Why haven't Bernanke and Paulson resigned?

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Its really a one way or the other binary result. Heaven help us if the current turkeys in charge are merely on a little above or below the mean.

There are really only two ways to gain complete economic consensus.

Method one is to do a magnificent job of managing the economy, somewhat the Alan Greenspan method, but Alan is no longer in charge.

Method two is to completely fuck up, the Bernanke and Paulson method, be asleep at the switch while small problems turn into huge disasters, and then scream only we can save you now.

Face the damn facts, either method works equally well. Public be pleased or public be damned, its a totally irrelevant metric.

I'm sorry, LL, but that analysis is so far out in the weeds as to be laughable.

The Greenspan method got the economy hooked on cheap money and unlimited credit. Coupled with the Bush Whitehouse and Repub Congress use of enormous deficits, we live in a fools' paradise of "growth" based on debt, shuffling paper, selling each other houses, obfuscating individual risk into systemic risk with false wealth based on hedging and derivatives.

It should tell us something when things represented as "wealth" or "assets" are just repackaged debt.

Sorry but you left Clintons out . It was clinton that got the bill passed for equal access to credit markets by minorities . Even tho they had no money to make payments. The Clinton years were no picnic. Blame here falls on both sides. So after Jan 20 . This becomes a Dem . problem they have full control . So After Dems are seated . Is it going to be fair to blame further erosion on them. Of course it is . They said they could fix it LOL.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Jhhnn

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Its really a one way or the other binary result. Heaven help us if the current turkeys in charge are merely on a little above or below the mean.

There are really only two ways to gain complete economic consensus.

Method one is to do a magnificent job of managing the economy, somewhat the Alan Greenspan method, but Alan is no longer in charge.

Method two is to completely fuck up, the Bernanke and Paulson method, be asleep at the switch while small problems turn into huge disasters, and then scream only we can save you now.

Face the damn facts, either method works equally well. Public be pleased or public be damned, its a totally irrelevant metric.

I'm sorry, LL, but that analysis is so far out in the weeds as to be laughable.

The Greenspan method got the economy hooked on cheap money and unlimited credit. Coupled with the Bush Whitehouse and Repub Congress use of enormous deficits, we live in a fools' paradise of "growth" based on debt, shuffling paper, selling each other houses, obfuscating individual risk into systemic risk with false wealth based on hedging and derivatives.

It should tell us something when things represented as "wealth" or "assets" are just repackaged debt.

Sorry but you left Clintons out . It was clinton that got the bill passed for equal access to credit markets by minorities . Even tho they had no money to make payments. The Clinton years were no picnic. Blame here falls on both sides. So after Jan 20 . This becomes a Dem . problem they have full control . So After Dems are seated . Is it going to be fair to blame further erosion on them. Of course it is . They said they could fix it LOL.

Yep. Both sides had various portions of the blame, although I still move more over to the current admin, which has been in power for 8 years, and "free" money helped motivate high housing costs.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Jhhnn

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Its really a one way or the other binary result. Heaven help us if the current turkeys in charge are merely on a little above or below the mean.

There are really only two ways to gain complete economic consensus.

Method one is to do a magnificent job of managing the economy, somewhat the Alan Greenspan method, but Alan is no longer in charge.

Method two is to completely fuck up, the Bernanke and Paulson method, be asleep at the switch while small problems turn into huge disasters, and then scream only we can save you now.

Face the damn facts, either method works equally well. Public be pleased or public be damned, its a totally irrelevant metric.

I'm sorry, LL, but that analysis is so far out in the weeds as to be laughable.

The Greenspan method got the economy hooked on cheap money and unlimited credit. Coupled with the Bush Whitehouse and Repub Congress use of enormous deficits, we live in a fools' paradise of "growth" based on debt, shuffling paper, selling each other houses, obfuscating individual risk into systemic risk with false wealth based on hedging and derivatives.

It should tell us something when things represented as "wealth" or "assets" are just repackaged debt.

Sorry but you left Clintons out . It was clinton that got the bill passed for equal access to credit markets by minorities . Even tho they had no money to make payments. The Clinton years were no picnic. Blame here falls on both sides. So after Jan 20 . This becomes a Dem . problem they have full control . So After Dems are seated . Is it going to be fair to blame further erosion on them. Of course it is . They said they could fix it LOL.

As Vic has repeatedly said, CRA wasn't about writing mortgages to poor credits. *REAL* evidence (as opposed to FUD like above) points out that CRA mortgages outperform the average prime conforming mortgage.

