Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN) NewsFlash Bush picks Ben Bernanke as the new Fed Chief, provided he wipes his face off first   (money.cnn.com ) divider line
    More: NewsFlash  
•       •       •

20914 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Oct 2005 at 12:26 PM (10 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

246 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2005-10-24 03:48:02 PM  
ok, but I mean really if faced with black or white, up or down..left foot or right. say a presidential election... where,

a. Gore is an asshat from a southern state
b. Bush is an asshat from a southern state
c. some other asshats ran that I didnt know enough about to cast a voe for.

and we all know the likelyhood of a non neocon or brying liberal getting elected is...

how do you choose a foot to blow off, take it as a litteral question, any and every argument for either foot will lead you to the same conclusion. either way I loose a farking foot..yay!

its a very valid mirror to the question of Presidential elections in this century. one wich someone who aims down the middle can surley appreciate. its so damn frustrating to know without a doubt that there will NEVER be a president who represents me... a neopagan meat eater with a facsination with military hardware, that also happens to hates war...

I really need to commit myself to either the crying liberal or Neocon/Fundie camps...being on the fence sucks :-P

let the recruitment begin! lets see who can win the prize that is me.
 
2005-10-24 03:51:57 PM  
*screams*

can we get a spell checker in here!? i'm addicted to them, I'm really not a bad speller, I just get in a hurry when I'm typing and start farking up random words...forgive?

/has "lazy fingers"
//wife really hates that :-P
 
2005-10-24 04:03:29 PM  
HK369
/now convinced that we are indeed doomed
I am glad I could help put things in thier proper perspective.

Actually the orginal idea of a deocratic republic is actually a decent idea. The idea is the unwashed masses are too dumb to make decisions on matters. However they are not too dumb to vote for people who then make decisions on things. This is somewhat true. I think the biggest problem is things now are spun and put out of proportion which makes it hard for the public to get a true feel of candiates. Schools need to teach more about the media and others influence people.

I really need to commit myself to either the crying liberal or Neocon/Fundie camps...being on the fence sucks :-P

Do you really feal that democrats are all "crying liberals"? Do you think John Kerry was a "crying liberal"? To me it seems that most Democrats that run now a days are mostly moderate left.

I find it funny how you could take many republican presidents of the past and they would easily be labeled "left liberals" today.
 
2005-10-24 04:06:40 PM  
Damn, I was realy hoping it would be this guy:

[image from phillytalkradioonline.com too old to be available]

BOOYAH!
 
2005-10-24 04:17:00 PM  
All hail the new Counterfeiter in Chief!
 
2005-10-24 04:22:53 PM  
yeah, I think the political landscape has been distilled down into those two groups for most intents and purposes.

and I agree that the republicans of the future would really defy a conventional and "modern" classification..the days of the statesmen are long past.

so as a practical matter, crying liberals and Neocon nutbags are all thats left in regards to who will actually be in power for the next..oh, 50 years at least. moderates are inefectuall by definition I'm sure you'll agree.

as for Kerry? yeah..he's an asshat like all the rest of you ask me. big old money family, toteing his military service around like a badge, as if that means anything... if it did then he wouldnt have thrown those medals out when he did..but it was a powerfull symbolic gesture... that John Kerry doesnt exist anymore, perhaps if he did he would be the president right now, but would things really be any different? nope. the particulars might be..but overall big money looks out for itself, and the left and right continue to squabble, content in the knowledge that you and I will be distracted by it to the point that we cannot see all of the corruption in DC. they are direct decendants of kings and despots in their ability to "play" the public and use us like a farking resource...and that will never change, no matter if its a liberal Conservative or moderate in "power"

/is really depressing myself now
//should really write this down
///D'OH!
 
2005-10-24 04:23:35 PM  
that should read "republicans of the past

/my bad
 
2005-10-24 04:26:43 PM  
He should have chosen Harriet Miers - this man actually knows something about the job he's been asked to do.

