Options
Fare thee well, Ben Bernanke. . .
derryb
Posts: 36,216 ✭✭✭✭✭
. . . let us hope your replacement has better vision than did you:
• (October 31, 2007) “It is not the responsibility of the Federal Reserve – nor would it be appropriate – to protect lenders and investors from the consequences of their financial decisions.”
• (January 10, 2008) “The Federal Reserve is not currently forecasting a recession.”
• (January 18, 2008) “[The U.S. economy] has a strong labor force, excellent productivity and technology, and a deep and liquid financial market that is in the process of repairing itself.”
• (June 10, 2008) “The risk that the economy has entered a substantial downturn appears to have diminished over the past month or so.”
• (July 2008, before House Financial Services Committee) “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are adequately capitalized.”
• (December 2010) “I wish I’d been omniscient and seen the crisis coming.”
• (October 31, 2007) “It is not the responsibility of the Federal Reserve – nor would it be appropriate – to protect lenders and investors from the consequences of their financial decisions.”
• (January 10, 2008) “The Federal Reserve is not currently forecasting a recession.”
• (January 18, 2008) “[The U.S. economy] has a strong labor force, excellent productivity and technology, and a deep and liquid financial market that is in the process of repairing itself.”
• (June 10, 2008) “The risk that the economy has entered a substantial downturn appears to have diminished over the past month or so.”
• (July 2008, before House Financial Services Committee) “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are adequately capitalized.”
• (December 2010) “I wish I’d been omniscient and seen the crisis coming.”
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
0
Comments
Overall I would give him a B. An A for his moves in 2008-2009, but a D for the QE programs.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>It will be interesting, however, still frightening to me - that this group basically controls the financial fate of our economy....well, at least until it tips out of their control as well.....hope I do not see that... Cheers, RickO >>
Well said and unfortunately true. The housing bubble was fun for everyone until it popped. Same for the stock market. I suspect a Yellen meltdown in a month.
<< <i> The world is littered with erroneous quotes and comments, especially in internet chatrooms. What would the economy looked like had he said everyone's home would lose 1/2 it's value? >>
The cure for high prices is high prices. . . or maybe I read that in an internet chatroom.
But wait, there's more Bernanke wisdom:
• (July, 2005) “We’ve never had a decline in house prices on a nationwide basis. So, what I think what is more likely is that house prices will slow, maybe stabilize, might slow consumption spending a bit. I don’t think it’s gonna drive the economy too far from its full employment path, though.”
• (October 20, 2005) “House prices have risen by nearly 25% over the past two years. Although speculative activity has increased in some areas, at a national level these price increases largely reflect strong economic fundamentals.”
• (November 15, 2005) “With respect to their safety, derivatives, for the most part, are traded among very sophisticated financial institutions and individuals who have considerable incentive to understand them and to use them properly.”
• (February 15, 2006) “Housing markets are cooling a bit. Our expectation is that the decline in activity or the slowing in activity will be moderate, that house prices will probably continue to rise.”
• (March 28, 2007) “At this juncture, however, the impact on the broader economy and financial markets of the problems in the subprime market seems likely to be contained. In particular, mortgages to prime borrowers and fixed-rate mortgages to all classes of borrowers continue to perform well, with low rates of delinquency.”
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
Loves me some shiny!
Text
Of course in Bernanke land, since nobody mails a letter, it does not count.
Good thing that only the food that I don't buy is going up in price.
<< <i>
<< <i> The world is littered with erroneous quotes and comments, especially in internet chatrooms. What would the economy looked like had he said everyone's home would lose 1/2 it's value? >>
The cure for high prices is high prices. . . or maybe I read that in an internet chatroom.
But wait, there's more Bernanke wisdom:
• (July, 2005) “We’ve never had a decline in house prices on a nationwide basis. So, what I think what is more likely is that house prices will slow, maybe stabilize, might slow consumption spending a bit. I don’t think it’s gonna drive the economy too far from its full employment path, though.”
• (October 20, 2005) “House prices have risen by nearly 25% over the past two years. Although speculative activity has increased in some areas, at a national level these price increases largely reflect strong economic fundamentals.”
• (November 15, 2005) “With respect to their safety, derivatives, for the most part, are traded among very sophisticated financial institutions and individuals who have considerable incentive to understand them and to use them properly.”
• (February 15, 2006) “Housing markets are cooling a bit. Our expectation is that the decline in activity or the slowing in activity will be moderate, that house prices will probably continue to rise.”
• (March 28, 2007) “At this juncture, however, the impact on the broader economy and financial markets of the problems in the subprime market seems likely to be contained. In particular, mortgages to prime borrowers and fixed-rate mortgages to all classes of borrowers continue to perform well, with low rates of delinquency.” >>
Gosh, I hope no one searches two and three year old posts to this forum! That might be humbling for some of us to read with the benefit of 20/ 20 hindsight. Of course, we would make excuses, lay blame elsewhere (banksters) and point how manipulation made us ... not wrong... just not right yet!