If you had done any research at all before opening your ridiculous piehole you'd have learned that less than 25% of subprime mortgages originated were from CRA regulated entities and the majority of those are performing. 75% of subprime mortgages were issued from non-CRA regulated entities.

Blaming CRA for this problem is yet another Repuglican duhversion tool at trying to lay the blame where it doesn't belong.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: senseamp
Paulson is gonna be gone with Bush, I am sure if he hands over $1Trillion of your bucks to his buddies, they'll take good care of him.
Bernanke should be fired, plain and simple. His solution to any problem is print more money.

And you'll probably have your job. Doesn't that suck.

Sure does, I could use a few months severance paid vacation before getting a job across the street.

You are naive

Sadly, many are.

Ex Fed guy, Mishkin, told a story of his father. His father owned a grocery store in Manhattan in 1929. After the market tanked his father remarked "those rich guys deserve it". In 1930 the store shut down.

Your cute little anecdote aside, the system is completely busted and we continue to prop it up and wait for the next bubble. The alternative would be pretty horrific, but doing what you always did is going to get you what you always got.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Your cute little anecdote aside, the system is completely busted and we continue to prop it up and wait for the next bubble. The alternative would be pretty horrific, but doing what you always did is going to get you what you always got.

The system isn't completely busted. Let me guess, you're one of those guys who gets a new car when your tires go flat?

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Your cute little anecdote aside, the system is completely busted and we continue to prop it up and wait for the next bubble. The alternative would be pretty horrific, but doing what you always did is going to get you what you always got.

The system isn't completely busted. Let me guess, you're one of those guys who gets a new car when your tires go flat?

No I don't. But I also don't think that running it through the car wash while it's still up in flames is really a smart idea either.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Your cute little anecdote aside, the system is completely busted and we continue to prop it up and wait for the next bubble. The alternative would be pretty horrific, but doing what you always did is going to get you what you always got.

The system isn't completely busted. Let me guess, you're one of those guys who gets a new car when your tires go flat?

No I don't. But I also don't think that running it through the car wash while it's still up in flames is really a smart idea either.

It puts the flames out.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Your cute little anecdote aside, the system is completely busted and we continue to prop it up and wait for the next bubble. The alternative would be pretty horrific, but doing what you always did is going to get you what you always got.

The system isn't completely busted. Let me guess, you're one of those guys who gets a new car when your tires go flat?

No I don't. But I also don't think that running it through the car wash while it's still up in flames is really a smart idea either.

:laugh: :thumbsup:

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Your cute little anecdote aside, the system is completely busted and we continue to prop it up and wait for the next bubble. The alternative would be pretty horrific, but doing what you always did is going to get you what you always got.

The system isn't completely busted. Let me guess, you're one of those guys who gets a new car when your tires go flat?

No I don't. But I also don't think that running it through the car wash while it's still up in flames is really a smart idea either.

It puts the flames out.

And you are still left with a burnt pile of crap that will be lucky if you are able to even get it started again.

They system needs overhauled....not band-aided.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
This is the biggest damn clusterfuck of all time,

100% agreed. :frown:

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Your cute little anecdote aside, the system is completely busted and we continue to prop it up and wait for the next bubble. The alternative would be pretty horrific, but doing what you always did is going to get you what you always got.

The system isn't completely busted. Let me guess, you're one of those guys who gets a new car when your tires go flat?

No I don't. But I also don't think that running it through the car wash while it's still up in flames is really a smart idea either.

It puts the flames out.

And you are still left with a burnt pile of crap that will be lucky if you are able to even get it started again.

They system needs overhauled....not band-aided.

I agree it needs to be overhauled. However, doing it from a stronger position is far more preferable to doing it in the midst of the biggest economic crisis in history.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Your cute little anecdote aside, the system is completely busted and we continue to prop it up and wait for the next bubble. The alternative would be pretty horrific, but doing what you always did is going to get you what you always got.

The system isn't completely busted. Let me guess, you're one of those guys who gets a new car when your tires go flat?

No I don't. But I also don't think that running it through the car wash while it's still up in flames is really a smart idea either.

It puts the flames out.

And you are still left with a burnt pile of crap that will be lucky if you are able to even get it started again.

They system needs overhauled....not band-aided.

I agree it needs to be overhauled. However, doing it from a stronger position is far more preferable to doing it in the midst of the biggest economic crisis in history.