/drta
 
2005-10-24 04:36:08 PM  
nerfball says: "to think that china is an ecomony even respectably close to that of the u.s. is absurd."

It isn't about whether the Chinese economy can ever be as big as the U.S. economy. It's about control. China has bought hundreds of billions of dollars worth of T-bonds over the last few years, which has kept the economy rolling along, AND has had a hand in the huge run-up of housing prices.

What China has done has directly contradicted what Greenspan has tried to do. Check out Dean Baker's analysis at www.cepr.net:

"By directly intervening in the long-term market by buying treasury bonds, the Chinese central bank has undermined Greenspans efforts. If the actions of the Chinese government were good for the U.S. economy, then Greenspans policy must have been bad."

Hopefully Ben Bernanke can help to straighten this out and give us back more control over our own economy before the Chinese decide to do a little monkeywrenching in our capital markets.
 
2005-10-24 04:37:26 PM  
nerfball:

bernanke graduated summa cum laude with an econ degree from harvard and has earned the respect of his peers over decades as a policy wonk and we should take YOUR word for it when you start saying he's a poor choice? THAT is what earned you a STFU.

Yeah, and Brownie earned the respect of his peers, too. "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job". And who are you to tell people to STFU? Is this guy your father or what?

and i don't ever remember saying george bush was a god of any sort. one thing i can say is that i'm sure you don't travel abroad muck. look at japan over the past 15 years, look at france or germany today. you want to see bad economies? THOSE are terrible economies. and just think, all the john kerry liberals want us to be more like france. THAT will also earn you a STFU (just like it earned a big one for kerry himself).

Our economy is great if you are rich, but so is the economy of Japan, Germany and France great if you are rich. The George Bush NeoCons want OUR economy to be more like Louis XVI's in FRANCE, for Cry-yi! "Let them eat cake!"
 
2005-10-24 04:41:36 PM  
MrBelvedere:

If you lefties really think our economy sucks now, why do you heap praise on Alan Greenspan? He is still the same position he had during your idol Clinton's time.


In case you missed, he got PWNED by Bush during the $300 tax check debacle. Greenspan was against tax cuts during the early part of 2001, but Bush called him into the Oval Office and probably blackmailed him or at least threatened him to make him change his mind. You NeoCons always conveniently forget that.
 
2005-10-24 04:43:43 PM  
H31N0US: The same way I address politics: aim right down the middle.


And shoot your dick off??? YIKES!! :D
 
2005-10-24 04:49:15 PM  
sigamajig:

cstmoore
Brownie, Bolton, Bernanke... is there some kind of pattern emerging here?
you forgot the obvious: Bush


He's from Texas - they have a thing with Killer Bs. :D

/Astros suck!
//GO YOU WHITE SOX!!!!
 
2005-10-24 04:53:58 PM  
MrBelvedere:

To all people saying this guy sucks:
Bush decides to pick whomever you want for the position. Who do you pick that is better? George Soros? Michael Moore? Howard Dean?

Answer with a logical reason and maybe we'll take you seriously. If not, stop acting like you know anything.


We're talking about THIS guy's nomination NOW. We're not talking about anyone else. It's this guy or not this guy. Get it?

If we were asking about alternatives, I would ask: Who do YOU want? Wolfowitz? Perle?
 
2005-10-24 05:03:24 PM  
Wait a minute....He was born in Georgia? So even the Jews in this administration are from the South?

/kidding...I'm 1/2 myself.
//would be worried if he WASN'T jewish
 
2005-10-24 05:04:47 PM  
Did somebody say he chose Bukakke?

[image from image.blog.livedoor.jp too old to be available]


OOOOOOOOOOOOh, Bernande. right
 
2005-10-24 05:05:20 PM  
Greenspan was against tax cuts during the early part of 2001, but Bush called him into the Oval Office and probably blackmailed him or at least threatened him to make him change his mind. You NeoCons always conveniently forget that.