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>Gosh, I hope no one searches two and three year old posts to this forum! That might be humbling for some of us to read with the benefit of 20/ 20 hindsight. Of course, we would make excuses, lay blame elsewhere (banksters) and point how manipulation made us ... not wrong... just not right yet! >>
As long as the future of the economic world is not at stake, I don't mind when you're wrong. If you feel it necessary to hold others here to a higher standard then please do so.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
Substitute the word "housing" for "gold/silver", and Bernanke would sound like a forum member.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
For my own part, I try to acknowledge that prices can go in either direction, but I don't try to hide my enthusiasm for precious metals either. My view takes into account that in 2006 when I joined this forum, $850 gold was still seen as far away and unattainable. I was as surprised as anyone else that prices escalated as much as they did, but I would also point out that the 2011 peak had virtually none of the same characteristics of the peak in 1980.
The paradox is that financial conditions were actually much worse in 2008 than they were in 1979, and the crisis management approach to monetary policy taken in 2008 has been dramatically different to the approach to monetary policy taken in 1979. If you're a momentum trader or a volatility trader, it's probably just fine to play these markets if you know what you're doing, and I'm not surprised at all that some stock traders and momentum players might be feeling their oats.
The naked truth is that the fundamentals haven't changed at all. There are still many compelling reasons to hedge against serious disruptions that can happen at any time as a result of chronic mismanagement of "the system". One of the biggest grievances that I have is the continuous manipulation of economic data going back to the Carter Administration, when the inflation and money supply data alterations started. If our economy hadn't been the pinnacle of strength and abundance, these manipulations would've come home to roost in a serious way and the manifestation of this problem is in the unsustainable growth of entitlement programs that mask the problems instead of addressing them. We're still living the dream, but it's only because we've had the good fortune to have had that position for a long time and have had the economic reserves to back it up. It's a mistake to assume that the economic diseases can be masked by monetary manipulation indefinitely.
I can state unequivocably that if you trust these guys - these corrupt big government central planners, these elitist big government politicians and these elitist Wall Street manipulators who are allowed to break every rule at your expense, then you are part of that "system". So be it.
It may be a mistake to presume that gold and silver would fix any of the inherent problems, or that they might become universally and predominantly the strongest currency in the US or anywhere else if there were an international economic collapse due to a massive loss of confidence in governments and in fiat. But, harkening back to a saying from my youth, "They're way ahead of whatever is in 2nd place."
Gold and silver won't always be a 100% slam-dunk winner in every situation. But, I'll take my chances and I'm not unhappy with the odds.
I knew it would happen.
Sounds good to me. The only knock i've ever had on PMs is their relative values--this includes value vs dollar, ie price--and the rapid attitude of fervent bulls and hucksters. At a certain value I could see PMs as a 99% slam dunk.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
<< <i>Odds - a very important aspect of investment decisions that is often overlooked. >>
Lets try to use the word probability rather than odds when referring to investments and keep odds to the casinos.
Gambling is not investing and investing is not gambling.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>
<< <i>Odds - a very important aspect of investment decisions that is often overlooked. >>
Lets try to use the word probability rather than odds when referring to investments and keep odds to the casinos.
Gambling is not investing and investing is not gambling. >>
Webster:
prob·a·bil·i·ty noun ˌprä-bə-ˈbi-lə-tç
: the chance that something will happen
: something that has a chance of happening
: a measure of how often a particular event will happen if something (such as tossing a coin) is done repeatedly
gam·ble verb ˈgam-bəl
: to play a game in which you can win or lose money or possessions : to bet money or other valuable things
: to risk losing (an amount of money) in a game or bet
: to risk losing (something valuable or important) in order to do or achieve something
A rose by any other name is still a rose. If we change "manipulation" to "control" is it really any different?
Political correctness has no place in finance or economics. Let's call things what they are unless of course we are talking about the value of a bank's assets.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
Thinking of investing as a game opens oneself to denial and manipulation and conspiracy theories.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>There is very little politically correct about me, but using your definitions investing is not a "game". Those that consider it as such are usually those that succeed in generating mediocre returns.
Thinking of investing as a game opens oneself to denial and manipulation and conspiracy theories. >>
Considering the current political environment, investing now is little more than a game of Three Card Monte.
Gambling is not investing and investing is not gambling.
I would suggest that probabilities play no significant part in today's stock market, other than when deployed inside HFT programmed trading in order to effect the "skim".
Gambling is believing that money flows and chart trading on relative values is comparable to investing. Baley's type of investing by virtue of analyzing market potentials and industry trends is more valid, except for the fact that the accounting rules change to suit the needs of the banking cartel on a purely political basis instead of providing any accountability whatsoever. I do make the assumption that if big banks fall into that category, then GE Capital (i.e., Ally Bank), Fannie May, Freddie Mac, BoAML and Citigroup all get the same political pass. And if that's the case, you must wonder about the tech industry and the drug industry in the same vein.
"Investing" ain't what it used to be, don't kid yourself. 2008 should have been enough of a warning shot, but apparently it wasn't.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>"Investing" ain't what it used to be, don't kid yourself. 2008 should have been enough of a warning shot, but apparently it wasn't. >>
Much wisdom in your post.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt