Append to end of headline: "... and once he finishes this year's taxes."

to me, at least, his credentials sound a little thin, if they have to include the national spelling bee in 1965

I know resume padding when I see it

Your EEEeeeidiot

As a matter of fact I'm Canadian...but pray tell me your thoughts on the forecoming collapse of the US and China's imminent rise to global dominance.

GIS for Chairmon


Intrigued?

Nurse, will you please remove Mr. Bernanke's face warmer?

Triaxis

The submitter was bashing Bush? I thought he was making a Bukkake joke.

2005-10-24 12:56:46 PM natetimm

Your pic no worky sparhawky.

Funny, works fine for me. Anyone here using photobucket? It's my first time.

Before anyone gets hyped up over this, just read what the last few Nobels in economics have been for. If your head doesn't asplode or your eyes glaze over then either you're asleep or are an economist. Just check how the fed works out interest rates and the most recent theory behind it. Your dog wants a nomination to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve.

good luck to him, he inherited a bit of a mess

As an advisor to the "Deficits don't matter" crowd in the White House, he's inheriting a mess that he helped create.

I work for the US Mint.

So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.

Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you dont know what you are talking about.

This is how bad info gets passed around.

If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.

Cuz some Farkers belive anythng they hear.

Good choice--a well-respected macroeconomist with a Ph.D from MIT. Link

I too thought it was a Bukkake joke

A huge new ineffective bureaucracy ( Homeland Security ). Two supreme court justices, possibly more. A new head of the Fed.

I don't know about you but my life has not become better during the Disaster Presidency. I'm lucky I guess because many people haven't a life at all anymore. To have this administration appoint people who will be in positions of power for likely decades is a scary thing. The disasters and boondoggles could go on and on without end.

Wow. He just laid it all out. He is going to do his best to keep the economy moving along in a good way. Does he really have the power to fire The President?

Bea Arthur

this choice makes me cry. all of you young-ins better be saving for your retirement. say good bye to social security..

You say this like:

1 - People should depend on Social Security for their retirement.

2 - That the elimination of Social Security as a pension program would be a bad thing. (Not at once, my idea is a 75 year phase out)

*ANYONE* who is depending solely on SS for their retirement is a fool and deserves the quality of life resulting from such a poor decision.

In terms of regressive taxes, SS and Medicare might be the very worst. A total tax of 15.3% on all income under ~$92,000... So *all* income earners contribute to SS while higher income earners stop contributing after they're well set. And no, removing the cap isn't a solution to this problem. Drastic reduction of the program and a progressive tax introduced at an AGI of $50k to $70k is.

It is funny, the Dems typically want to be on the side of the poor or disadvantaged, however, they also support widly regressive policies like Social Security that reallocate income from *all* income earners rather than targetting those with the ability to pay.

Elimination of SS as a pension benefit program would greatly benefit this country economically. However, in its place there would have to be some sort of government mandated savings program and retainment of the social safety nets.

Gotta trot out this NSFW flash anim again. (no explicit images, but there is some untoward language)

/i don't like bernanke
//immediately wary of anyone "the smirk" appoints

fudomyoo:

uhm, if you haven't been paying attention, it's not. Read the paper, not the propaganda. Why do you think everyone's freaking out about China?

china is a third world country with a banking sector that hold s over 40% of its outstanding loans as non performing and a per capita income less than that of mexico. to think that china is an ecomony even respectably close to that of the u.s. is absurd.

if you look at the cia fact book, they list china as about a $6t economy and the u.s. at about $13t (purchasing power parity converts the same goods and services such as housing, haircuts, big macs in china by chinese into u.s. dollar equivilents). On a dollar basis, china has about a $1.6t economy, about 1/9 the size of the u.s.

also, demographically, china is farked. they will get old before they get rich. at least japan got rich before it got old. demographically, the u.s. is the strongest country on earth. likewose economically and militarily.

sorry kids, we aren't going to hell as a nation, only individually.

Did someone say Bernake?

Sparhawk

You have been reading too many doom and gloom scenarios. Are their economic issues right now? Of course there are. Tell me a time when there hasn't been. As to China and Europe....place your money there. I'll place my marker on the US and in ten years we'll see who is ahead.

I agree that this guy has good credentials, but the most important one in this case is his Bush Crony credential.

Mr. President, may I make a nickname suggestion?

B.B.

Does the new chairman remind anyone else of Toby Ziegler? You know, in looks. I'd say in facial hair, but I think that'd just get me in trouble in this thread.

china is a third world country

I thought that communist nations were the seldom referred to 2nd World.