Care to explain why Bush would go so far as to blackmail a 79 year old man over what he thinks about tax cuts? The Fed regulates monetary policy, not fiscal policy. Greenspan's opinion on tax cuts would just be another one in a million.
 
2005-10-24 05:29:49 PM  
ZipBeep

I can't tell if you're trying to flame or trying to make liberals look bad or what.

bernanke graduated summa cum laude with an econ degree from harvard and has earned the respect of his peers over decades as a policy wonk and we should take YOUR word for it when you start saying he's a poor choice? THAT is what earned you a STFU.

Yeah, and Brownie earned the respect of his peers, too.


No. Bernanke has actually earned the respect of his peers. Comparing Bernanke to Michael Brown both signals your ignorance of Bernanke (of whom I'm sure you hadn't even heard before today) and is detrimental to the real and valid criticism of Brown's appointment.

Here's why you should support Bernanke:

1. He has been published multiple times in the American Economic Review, the profession's most elite journal. Being published once in the AER is a big deal.
2. He is widely regarded as an authority on monetary policy issues, due in part to the fact that he has authored and supported several of the most important monetary policy theories of the past thirty years.
3. Yes, his academic record is impeccable.
4. He is also highly regarded by financial economists.
5. He's not a Bush crony. He's actually supported across the political spectrum. Brad DeLong spends every day calling for Bush's impeachment, and he supports Bernanke.
 
2005-10-24 05:40:39 PM  
colklink

Care to explain why Bush would go so far as to blackmail a 79 year old man over what he thinks about tax cuts? The Fed regulates monetary policy, not fiscal policy. Greenspan's opinion on tax cuts would just be another one in a million.

I don't know about blackmail, so I can't answer that. But no, you're dead wrong about Greenspan's opinion on tax cuts being just another one in a million. The effectiveness of tax cuts as economic stimulus depends on the Fed's willingness to accomodate those cuts. Tax cuts lead to lower revenues (and don't even start with that unproven Laffer curve nonsense), and as a result, increase the deficit (or decrease a surplus, as the case may be). This leads to the need to issuance of more bonds, because someone has to finance the debt.

Meanwhile, tax cuts tend to be inflationary, so the Fed may want to sell more bonds to constrict the money supply, which combined with the bonds already issued would lead to significantly lower bond prices/higher interest rates, and thus put the brakes on the whole thing. If the Fed is willing to accomodate the tax-cut policy, it can back off on bond sales and allow for possible inflation.

That's leaving an enormous amount out. But the point you should get here is that Greenspan's opinion on tax cuts was really important... and when he supported the 2001 cuts, it was, to many people, the low point of his tenure.
 
2005-10-24 05:47:45 PM  
never odd or even: Great Headline. Been awhile since one made me laugh out loud.

Lame headlines continue here at FARK and so does the reach arounds for all of you that seem to think only republicans reward people in thier own party.

You people scare me more than anything else in the world.


I have said it before and probably will say it numerous times, FARK has become pathetic now that it seems to be only open season on one political party.

Why has nobody made fun of hillarys sudden swing to the center? Its been in the news alot lately.
 
2005-10-24 06:05:37 PM  
Lame headlines continue here at FARK and so does the reach arounds for all of you that seem to think only republicans reward people in thier own party.

While it is lame that people are attacking Bernanke for no reason whatsoever, the Bush administration has gone far beyond any administration in the past hundred years in the scope of its cronyism. It's not even a partisan issue-- the entire Republican party isn't screwed up, just the part that happens to be in control. So don't pull this "other people [ie Democrats] do it too," because there's a difference between choosing people who tend to share your views and are qualified (as everyone on both sides does), and appointing people based on loyalty alone.

Why has nobody made fun of hillarys sudden swing to the center? Its been in the news alot lately.