We can both agree that it would be the preferred position. The problem with that though is that you can't dismantle the huge conglomerate banks so that there is more competition. If we could do that, it should lead to those that are mismanaged and about to fail....the ability to fail without the need for anything more than FDIC intervention.

What we have now is this "too big to fail" mentality which means that the shareholders and taxpayers are burdened with the losses instead of those that should be....the executives.

Edit: And just why have none of these executives been indicted? They intentionally mislead investors into believing that they were more solvent than that were and that their exposure to the subprimes was less than what it was. Sounds like fraud to me.

 

[brencat]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
The Greenspan method got the economy hooked on cheap money and unlimited credit. Coupled with the Bush Whitehouse and Repub Congress use of enormous deficits, we live in a fools' paradise of "growth" based on debt, shuffling paper, selling each other houses, obfuscating individual risk into systemic risk with false wealth based on hedging and derivatives.

It should tell us something when things represented as "wealth" or "assets" are just repackaged debt.

It was a while ago, but just have to say -- best post of this thread. Spot on IMO :thumbsup:

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
It should tell us something when things represented as "wealth" or "assets" are just repackaged debt.

That is exactly what fiat money is.

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Its our fault, for assuming the government can manage a currency without making one mistake. Everyone makes mistakes so its silly to give a few individuals control over an entire currency and exclude all competition.

And now is the perfect time to bust our government monopoly, right in the midst of a depression. Let's see if anybody can do the job better. If we keep this course we're definitely going to experience extreme levels of unemployment, business foreclosures, and loss of credit. Why not try something new?

 

[Pneumothorax]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Edit: And just why have none of these executives been indicted? They intentionally mislead investors into believing that they were more solvent than that were and that their exposure to the subprimes was less than what it was. Sounds like fraud to me.

You should know the answer to that... the old washington mantra "Don't bite the hand..." As I've said before all the FBI BS about them going in and investigating... None of these CEO's will spend a day in jail or even pay a fine.

 

[Muse]

Bernanke was a professor and an expert on the Great Depression and its causes. As such he is apt to be regarded as the right man for his job. In fact Obama is evidently going to keep him on at least for a while. Paulson is undoubtedly on much shakier footing, but he's not going to step down now. Hey, he's termed out in 70 days, so he's not jumping ship nohow.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Muse
Bernanke was a professor and an expert on the Great Depression and its causes. As such he is apt to be regarded as the right man for his job. In fact Obama is evidently going to keep him on at least for a while. Paulson is undoubtedly on much shakier footing, but he's not going to step down now. Hey, he's termed out in 70 days, so he's not jumping ship nohow.

I've heard this. It doesn't mean a thing, because frankly there are experts on the economy who call each other morons, aren't there? You can have two economists with PHds and a lifetime of experience who can argue two sides of an issue quite competently. Now, it's not likely they're both right, but just because Bernanke has studied something that happened 75 years ago doesn't mean he a) actually learned his lesson properly and b) can apply its teachings to what's going on now--where applicable; the economy is wildly different now than it was then.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Muse
Bernanke was a professor and an expert on the Great Depression and its causes. As such he is apt to be regarded as the right man for his job. In fact Obama is evidently going to keep him on at least for a while. Paulson is undoubtedly on much shakier footing, but he's not going to step down now. Hey, he's termed out in 70 days, so he's not jumping ship nohow.

I've heard this. It doesn't mean a thing, because frankly there are experts on the economy who call each other morons, aren't there? You can have two economists with PHds and a lifetime of experience who can argue two sides of an issue quite competently. Now, it's not likely they're both right, but just because Bernanke has studied something that happened 75 years ago doesn't mean he a) actually learned his lesson properly and b) can apply its teachings to what's going on now--where applicable; the economy is wildly different now than it was then.

There are also a few different opinions on the causes of the Great Depression.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: senseamp
Paulson is gonna be gone with Bush, I am sure if he hands over $1Trillion of your bucks to his buddies, they'll take good care of him.
Bernanke should be fired, plain and simple. His solution to any problem is print more money.

vs tighten credit and repeat history all over again :thumbsup:

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: senseamp
Paulson is gonna be gone with Bush, I am sure if he hands over $1Trillion of your bucks to his buddies, they'll take good care of him.
Bernanke should be fired, plain and simple. His solution to any problem is print more money.

vs tighten credit and repeat history all over again :thumbsup:

If we're giving away trillions of dollars, why is going to the credit market? Give it to the people who are going to spend it directly and cut out the middle man (the banks) who fucked up in the first place.

