THE Ben Bernanke Thread (merged)

[sittinguy]

The vid is gone, can someone post a link to it?

[AirlinePilot]

This takes the cake. How long can it go on? You and I are being robbed. Plain as day.

http://market-ticker.org/archives/1305- ... rjury.html

[Novus]

It is gone on blatantly for 9 months already and the national robbery will continue until the people rise up with torches and pitchforks and hang em high.

[eastbay]

It is gone on blatantly for 9 months already and the national robbery will continue until the people rise up with torches and pitchforks and hang em high.

How dare they threaten the powers that be!! The first to do so won't last long.

[notill]

The United States HAS OFFICIALLY HIT THE TREASURY DEBT WALL and The Fed and Treasury are engaged in subterfuge and conspiracy in an attempt to hide this from the market.

we had two failed Treasury Auctions last week, both 5 and 7 year, yet we intend to try to borrow ANOTHER $400 billion next quarter and nearly $100 billion this coming week

This was a good post.

Other than the Fed, the treasury is having trouble finding sufficient buyers for their debt, this is a significant milestone being reached.

[DantesPeak]

I discussed this same issue a number of times in the dollar crash thread, which is the Fed is indeed monetizing Treasury debt issuance at a rapid rate. The only disagreement that I might have with some of the more pessimistic commentators is that the Fed does not directly participate in new Treasury offerings - except to the extent it 'rolls over' expiring positions. So yes, the Fed can and does buy Treasury securities on the day they are issued - but this information is not secret, and I don't see any solid evidence that are making secret purchases somehow.

The Fed has bought $225 billion in notes/bonds and $553 billion in mortgage securities over the last year. So a significant portion of all new bonds/notes/mortgages have been monetized - that is paid for by the issuance of new Fed fiat money. Historically such high rates of monetization have been associated with high rates of domestic inflation, although in Japan's case, the extra money went mostly to the US and helped pump up the housing bubble (along with the Fed).

http://peakoil.com/economics-finance/th ... 1-195.html

[Jotapay]

So yes, the Fed can and does buy Treasury securities on the day they are issued - but this information is not secret, and I don't see any solid evidence that are making secret purchases somehow.

Denninger and and ZeroHedge evidently turned up the actual Cusips where the purchases were made by the Fed from the primary dealers one week later, to the tune of 50% of the issuance of the 7-yr auction.

50% is a whole lot of printing. A boat load.

[Jotapay]

Here it is:
http://market-ticker.org/archives/1304- ... vered.html

In my opinion, this is a bombshell of a blog post. The rate of monetization is going vertical.

[DantesPeak]

To explain myself a little better, I am in no way disputing the conclusion that the Fed bought bonds that were only sold a few days before. This is public information. Also I am not disputing that Bernanke is lying about monetization. I just wonder why Congress is letting him get away with this (outside of Ron Paul and few others).

I am only disputing some web posters (maybe none of those mentioned above) that say there is some type of secret Fed buying conspiracy. No, the monetization of the Treasury debt – and also home mortgages – is occurring at a very rapid rate in view under our collective noses. This game won’t be maintained forever. Weimar Germany contained hyperinflation after almost two years of broad based monetization before prices exploded. Our two years is coming up near the end of 2009.

[deMolay]

Look, the only ones responsible are Obama and the Democratic controlled Congress. But if you even mention Obama's name in anyway with anything negative you get crucified. He and the Dems are still blaming Bush for goodness sake. Even tho he is the one doing the vertical spending. He has his agenda and that is all that matters. He really doesn't give a tinkers damn how it ends as long as he gets his agenda pushed through. The Democratic controlled Congress will do as he wishes, and he won't check or admonish their excesses. And he certainly will not veto anything. He is a community rabble rouser, who is far over his head. That is how he is approaching the situation. He is still on the campaign trail and still stuck in Chicago Community Organizer mode. He is simply not up to the job of President in charge of the largest economy on earth. And just like Hogans Hero's Col. Klink, he has surrounded himself with Nimcompoops. It will not end well. OK now shoot the messenger.

[Chuckmak]

Republican policies tend to create economic crises...Democrat policies tend to exacerbate and prolong economic crises. All sides are to blame. But everyone wants to play innocent when they know their not.

[DantesPeak]

How is Bernanke lying - the subject of this thread - Obama's fault? Bernanke served in the Fed a long time under Bush. I very much doubt if Obama was to pick someone for Fed chief, Obama would have picked Bernanke.

Granted someone Obama might, or might yet pick, could be worse. But the Fed's money base was already near the same levels as now as when Obama came in, and it's not clear how much influence Obama has over the Fed.

