama.

Never has one POTUS done so much in such a short time to... LOL... unite the country.

Never has one POTUS done so much in such a short time to change the country.

Never has one POTUS done so much in such a short time to kill hope in the country.

Never has one POTUS done so much in such a short time to justify the Nobel Peace Prize.

Never has one POTUS traveled the globe as he has, demeaning us before world audiences.

Hands down, and ass in the air, the winner is Obi-1.

.
 
Buying power for imports, yes. Why is it inherently a good thing to import more instead of producing it domestically? I'm not saying it's a BAD thing, but it's hardly a huge advantage. :confused:
So are you suggesting a weak dollar does not affect both imports, and exports?

Now I am confused....?

Who said anything about imports being "inherently good", this is nonsense, a product is good, if it is safe, if it is able to move, and move quickly, and finally if it is bottom line, profitable.


If oil-producing nations stop using the dollar (which I think is inevitable anyway), it will cost whatever the exchange rate is. At that point, there would be more negative effects to letting the dollar get even weaker than it was at the moment they stopped using it. But there are no such effects as of now.
Another dreamer I see, we will cross that bridge once we burn it!:doh



Ponzi scheme? Huh? A weak dollar is a Ponzi scheme? Are you just throwing around buzzwords you read in Business Week and hoping they'll somehow connect to form a coherent thought?
The ponzi scheme is the federal reserve, and their constant booms and busts, do you enjoy being a puppet on a string?



Most of our milk and bread is produced domestically, not imported. :confused:

Supply and demand, these prices will go up because demand will fall, think....powered milk, just for a second, let that sink in....
 
Back
Top Bottom