 

[filetitan]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: senseamp
Paulson is gonna be gone with Bush, I am sure if he hands over $1Trillion of your bucks to his buddies, they'll take good care of him.
Bernanke should be fired, plain and simple. His solution to any problem is print more money.

vs tighten credit and repeat history all over again :thumbsup:

If we're giving away trillions of dollars, why is going to the credit market? Give it to the people who are going to spend it directly and cut out the middle man (the banks) who fucked up in the first place.

true, instead we get the bill for their mess.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: senseamp
Paulson is gonna be gone with Bush, I am sure if he hands over $1Trillion of your bucks to his buddies, they'll take good care of him.
Bernanke should be fired, plain and simple. His solution to any problem is print more money.

vs tighten credit and repeat history all over again :thumbsup:

If we're giving away trillions of dollars, why is going to the credit market? Give it to the people who are going to spend it directly and cut out the middle man (the banks) who fucked up in the first place.

If I had to choose

A) prop up distressed assets that historically have stable value
or
B) hand cash to people who haven't earned it

I choose A 100/100 times.

Plus what good is $3500 cash in the hands of an individual when the entire banking system is about to implode?

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Muse
Bernanke was a professor and an expert on the Great Depression and its causes. As such he is apt to be regarded as the right man for his job. In fact Obama is evidently going to keep him on at least for a while. Paulson is undoubtedly on much shakier footing, but he's not going to step down now. Hey, he's termed out in 70 days, so he's not jumping ship nohow.

I've heard this. It doesn't mean a thing, because frankly there are experts on the economy who call each other morons, aren't there? You can have two economists with PHds and a lifetime of experience who can argue two sides of an issue quite competently. Now, it's not likely they're both right, but just because Bernanke has studied something that happened 75 years ago doesn't mean he a) actually learned his lesson properly and b) can apply its teachings to what's going on now--where applicable; the economy is wildly different now than it was then.

Alan Greenspan admitted recently that he's shocked by the recent economic catastrophe and says if he'd known that this could happen he would have espoused far different strategies than the ones he did. We might have avoided a lot of this if he had. I wouldn't put all the blame for what's happened on Paulson and Bernanke. Bush is a nice scapegoat since he's termed out in a couple of months, however I think he does deserve a lot of the blame. Hey you've got to blame someone, huh? Anyway, since these guys are all history come Jan. 20th, what's the deal with wanting their heads now? Given Paulson's speech yesterday (?) saying he's comfortable spending the 700 billion buck bailout on things other than mortgage buy-ups given a different appearance of things than he thought probably has put him squarely in the cross-hairs of the post assassins.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Muse

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Muse
Bernanke was a professor and an expert on the Great Depression and its causes. As such he is apt to be regarded as the right man for his job. In fact Obama is evidently going to keep him on at least for a while. Paulson is undoubtedly on much shakier footing, but he's not going to step down now. Hey, he's termed out in 70 days, so he's not jumping ship nohow.

I've heard this. It doesn't mean a thing, because frankly there are experts on the economy who call each other morons, aren't there? You can have two economists with PHds and a lifetime of experience who can argue two sides of an issue quite competently. Now, it's not likely they're both right, but just because Bernanke has studied something that happened 75 years ago doesn't mean he a) actually learned his lesson properly and b) can apply its teachings to what's going on now--where applicable; the economy is wildly different now than it was then.

Alan Greenspan admitted recently that he's shocked by the recent economic catastrophe and says if he'd known that this could happen he would have espoused far different strategies than the ones he did. We might have avoided a lot of this if he had. I wouldn't put all the blame for what's happened on Paulson and Bernanke. Bush is a nice scapegoat since he's termed out in a couple of months, however I think he does deserve a lot of the blame. Hey you've got to blame someone, huh? Anyway, since these guys are all history come Jan. 20th, what's the deal with wanting their heads now? Given Paulson's speech yesterday (?) saying he's comfortable spending the 700 billion buck bailout on things other than mortgage buy-ups given a different appearance of things than he thought probably has put him squarely in the cross-hairs of the post assassins.

I don't blame them all. I just think that they are definitely, demonstrably, no better than plenty of other people who didn't see this coming (and that is being kind; in their position are they not paid/trusted to be better than the regular economically ignorant person?), and thus lack the wisdom and skills to deserve being put at the helm of solving it.

Asking for their head, well things are happening quickly, aren't they? What's happened in the last 70 days? What could happen in the next 70? Time to throw this rotten apple out!