Dr. Bernanke must really want the job as the next Federal Reserve Chair. I wonder if he will be so pleased to have it when the banking crisis starts.
I wonder how history shall remember him if the liquidity solution to the G-8 housing bubble causes the next depression. Will he take the blame for the next major world depression.
Then again, what am I thinking, lets just join hands and all buy a SUV,
I agree with Chromatic... looks like 'Helicopter Ben' Bernanke took a big gulp of Kool Aid before heading out on the campaign trail... campaigning for FED Chairman that is.
Let's try this again. Apologies if this is a duplicate.
bernanke: "For example, states exhibiting higher rates of job growth also tend to have experienced greater appreciation in house prices,"
This doesn't say which is cause and which is effect. The jobs report friday pointed to housing as a major source of job growth (real estate, construction). Tack on jobs related to cash out refi consumer spending and you get localized job growth in housing boom regions.
Ben Bernanke is not the best choice for Fed Chairman.
I continue to read cheerleading comments elsewhere.
Having read some of his recent speeches, I see a further disaster in the making. He's not anchored in reality. And he struggles in connecting the dots.
I continue to read cheerleading comments elsewhere.
Having read some of his recent speeches, I see a further disaster in the making. He's not anchored in reality. And he struggles in connecting the dots.
And how would any of those qualities disqualify him in Bushes view...
Does anyone other than me see the irony of the reduction in the deficit due to one-time receipts from capital gains taxes (or what amounts to them) being lauded by those who, for as long as I can remember, have wanted to repeal capital gains taxes?
I agree with Bernanke. Southern California the home of areospace defense ontractors big and small is booming with no end in sight. The housing prices are following in lock step. Many real estate are breathing easlier after rthe London bombing.
A strong military and will protect us from the inability to compete worldwide. One of our biggest exports in aerospace and military weaponry.
Real estate in Southern California will only decline if peace breaks out and we have uniformly prevented that by establishing an ongoing war and a need for future combat toys.
A reallistic optimism at this stage in the game would be a guarded optimism. It is like Iraq, a hopeful view would take into account the many pressing problems of which the insurgents are only one and maybe not even the biggest.
One could still be optimistic, scary situations have been navigated before with good results.
But when you get this "see no evil," "don't worry folks, nothing going on, everything is dandy" insistance, almost shrill in intensity backed up by "liberal leftist traitors are trying to undermine the war/dollar/economy because they hate America" muttered darkly in the background, one suspects the optimism is not reasonable. It is an act of faith, an imitation of the communist system where if your produced glowing reports on the glowing state of the economy it was true.
Rhetoric trumps reality. the chocolate ration has been increased to 5 grams from 7, life is good, big brother loves you.
The improvement Bernanke is referencing is relative to projections, no? That seems to be the context ...
If reducing the increase in projected Social Security benefits is a cut in benefits, then similar logic would dictate that reducing the increase in projected deficits is a deficit cut. This is common government-speak.
I think what you may be arguing for is a better / more reasonable set of terminology. If so, I'd agree, but I'd also argue that it should be used universally.
Given the prevalance of this increase-but-cut "logic", Bernanke's statement is no more "laughable" than the aforementioned Social Security benefit cut argument which has gained widespread acceptance (esp. among the Left).
His comments are responsible: can u imagine the fallout if a gov't official stated there was rampant speculation, leveraging, and overvaluation in the housing market? No one here has commented on the phenomenon of the "self-fulfilling prophecy" that gov't officials can bring on through their statements about the economy. There are reasonable people on both sides of the debate on whether there is a housing bubble. It is one thing to disagree with this man's analysis; it seems unfair to impugn his motives as well.
I don't impugn his motives. I think the right is totally sincere. But using Iraq as an example they have done far more to undermine the situation than any leftist critic. By denying any flaws or any problems, by measuring success "relaative to projections" so that standards always slip; they hindered the possibility of reform and the appointment of competent individuals.
The right is showing the lack of civics education and abandonment of fundamental values. Mr. Wright believes that the purpose of government is to lie, that reality is generated by belief (Mao had a similar notion, the will of the people could do all things) to wish upon a star.
The system of citizenship is based on the proposition of a responsible public interacting with officials of integrity, the belief is that faced with truth the people will rise and respond.