Hillary has always been fairly moderate, much like her husband. Yes, she's supported issues that please the left (gun stuff, her health care plan), but also those that please the right (free trade). So there really isn't any sudden swing... plus, it's hard to make fun of moderates, at least those who tend to make sense. I'm not a huge Hillary fan by any means, but I don think there's much to attack her for at the moment. Of course, this could be in part because her party isn't in power, so she doesn't have much of an opportunity to do anything stupid. But really, if you look for instance at her speech when voting to authorize the use of force against Iraq, you'll find that she was quite on target. She's not perfect by any means, but I'm not sure I understand your call to mock her.
 
2005-10-24 06:06:59 PM  
colklink:

Care to explain why Bush would go so far as to blackmail a 79 year old man over what he thinks about tax cuts? The Fed regulates monetary policy, not fiscal policy. Greenspan's opinion on tax cuts would just be another one in a million.


NOTE: Blackmail OR threaten him. Why did Greenspan suddenly change his stance??

And the man responsible for one of the best economies in history says "no" to tax cuts and he is just one in a million? Yeah, right.

/Your NeoCon is showing. Cover that up, please.
 
2005-10-24 06:08:37 PM  
Tax cuts lead to lower revenues (and don't even start with that unproven Laffer curve nonsense), and as a result, increase the deficit (or decrease a surplus, as the case may be). This leads to the need to issuance of more bonds, because someone has to finance the debt.

Thanks for your insight, but earlier this year we saw an increase (unproven laffer curve?) in expected tax revenue that many consider to be a result of the tax cuts. Taken everything you said to be correct, would this mean that maybe Bush convinced AG instead of blackmailing him?
 
2005-10-24 06:09:24 PM  
HK369
Ok Now I am really confused. First you say the Democrats are run by the "crying liberals" and then a couple sentences later you say the are owned by corporate money and do things exactly the same as the republicans. It seems to me you can't have it both ways. How can you say they are both extremes and both the same at the same time?

Seems like the public that you are critical of, you are more interested about what a candidate did years ago, or where they came from, then actually about how they stand on issues.

It's always much easy to talk about vague ideals that will never actually get tested than to compromise with someone or something in detail that can always be criticised.
 
2005-10-24 06:13:18 PM  
ZipBeep,

You'll also need to explain to me why you're calling me a Neocon (a term often used in foreign policy circles) when I'm talking about supply-side economics (tax cuts).
 
2005-10-24 06:13:27 PM  
RaveX:

Here's why you should support Bernanke:

1. He has been published multiple times in the American Economic Review, the profession's most elite journal. Being published once in the AER is a big deal.
2. He is widely regarded as an authority on monetary policy issues, due in part to the fact that he has authored and supported several of the most important monetary policy theories of the past thirty years.
3. Yes, his academic record is impeccable.
4. He is also highly regarded by financial economists.
5. He's not a Bush crony. He's actually supported across the political spectrum. Brad DeLong spends every day calling for Bush's impeachment, and he supports Bernanke.



All that is fine and dandy. But we can't question anything about this guy? He's the greatest thing since cheese?

His views on deflation are directly in opposition of Greenspan's. It sounds like he wants more inflation, and while that's all good when you are an Argentina or Brazil and trying to inflate your way out of debt, I'd rather see a strong dollar, low inflation and payoff of debt.

Milton Friedman gets published all over the place and is widely respected by his peers and probably knows more about the economy than anyone in the world, but I sure wouldn't want him running the Fed.
 
2005-10-24 06:14:39 PM  
Oh, and he's been a Bush economic advisor for what, the past 5 years???

That says a lot.
 
2005-10-24 06:16:48 PM  
colklink:

ZipBeep,

You'll also need to explain to me why you're calling me a Neocon (a term often used in foreign policy circles) when I'm talking about supply-side economics (tax cuts).



When you defend Bush, you are a NeoCon. Sorry if you don't like it. There's been a lot of "Lib" and "Liberals" in this thread, but you don't see me whining about it.

/Why do you NeoCons whine all the time?
 
2005-10-24 06:18:38 PM  
colklink:

Thanks for your insight, but earlier this year we saw an increase (unproven laffer curve?) in expected tax revenue that many consider to be a result of the tax cuts. Taken everything you said to be correct, would this mean that maybe Bush convinced AG instead of blackmailing him?


No, that was due to the one-time amnesty program for Corporate earnings earned overseas. Come on, pay attention.
 
2005-10-24 06:24:19 PM  
Thanks for your insight, but earlier this year we saw an increase (unproven laffer curve?) in expected tax revenue that many consider to be a result of the tax cuts.

Yeah... but no. We did see a short-term increase in expected tax revenue, that much is true. But that's an increase over what was expected given the tax cuts. If you use as your baseline the expected revenue had the Bush tax cuts not gone through, revenue was lower than the baseline.

As far as the "many" who consider it to be the result of the tax cuts, those "many" are in rather profound disagreement with most mainstream economists and the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. If you get your economics from partisan shills, then they'll probably also tell you that sunshine is a result of the tax cuts.

Taken everything you said to be correct, would this mean that maybe Bush convinced AG instead of blackmailing him?

Well, like I said before, I don't know anything about blackmail. I do know that he has since admitted that the tax cuts were a mistake, though.

I don't buy into unsubstantiated conspiracy theories or partisan nonsense. I actually hate politics in general. What I do care about is policy. The tax cuts were bad policy, and Greenspan screwed up by supporting them. That doesn't even mean that Greenspan wasn't a good Fed Chief, it just means that he made one particular mistake on one particular policy.
 
2005-10-24 06:31:55 PM  
I probably should have left "blackmail" out. I stand by "threatened", though. The Bush family is well known for threatening people and getting revenge.
 
2005-10-24 07:23:40 PM  
steaming pile - Lame headlines continue here at FARK and so does the reach arounds for all of you that seem to think only republicans reward people in thier own party.

You people scare me more than anything else in the world.


I have said it before and probably will say it numerous times, FARK has become pathetic now that it seems to be only open season on one political party.

Why has nobody made fun of hillarys sudden swing to the center? Its been in the news alot lately.


Um, I laughed because of the bukkake reference. Meaning, the headline making fun of his name was funny to me. It had absolutely nothing to do with politics. I'm actually conservative, not to say I voted for Bush.
 
2005-10-24 08:08:15 PM  
Okay for those that aren't getting this:


[image from marions-kochbuch.de too old to be available]
+
[image from artchive.com too old to be available]


= Bernanke
 
2005-10-24 08:54:46 PM  
Greenspan was awesome. I just want this guy to do exactly the same things Greenspan did.
To those too young to remember Paul Volcker as fed Chairman, the FC can do incredible damage to the economy.
It was like having the big eye of Sauron looking out over the land and withering everything it sees.
 
2005-10-24 09:01:45 PM  
If I visualize that headline, it is very disturbing.
 
2005-10-24 09:03:52 PM  
Volcker was also actually a good Fed Chairman... He did exactly what he had to do-- which, ironically, was identical to what the monetarists would have done. If he had pursued a looser monetary policy, we'd still be in recession. Stagflation is a really nasty thing to have to combat. There are no painless options.
 
2005-10-24 09:09:56 PM  
ZipBeep
/Why do you NeoCons whine all the time?

because it goes so well with the chesse they are cutting
 
2005-10-24 09:14:52 PM  
Sparhawk

Good on you for being the voice of reason here.

What you said about the US economy is absolutely true.

The debt situation negates all other factors in this instance. Regardless of industrialisation, technology, education, political systems or national institutions, if you dont have any money, they collapse. Arguments of the rest of the world needing the US economy more than the US economy needs them is false. The collapse of the US economy would hurt, but the rest of the world would recover faster than the US could.

My biggest worry is that the US will try to use further military options to avoid collapse. I have a bad feeling though, with Iran starting to trade its oil in Euro's next march, which will be another devastating blow to the US economy because China needs to buy oil, they buy it from Iran, and they will have little use for US dollars, and will trade them in for Euro's.