Wait...the guy that's brought us our current economy via advising the executive branch is going to be given the opportunity to then tickle the ivories directly through rate-setting?

Why does this just not sound like a good idea!?

Sparhawk.:

The US is certainly not the world's economic powerhouse anymore.

you are as wrong as wrong gets here on fark, and that's saying something. if our economy slowed down, china, japan and the rest of the world would go straight into the shiatter.

ever heard the phrase, when america sneezes, the world catched the flu? its even more true today than it ever has been. china might be growing quickly, but it has no banking system, no provisions for caring for a quickly aging population, no social structure for handling a massive urbanization of its population, poor resource development (when we are looking at getting away from a fossil fuel based society, china is just getting into being one. in other words, they industrial basis is second rate).

vwdrewvw:

Better than whom I anticipated: Joesph Solomon, head of the Kentucky Coalition for Christian Economics.

/that guy dont really exist, but he should


If he existed, it's unlikely his name would be Joseph Solomon.

:D

I've got 10 shares of Halliburton that says this guy forces interest rates down and inflation buttsecks us all into the stoneage.

2005-10-24 12:55:49 PM iamrobot

in that small time period you mention he managed to stop the "dominoe" effect global recession that toppled south america and even with the .com correction to an inflated market the 90s were undeniably a good economic period.

I read about that actually. The 90s were a good economic period, but with less mania and less George Bush / Greenspan stupidity we could have been sitting pretty here in 2005 as well. There were a lot of real productivity gains in that period that helped out a lot: it wasn't "just" a bubble. If steps had been taken to mercilessly tamp down on the bubble, we could have had good productivity and wage gains without the bubble.

the problem with a free economy is that you get bubbles and they burst. i'm willing to deal with that particular side effect of democracy without any more government interference.

First you applaud Greenspan's efforts to stop a South American / Asian recession, then you argue that we'd be better off with a "free" economy (e.g., one without a federal reserve?). Which is it?

My personal view is that a macro economy like ours is best with a mix of "freedom" and government control to keep it from going off the tracks. Too much government control, you get the Soviet Union, too little, and you get the robber barons and Gilded Age.

He looks good enough, and if a lot of his academic research is on Great Depression stuff, that should serve him well in the near future, sadly.

Of course, he has worked with bush to get us where we are now, so who the fark knows.

Yay, another neoliberal.

Is he Bush's CPA or something?

then tickle the ivories directly through rate-setting?

That's racist.

/can't find the animated GIF
//Hopefully obvious in jest
///Hope floats

2005-10-24 01:08:26 PM impaler

WOW! You don't know shiat about economics. So why the fark are you commenting on them? Seriously, you're an idiot.

Ha ha ha, the famed "you're a moran" gambit with no supporting arguments. Do you want to have a conversation, or are you just going to throw rocks?

What are the odds. First the most qualified person in the country to fill the vacant supreme court seat just happens to be Bush's personal lawyer. Now the most qualified person to essentially guide the US economy and have great impact on the world economy just happens to be a Bush economic
advisor.

Sparhawk

Actually I tend to think that Greenspan's actions after the .com bust ensured that the recession would only sting a little instead of hurt like a sledge.

A lot of wealth back then in the form of investments shriveled up like George after being in the pool.

Now agreeing on the tax cuts I'll concede was just idiotic lunacy. Especially in light of the massive spending the government was putting out.

My impression of the current congress.

"Hey Hunny.. I just bought a lexus!"
"Ohh wow.. nice!"
"Ohh yea I got a demotion at my job too"

natetimm:

Why do you write it dot.com? Shouldn't it be .com or dot com? dot.com is like saying dot dot com. Like the rio grande river is just the rio grande. or something.

Oh Bravo! *clap*clap*

Nothing like pointing out a lingustic usage error in an economics debate.

/the la brea tar pits?

SherKhan wins the forgotten trivia question of the day! Socialist and Communist nations (the Soviet Bloc being the example) were referred to as the "second world". Everyone not in the first or second world were in the "third world".

Although now, China really isn't communist anymore. What's that make them? 1.5st nation? :)

nerfball:

ok, i'll bite. who would your choice have been and why would your choice have been any better?

i love how people on fark can biatch about the world around them and yet have clue as to why it is the way it is and what factors have gone into making it the way it is. its easy as hell to biatch but damn tough to come up with an idea to make the situation any better. its tougher still to try to bet others to agree with the suggestion and next to impossible to successfully execute the plan after that.

in a world where people are charged with actually running the show, farkers biatch and always want something else, but not a damn one of them has the ability to be part of the solution. which, of course, makes them part of the problem.