I do not say the right is alone in this. But they should see how disgarceful their standards are and how on a mass level they are taking it to intensities typical of a cult. The prison scandal is a sample. By any standards some of the abuses are unacceptable, beating people to death or dodomizing them with light sticks is evil. The right responds by minimizing the incidents, ignoring any but those that can be mocked and then retreating to the claim that because they were terrorists they got what they desrved. They don't believe in responsibility.
In fact our system is responsible. The abuses are exposed from within, publicized by other aspects, a large number of cases have gone or are going to trial, and if these actions and other reforms are still arguably inadequete they are what distinguishes our system from that of Syria. Imperfectly, but steadily, far too slowly at times, but still haltingly moving to a better system, a greater morality.
The right has chosen to pretend there are no problems, to think that if one makes glorious claims all is well. It is the method of Stalin.
Here is something all reasonable people can agree upon.
Stocks and in many markets real estate are at extremely high valuations based on the usual measures. Debt is also high by the same standards.
Based on past behaviors we can expect prices to flatten for a significant period with a high probability of significant declines.
Starting from these facts one can argue that new rates of valuation are rational and that various experimental manipulative techniques both public and private can moderate and reduce the usual effects.
A reasonable caveat to this is that historically even effective economic measures have had finite effect, that confidence in such measures hurt us deeply just 3 decades ago, that there is a tendency to overestimate even real effects. For example much of the nineties speculation was based on a very real perception that new technologies had the power to massively improve the efficiency and productivity of the economy. I think this is true, but as with railroads, factories and telegraphs the expotential effects are radical across decades not in the short run.
So while one can rationally believe "this time is different" all rational investors will know that just as there is some chance of huge returns there is also high risk.
The general public is poorly informed. It depends on basic informaton from authorities. Traditionally bankers from the local to the national have been voices of conservatism and caution. They are trusted to include the caveats, to slow the party.
The very validity of society depends upon this. There is already considerable alienation from authority and institutions. The potential consequences of this is the undermining of our society.
This is not abstract. I recently met a medical technician making perhaps $40,000 a year. Her father is going to cosign and help her buy a property in the Bay area. She has had community college, he is an immigrant. They are responding to the clamors of the society around them, a clamor that still somewhat trusted authority figures are abetting.
Knowing the possible consequences an well informed person can bet on the current situation. But when we as a society do not consider the risks to a hard working person following thev rules the best they can and expose her to (based on history) a high risk of financial ruin, bitterness and crippling of a potentially rich life in order to mantain things in the hope that we can manage a "soft landing," that such landings can be repeated and all will turn out well; then we have made a questionable moral choice.
Multiply her by hundreds of thiusands and even millions and we are in a fundamental way beyond economics undermining the American dream for the short term process of making the current president appear an economic success.
It is becoming clear that the true conservative focus has been banished from the dominant American rightwing.
observer:
Judging from your last statements you have made misconceptions regarding my post here. First, you pretend my words were directed at you personally. In fact, I had dismissed your speech from my mind altogether. With more time to study it perhaps some coherent thought might be extracted from it; however, it was so far off topic I wasn't inclined to do so. Second, you make unsupportable blanket statements about my beliefs, seemingly in respone.
quoting you:
"Mr. Wright believes that the purpose of government is to lie, that reality is generated by belief (Mao had a similar notion, the will of the people could do all things) to wish upon a star."
If a member of the president's physics advisory committee said that M=EC^2 and that mass=force * acceleration, the academic physics community would unite in a horrified choir outing the alleged expert as a charlatan.
Ben Shalom Bernanke's denial of the overwhelming evidence from diverse sources that there's a housing bubble is in the same league.
Why aren't economists letting this bozo know from the getgo that they will no longer let Bush's economists make a mockery of their profession?
Dr. Bernanke must really want the job as the next Federal Reserve Chair. I wonder if he will be so pleased to have it when the banking crisis starts.
I wonder how history shall remember him if the liquidity solution to the G-8 housing bubble causes the next depression. Will he take the blame for the next major world depression.
Then again, what am I thinking, lets just join hands and all buy a SUV,
Chromatic Dispersion
I agree with Chromatic... looks like 'Helicopter Ben' Bernanke took a big gulp of Kool Aid before heading out on the campaign trail... campaigning for FED Chairman that is.
I wonder if he signed Karl to the team...
Let's try this again. Apologies if this is a duplicate.
bernanke: "For example, states exhibiting higher rates of job growth also tend to have experienced greater appreciation in house prices,"
This doesn't say which is cause and which is effect. The jobs report friday pointed to housing as a major source of job growth (real estate, construction). Tack on jobs related to cash out refi consumer spending and you get localized job growth in housing boom regions.
It's flat out embarrassing that Bernanke does not find our GSEs even minimally complicit in our current r.e. debacle.
Look all, honest whores are not paid very much. Most end up wives exponding on their husband's faults.
Likewise honest folks do not get paid very much in the GOP camp, because like the average john, the GOP does not want to hear the truth.
Ben Bernanke is not the best choice for Fed Chairman.
I continue to read cheerleading comments elsewhere.
Having read some of his recent speeches, I see a further disaster in the making. He's not anchored in reality. And he struggles in connecting the dots.
I continue to read cheerleading comments elsewhere.
Having read some of his recent speeches, I see a further disaster in the making. He's not anchored in reality. And he struggles in connecting the dots.
And how would any of those qualities disqualify him in Bushes view...
Does anyone other than me see the irony of the reduction in the deficit due to one-time receipts from capital gains taxes (or what amounts to them) being lauded by those who, for as long as I can remember, have wanted to repeal capital gains taxes?
dry fly: "And how would any of those qualities disqualify him in Bushes view..."
I would assume that they're pleased with his housing remarks.
Looks "qualified" so far, including his new role.
I agree with Bernanke. Southern California the home of areospace defense ontractors big and small is booming with no end in sight. The housing prices are following in lock step. Many real estate are breathing easlier after rthe London bombing.
A strong military and will protect us from the inability to compete worldwide. One of our biggest exports in aerospace and military weaponry.
Real estate in Southern California will only decline if peace breaks out and we have uniformly prevented that by establishing an ongoing war and a need for future combat toys.
I am a mortgage lender. Also, I am very vigilant.
I am, therefore, your best defense against economic catastrophe.
You need not genuflect, although from here on out you may refer to me as "Your Grace." It will show your perspective and good sense.
A reallistic optimism at this stage in the game would be a guarded optimism. It is like Iraq, a hopeful view would take into account the many pressing problems of which the insurgents are only one and maybe not even the biggest.
One could still be optimistic, scary situations have been navigated before with good results.
But when you get this "see no evil," "don't worry folks, nothing going on, everything is dandy" insistance, almost shrill in intensity backed up by "liberal leftist traitors are trying to undermine the war/dollar/economy because they hate America" muttered darkly in the background, one suspects the optimism is not reasonable. It is an act of faith, an imitation of the communist system where if your produced glowing reports on the glowing state of the economy it was true.
Rhetoric trumps reality. the chocolate ration has been increased to 5 grams from 7, life is good, big brother loves you.
The improvement Bernanke is referencing is relative to projections, no? That seems to be the context ...
If reducing the increase in projected Social Security benefits is a cut in benefits, then similar logic would dictate that reducing the increase in projected deficits is a deficit cut. This is common government-speak.
I think what you may be arguing for is a better / more reasonable set of terminology. If so, I'd agree, but I'd also argue that it should be used universally.
Given the prevalance of this increase-but-cut "logic", Bernanke's statement is no more "laughable" than the aforementioned Social Security benefit cut argument which has gained widespread acceptance (esp. among the Left).
His comments are responsible: can u imagine the fallout if a gov't official stated there was rampant speculation, leveraging, and overvaluation in the housing market? No one here has commented on the phenomenon of the "self-fulfilling prophecy" that gov't officials can bring on through their statements about the economy. There are reasonable people on both sides of the debate on whether there is a housing bubble. It is one thing to disagree with this man's analysis; it seems unfair to impugn his motives as well.
I don't impugn his motives. I think the right is totally sincere. But using Iraq as an example they have done far more to undermine the situation than any leftist critic. By denying any flaws or any problems, by measuring success "relaative to projections" so that standards always slip; they hindered the possibility of reform and the appointment of competent individuals.