[truecougarblue]

It is Obama's fault because during the first few months of his administration he and his have multipied the horrific Bush deficit 5X, thus necessitating the Treasury/Fed two step.

[DantesPeak]

It is Obama's fault because during the first few months of his administration he and his have multipied the horrific Bush deficit 5X, thus necessitating the Treasury/Fed two step.

I challenge you to go back and look at what the Fed did before Obama became President, and provide some proof supporting what you said about the Fed.

The budget deficit ran at about a $1 trillion rate in the second half of 2008 under Bush. Much of the increase this year are for programs passed under Bush, like bailing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, plus a huge increase for Medicare and extra unemployment benefits. Granted Obama has added to that, but only a fraction of the expected deficit this year. Let's not distort the facts, there will be enough blame to go around to everyone by the time this depression is finished (if ever).

[truecougarblue]

July 28, 2008

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's budget chief blamed the faltering economy and the bipartisan stimulus package for the record $482 billion deficit the White House predicted for the 2009 budget year.

August 4, 2009

According to new figures from the Treasury Department, the federal debt -- the accumulation of all the annual budget deficits -- has grown by more than $1 trillion since Obama took office more than six months ago.

I'm not going to spend time tracking it all down. These two figures are Bush's last year and Obama's first year. The structural deficit projected going forward is indeed expected to reach the 5X I stated without even taking into account reduced revenue due to the depression.

A more important question would be, why are you shilling for Obama? They both are owned by Goldman, and only seek to increase their own power. There isn't a dime's difference between them. Be careful, your partisanship is showing.

[vision-master]

How is Bernanke lying - the subject of this thread - Obama's fault? Bernanke served in the Fed a long time under Bush. I very much doubt if Obama was to pick someone for Fed chief, Obama would have picked Bernanke.

Granted someone Obama might, or might yet pick, could be worse. But the Fed's money base was already near the same levels as now as when Obama came in, and it's not clear how much influence Obama has over the Fed.

Let's see what happens the 1st of the year?

The cynical answer is that he’s running for re-election, although the chairman of the Federal Reserve is appointed, not elected. Bernanke was appointed by George Bush and his four-year term expires in January. He would clearly like to stay in office, which would take a single vote, that of President Obama.

[joewp]

It is Obama's fault because during the first few months of his administration he and his have multipied the horrific Bush deficit 5X, thus necessitating the Treasury/Fed two step.

I challenge you to go back and look at what the Fed did before Obama became President, and provide some proof supporting what you said about the Fed.

The budget deficit ran at about a $1 trillion rate in the second half of 2008 under Bush. Much of the increase this year are for programs passed under Bush, like bailing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, plus a huge increase for Medicare and extra unemployment benefits. Granted Obama has added to that, but only a fraction of the expected deficit this year. Let's not distort the facts, there will be enough blame to go around to everyone by the time this depression is finished (if ever).

Let's not get distracted by partisan politics. Bush and Obama are on the same team, the banker's team. Creating new money as debt and enslaving the populace with the interest payments has been the standard operating procedure for at least the last 90 years (if not more). Partisan politics is a mere distraction designed to deflect the people from realizing the real cause of the financial debacle, the printing of fiat money as debt by the Fed and banks under the fractional reserve banking system we've been saddled with since the passage of the Federal Reserve Act. The massive debt amounts we're seeing now are a predictable consequence of exponential growth of the money supply in a vain attempt to keep "economic growth" continuing in spite of stagnant oil supplies.

Once "economic growth" starts to begin again(if ever), we'll see $100+ oil prices and more and more defaults on mortgages and credit card debt, and a crash worse than the one we're in now. It's all the fault of a money system that requires constant growth or bust. We're in the bust, and both parties, being two sides of the same banker-owned coin, are responsible.

Remember, every dollar in your wallet and bank account was created from somebody's debt, which carries interest of some percent a year, requiring "economic growth" to just pay the interest. Since constant growth in a finite environment is impossible, and it seems Liebig's Law of the minimum is decidedly pointing to oil supplies as the limiting factor of our civilization, I don't think you can really blame anybody but all of us for being collectively as dumb as yeast.

[truecougarblue]

Thanks Joe, I agree completely. Apparently someone missed the word "horrific" in my prior post. Less bad/more bad, it's still bad.

[hillguy57]

Amazing footage from the 30's.What's really strange is the racial bias at the end commented on as if it was a totally acceptable way to think. What passes as normal social attitude is now unthinkable. At least we have progressed in some ways.

[Buggy]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/32521818

I. Can't. Stop. Throwing. UP!!!!!

Come reappointment time he will get a no go and be the named scapegoat for the collapse of the dollar.