Black People : BUSH; I mean Bernanke wants another term??????????????

Discussion in 'Black People Open Forum' started by Ankhur, Dec 3, 2009.

  1. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    That was a hard choice cause the only white supremist dumber then George W Bush is Bernanke at the Federal Reserve.

    But we now live in the Twilight Zone,
    were if you screw up on a job and cause harm to the lives of many you get fired, but if you are rich and white and work for major finance, you are called too big to fail and you don't get fired but are given enough chedda to give your self a big fat bonus for criminal negligence and incompetence .

    But this mans incompetence makes Bush look like Einstein
     
  2. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3tTlb0s6Bs&feature=player_embedded#

    A word from a real Socialist senator, without fear of claiming that title
     
  3. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    This neocon numb skull has been reapointed but why???????????

    Correct me if I am wrong, but theDemocrats have the majority in the House and the Senate!!!!

    SO WHY PUT A BUSH BOY ,WALL STREET VULTURE BACK IN OFFICE??? OVER AN INSTITUTION IN CONTROL OF THE NATIONS FINANCE,

    THAT HAS YET TO BE AUDITED.????


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rka9VbPPMys&feature=player_embedded#
     
  4. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    Bernanke has been reinstated

    Bernanke has won
    A BUSH- BOY HOLDING THE POWER OVER THE ECONOMY

    THE NEOCONS MARCH TRIUMPHANT INTO 2010

    Gates has gotten the troop increase
    BUSH-BOY HOLDING THE POWER OVER THE MILITARY

    THE NEOCONS MARCH TRIUMPHANT INTO 2010

    Gen. Jim Jones will make millions from the continuation of both wars
    BUSH-BOY ESTABLISHING THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX ON THE BACKS OF THE PUBLIC

    THE NEOCONS MARCH TRIUMPHANT INTO 2010
    WITH THE REAL POWER OF THE NATION BACK IN THEIR HANDS

    MUCH HAS HAPPENED IN ONE YEAR!

    MORE OF THE SAME!!!
     
  5. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    Rewarded for incompetence and Criminal Negilgence;


    Published on Tuesday, December 8, 2009 by The Guardian/UK
    Blame Bernanke
    The Fed chairman Ben Bernanke could have acted to burst America's housing bubble – and yet he did nothing
    by Dean Baker

    As the senate debates Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke [1]'s reappointment, it is striking how the media views blaming Bernanke for the Great Recession [2] as being out of bounds. Of course Bernake bears much of the blame for America's economic collapse.
    He was either in, or next to, the driver's seat for the last seven years. Bernanke was a member of the board of governors of the Federal Reserve since the summer of 2002. He served a six-month stint as head of President Bush's council of economic advisors beginning in the summer of 2005 and then went back to chair the Fed in January of 2006.

    This crisis is not a weather disaster like Hurricane Katrina; it is a man-made disaster that was brought about by seriously misguided economic policy [3]. And, after Alan Greenspan [4], Bernanke was better positioned than any other person in the country to prevent this disaster.

    The basic argument is very simple. The US had an enormous housing bubble. This bubble drove the economy ever since the last recession in 2001. It propelled the economy directly through a building boom that sent housing construction to record levels. Indirectly, it led to a consumption boom as people spent money based on the $8 trillion in housing equity that was temporarily created by the bubble.

    When the bubble collapsed it was inevitable that it would lead to the sort of disaster that we are now seeing. We lost close to $500bn in annual demand due to the collapse of housing construction. The building boom created an enormous glut of housing. There will be little need for new construction for several years in the future.

    The disappearance of trillions of dollars of bubble-generated housing equity led to a plunge in consumption. Annual consumption has fallen by close to $500bn. If we add in a loss in demand of close to $200bn associated with the bursting of a bubble in commercial real estate, the collapse of the bubbles led to a fall in annual demand of close to $1.2tn. The Fed has nothing in its bag of tricks that allows it quickly replace $1.2tn in demand, which is why the country is now mired in double-digit unemployment [5].

    In spite of the heroic efforts at obfuscation by many economists, there is not really much to dispute in the above story. Add in the fact that the bubble was both recognisable and preventable, and you have a very solid indictment of Bernanke.

    The bubble was easy to recognise, Bernanke just failed to do it. Nationwide house prices had already experienced an unprecedented 30% increase by the summer of 2002. Since there was nothing in the fundamentals of the housing market to justify this run-up [6], and no remotely corresponding increase in rents, Bernanke should have already been aware of the housing bubble by the time he joined the Fed in 2002.

    The Fed has a large arsenal with which to attack a housing bubble, but the first weapon is simply talk. If Greenspan and Bernanke had used their platform at the Fed to educate Congress, the financial industry, and the public at large about the existence of the housing bubble and the risks it posed, this likely would have been sufficient to pop it.