Instead of biatching about other people biatching, why don't you just give us the reasons we should back this guy?

/Or are you saying we should just take it on "faith" that George W. Bush would only nominate a great candidate????

//His ideas on how to stop deflation are suspect: He referenced the possibility of a "helicoptor drop" of dollar bills as a last-resort possibility to stop deflation; his strong stance against deflation may have been a reason for his nomination.

He's held a Guggenheim Fellowship and a Sloan Fellowship,Has various"numbered Swiss Bank accounts",Reserves honourary membership to Skull & Bones.

cargrrl82:

Just check how the fed works out interest rates and the most recent theory behind it.

I have read some things that alluded to the idea that interests rates have been manipulated as way of counteracting civil unrest? What do you make of that?

"currently serves as the chairman of President Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, which provides the president with analysis and advice on economic issues."

This one line is the death-knell of his nomination. He might as well have nominated Paris Hiltons fufu dog.

also, demographically, china is farked. they will get old before they get rich. at least japan got rich before it got old. demographically, the u.s. is the strongest country on earth. likewose economically and militarily.

sorry kids, we aren't going to hell as a nation, only individually.

no way dude! India is demographically the stongest country.

I still don't get it.

It's really a bukkake joke? Because that's not very funny.

2005-10-24 01:20:07 PM IdBeCrazyIf

Actually I tend to think that Greenspan's actions after the .com bust ensured that the recession would only sting a little instead of hurt like a sledge.

I also agree, but I think that we needed a longer and harsher recession then to force the economy back into good shape. I mean sure we've had a relatively mediocre-to-good last four years, but now where are we? Facing the end of another gigantic asset bubble again and inflation, in debt a lot more, etc.

I think Greenspan should have cut rates, but not to zero, instead to some medium-low number. I'm aware that he was afraid of a Japan-style malaise and long low-energy deflationary recession, but I'm not sure that's worse than what we're looking at here, which is an asset bubble and a credit-based economic mess on the other end.

As an aside, just about every economy, technology, and business magazine has been touting China's soon-to-be market dominance for a good year now.

Point? Don't discount SparHawk too quickly. He might be leaning a bit more towards "Doomsday" than most Farkers appreciate, but he's not completely out in left field. As "The Economist", "Business Week", "CIO Magazine", and "Business 2.0" have all discussed and are continuing to rave about, China's economy is on track to explode within the next decade and leave the US economy in the dust.

We're talking about a country with four times the population of the United States whose economy is quickly changing to a capitalist system with a focus on technology and engineering. Prove to me those jobs don't generate wealth and I'll prove to you that the sky is actually a painting and that up is really down.

IBM is starting a program to churn out IT/Engineering graduates in China at a rate of 80,000 per year for 5 years and that's just IBM. If you don't think that that figure alone is cause for alarm, think again. The US isn't doomed but we're certainly on the wrong train, possibly on the wrong track altogether.

ZipBeep: Instead of biatching about other people biatching, why don't you just give us the reasons we should back this guy?

/Or are you saying we should just take it on "faith" that George W. Bush would only nominate a great candidate????

//His ideas on how to stop deflation are suspect: He referenced the possibility of a "helicoptor drop" of dollar bills as a last-resort possibility to stop deflation; his strong stance against deflation may have been a reason for his nomination.


he's as experienced in economics and in macro policy as any of the other candidates. larry lindsay was probably on track for the nomination until about two years ago when he broke ranks with the admin on the cost of the war. as far as his solution to deflation, its impossible to answer hypothetical questions. what are the other economic inputs at the time of deflation? look at japan - a $6t economy that grew like crazy and then quit growing for 15 years (my guess is that china is in for a similar fate).

people hold greenspan as a god, but he screwed up repretedly. when he was chair of the CEA under ford, he didn't have a clue how to fight inflation (remember his famous 'win' button?). in '91 greenspan saw inflation all around and the problem was actually a deflating ecomony (his refusal to lower rates put the economy into the shiatter and we ended up with clinton as president - thanks for nothing alan). as of late, greenspan failed to address the equity bubble in '95 and instead transferred it to the asset bubble we have today in housing.

the bottom line is that macro policy officials are tough to find, tough to train and practice an imperfect profession. bernenke is as qualified as anyone we have today. that makes him an acceptable candidate.

if you have a better candidate, name that person and we will all find ways to point out that you are an idiot for supporting a candidate. if you don't have a better candidate, STFU and have a nice day.