Scary times.
 
2005-10-24 10:39:58 PM  
You are the spark

RIP
 
2005-10-24 10:51:09 PM  
[image from img479.imageshack.us too old to be available]
unavailable for comment. reportedly found floating in pool with other looters...

/imageshack is good.
 
2005-10-24 11:04:00 PM  
Maybe now the dollar will explode onto the face of the currency market.

/who is going to PS George on the $1 bill so he has a milk mustache?
 
2005-10-25 12:32:43 AM  
Corvus

ok, so what exactly "confused" you? more like you hate to have the two parties displayed for what they are, and thats esentially the same. mine is a non-partisan argument, and most people cant handle that. thats fine, I realize that in order to justify their position most have to pick a party line and stick too it. in this rare case I can indeed have my cake and eat it too. left or right = nutjobs...get it? sheesh! and I actually said what I did about Kerry in responce to a comment about him and what if he were president today? not a comment but a reply. I dont give a shiat what these nuts did back in the day.

pick on someone else homeboy, you got nothing to gripe about with my statements other than the fact that they are truely moderate, and I know party-liners hate that with a passion.

so let me say it again reeaal slow for you...

Crying liberals, Neocon fascists, Greenparty treehuggers and everyone else in the centerstage of american politics are all alike, mearly playing differnt positions to garner support from different portions of the populace. party liners and shortsighted people (often the same folks) are the willing slaves of said groups and their plans of world domination.... get it? got it? probably not.

/goodbye cruel thread
//leaves to find a boobies thread
///*fap*
 
2005-10-25 01:31:17 AM  

Oh my farking god. For the last time, if you're still paying attention:


IT WASN'T A BUSH-OR-REPUBLICAN-BASHING JOKE.
IT'S A BUKKAKE JOKE.


Holy crap you people are dense.

 
2005-10-25 02:46:52 AM  
Buck-cake?

...Christ, Dubya has brought back the 60s and 70s, yes he has.

A war against a concept instead of a political group, which is devolving into guerrilla warfare.

Mad inflation.

High gas prices.

Hey everyone, break out white leisure suits, cuz DISCO MUST BE COMING BACK SOON!
 
2005-10-25 02:48:40 AM  
RaveX: Volcker was also actually a good Fed Chairman.

he carried an index card with the average wage of labor, vowing to keep bringing it down. Everybody thank him for starting the trend towards manipulating the markets for the gains of the rich and protecting their money instead of making sure everyone is doing well.
 
2005-10-25 03:41:30 AM  
Big Al

he carried an index card with the average wage of labor, vowing to keep bringing it down. Everybody thank him for starting the trend towards manipulating the markets for the gains of the rich and protecting their money instead of making sure everyone is doing well.

Yes, conspiracy theories will get us all very far.

Questions for you:

1. How do you think Volcker manipulated markets?

2. Given the relationship embodied in the Phillips curve and the fact that Volcker began his tenure at the Fed with inflation in excess of 10%, what policy would you prefer he had followed?

3. Volcker began his tenure with real wages at their lowest point in ten years. They had been falling quickly for the past year, and fell for another year before becoming relatively stable. They then began to climb. When he exited, real wages were at the highest point in thirteen years, and had been climbing for the past five. If he really did "[vow] to keep bringing [the average wage of labor] down" as you say, was he just really bad at it?

(If you wish to check the numbers on this, use the National Average Wage Index compiled by the SSA, deflated by the BLS's CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers)

4. Have you ever bothered to take a course in economics?

5. Does Carter spend all his time working with Habitat for Humanity to atone for appointing Evil Paul Volcker as Fed Chairman?

6. With respect to a "trend towards manipulating the markets..." -- to what markets are you referring, and how has manipulation occurred to protect the money of the rich? Are these markets typically redistributive?

7. Finally: to what monetary policy theory or mix of theories do you subscribe, and why?
 
Displayed 46 of 246 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report