    This is not about mumbling "irrational exuberance," it's a question of using the Fed's full research capacities to document the existence of a housing bubble (they actually did the opposite) and then disseminating this research as widely as possible. If this proved inadequate, the Fed also had substantial regulatory powers to curb the deceptive subprime loans that helped inflate the bubble in its later stages.

    full rticle;
    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/12/08-6
     
  6. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    Published on Friday, December 11, 2009 by The New York Times
    Bernanke’s Unfinished Mission
    by The New York Times
    by Paul Krugman

    Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, recently had some downbeat things to say about our economic prospects. The economy, he warned, “confronts some formidable headwinds.” All we can expect, he said, is “modest economic growth next year — sufficient to bring down the unemployment rate, but at a pace slower than we would like.”

    Actually, he may have been too optimistic: There’s a good chance that unemployment will rise, not fall, over the next year. But even if it does inch down, one has to ask: Why isn’t the Fed trying to bring it down faster?

    Some background: I don’t think many people grasp just how much job creation we need to climb out of the hole we’re in. You can’t just look at the eight million jobs that America has lost since the recession began, because the nation needs to keep adding jobs — more than 100,000 a month — to keep up with a growing population. And that means that we need really big job gains, month after month, if we want to see America return to anything that feels like full employment.

    How big? My back of the envelope calculation says that we need to add around 18 million jobs over the next five years, or 300,000 jobs a month. This puts last week’s employment report, which showed job losses of “only” 11,000 in November, in perspective. It was basically a terrible report, which was reported as good news only because we’ve been down so long that it looks like up to the financial press.

    So if we’re going to have any real good news, someone has to take responsibility for creating a lot of additional jobs. And at this point, that someone almost has to be the Federal Reserve.

    I don’t mean to absolve the Obama administration of all responsibility. Clearly, the administration proposed a stimulus package that was too small to begin with and was whittled down further by “centrists” in the Senate. And the measures President Obama proposed earlier this week, while they would create a significant number of additional jobs, fall far short of what the economy needs.

    But while economic analysis says that we should have a large second stimulus, the political reality is that the president — faced with total obstruction from Republicans, while receiving only lukewarm support from some in his own party — probably can’t get enough votes in Congress to do more than tinker at the edges of the employment problem.

    The Fed, however, can do more.

    Mr. Bernanke has received a great deal of credit, and rightly so, for his use of unorthodox strategies to contain the damage after Lehman Brothers failed. But both the Fed’s actions, as measured by its expansion of credit, and Mr. Bernanke’s words suggest that the urgency of late 2008 and early 2009 has given way to a curious mix of complacency and fatalism — a sense that the Fed has done enough now that the financial system has stepped back from the brink, even though its own forecasts predict that unemployment will remain punishingly high for at least the next three years.

    The most specific, persuasive case I’ve seen for more Fed action comes from Joseph Gagnon, a former Fed staffer now at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Basing his analysis on the prior work of none other than Mr. Bernanke himself, in his previous incarnation as an economic researcher, Mr. Gagnon urges the Fed to expand credit by buying a further $2 trillion in assets. Such a program could do a lot to promote faster growth, while having hardly any downside.

    So why isn’t the Fed doing it? Part of the answer may be political: Ideological opponents of government activism tend to be as critical of the Fed’s credit expansion as they are of the Obama administration’s fiscal stimulus. And this has probably made the Fed reluctant to use its powers to their fullest extent. Meanwhile, a significant number of Fed officials, especially at the regional banks, are obsessed with the fear of 1970s-style inflation, which they see lurking just around the bend even though there’s not a hint of it in the actual data.

    But there’s also, I believe, a question of priorities. The Fed sprang into action when faced with the prospect of wrecked banks; it doesn’t seem equally concerned about the prospect of wrecked lives.

    full article:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/11/opinion/11krugman.html?_r=2&ref=opinion
     
  7. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    Huffpost - Americans Think Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke Prefers Wall Street Over Main Stree

    First Posted: 12-16-09 07:06 AM | Updated: 12-16-09 11:29 AM


    The poll numbers come on the eve of a crucial confirmation vote in which senators will decide whether Bernanke should keep his job. Already, at least five Democratic and Republican senators have placed "holds" on his nomination, temporarily blocking it from moving forward.

    The poll, commissioned by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) and Democracy for America, recently asked more than 800 voters a simple question: "Who do you think that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke cares about more, Wall Street or Main Street?"

    Forty-seven percent of respondents said Bernanke favors Wall Street; 20 percent said Main Street; the rest weren't sure.

    The results were largely similar across party lines, geography, sex, race and age. Independents, however, said they think Bernanke favors Wall Street by a three-to-one margin, the highest disparity recorded by the poll.

    "This poll proves that Americans simply don't trust Ben Bernanke. Any senator who votes to confirm Ben Bernanke will make a statement that they care more about Wall Street bankers than their constituents," Aaron Swartz, PCCC's co-founder, said in an e-mail. "If Bernanke was smart, he'd withdraw his name."

    Bernanke has been under fire for the past two years. In 2007, he misjudged the fallout from the subprime crisis, telling members of Congress that the burgeoning disaster in the nation's housing markets seemed "likely to be contained."

    Last year, after the Fed began its historic intervention into the markets by facilitating JPMorgan Chase's purchase of Bear Stearns, many free-marketeers were alarmed by the government's heavy hand. That was followed by a series of taxpayer-funded bailouts.

    full article;
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/16/americans-think-federal-r_n_393789.html?view=print
     
Loading...