The right is showing the lack of civics education and abandonment of fundamental values. Mr. Wright believes that the purpose of government is to lie, that reality is generated by belief (Mao had a similar notion, the will of the people could do all things) to wish upon a star.
The system of citizenship is based on the proposition of a responsible public interacting with officials of integrity, the belief is that faced with truth the people will rise and respond.
I do not say the right is alone in this. But they should see how disgarceful their standards are and how on a mass level they are taking it to intensities typical of a cult. The prison scandal is a sample. By any standards some of the abuses are unacceptable, beating people to death or dodomizing them with light sticks is evil. The right responds by minimizing the incidents, ignoring any but those that can be mocked and then retreating to the claim that because they were terrorists they got what they desrved. They don't believe in responsibility.
In fact our system is responsible. The abuses are exposed from within, publicized by other aspects, a large number of cases have gone or are going to trial, and if these actions and other reforms are still arguably inadequete they are what distinguishes our system from that of Syria. Imperfectly, but steadily, far too slowly at times, but still haltingly moving to a better system, a greater morality.
The right has chosen to pretend there are no problems, to think that if one makes glorious claims all is well. It is the method of Stalin.
Here is something all reasonable people can agree upon.
Stocks and in many markets real estate are at extremely high valuations based on the usual measures. Debt is also high by the same standards.
Based on past behaviors we can expect prices to flatten for a significant period with a high probability of significant declines.
Starting from these facts one can argue that new rates of valuation are rational and that various experimental manipulative techniques both public and private can moderate and reduce the usual effects.
A reasonable caveat to this is that historically even effective economic measures have had finite effect, that confidence in such measures hurt us deeply just 3 decades ago, that there is a tendency to overestimate even real effects. For example much of the nineties speculation was based on a very real perception that new technologies had the power to massively improve the efficiency and productivity of the economy. I think this is true, but as with railroads, factories and telegraphs the expotential effects are radical across decades not in the short run.
So while one can rationally believe "this time is different" all rational investors will know that just as there is some chance of huge returns there is also high risk.
The general public is poorly informed. It depends on basic informaton from authorities. Traditionally bankers from the local to the national have been voices of conservatism and caution. They are trusted to include the caveats, to slow the party.
The very validity of society depends upon this. There is already considerable alienation from authority and institutions. The potential consequences of this is the undermining of our society.
This is not abstract. I recently met a medical technician making perhaps $40,000 a year. Her father is going to cosign and help her buy a property in the Bay area. She has had community college, he is an immigrant. They are responding to the clamors of the society around them, a clamor that still somewhat trusted authority figures are abetting.
Knowing the possible consequences an well informed person can bet on the current situation. But when we as a society do not consider the risks to a hard working person following thev rules the best they can and expose her to (based on history) a high risk of financial ruin, bitterness and crippling of a potentially rich life in order to mantain things in the hope that we can manage a "soft landing," that such landings can be repeated and all will turn out well; then we have made a questionable moral choice.
Multiply her by hundreds of thiusands and even millions and we are in a fundamental way beyond economics undermining the American dream for the short term process of making the current president appear an economic success.
It is becoming clear that the true conservative focus has been banished from the dominant American rightwing.
The argument that liberals and leftists are no
observer:
Judging from your last statements you have made misconceptions regarding my post here. First, you pretend my words were directed at you personally. In fact, I had dismissed your speech from my mind altogether. With more time to study it perhaps some coherent thought might be extracted from it; however, it was so far off topic I wasn't inclined to do so. Second, you make unsupportable blanket statements about my beliefs, seemingly in respone.
quoting you:
"Mr. Wright believes that the purpose of government is to lie, that reality is generated by belief (Mao had a similar notion, the will of the people could do all things) to wish upon a star."
What stuff. In summary you are a forum troll.
If a member of the president's physics advisory committee said that M=EC^2 and that mass=force * acceleration, the academic physics community would unite in a horrified choir outing the alleged expert as a charlatan.
Ben Shalom Bernanke's denial of the overwhelming evidence from diverse sources that there's a housing bubble is in the same league.
Why aren't economists letting this bozo know from the getgo that they will no longer let Bush's economists make a mockery of their profession?