Bernanke delivers blunt warning on U.S. debt

[endsongs]

Quote from Misthos:

Where was the "truth" when he monetized over a trillion of Wall Street's bad loans?

Where was the "truth" when he orchestrated the backstopped bailouts of Bear and Merril, and Wachovia... etc...?

I get it. Wall Street is taken care of - Capitalism, when it is dangerous to Wall Street, must be ignored.

But those old people expecting their Social Security checks need to abide by "fiscal responsibility."

I can't believe quite a few posters here fell for that testimony. Bernanke is a creature of Wall Street first. He took care of Wall Street, and will do so again when the time comes... just as the Fed helped with LTCM, AIG, Bear, Merrill, the GSEs, and all the former Investment Banks that now get special access to the Fed.

What did the Fed do for you?

I'll answer that: Bernanke just said that the Fed will do SHIT for you. Don't get me wrong, the Fed should not be in that role to help every insolvent person or entity anyway. But it smacks of a doublestandard that the Fed bails out Wall Street with no strings attached, and then gets cheers for saying no one else should expect anything - that the peasants should not be getting uppity and expect anything.

In my view, Bernanke did not all of a sudden get "religion." He is Wall Street's mouthpiece. He basically said that even though Wall Street just got an historical bailout, the peasants now need to expect cuts.

And the peasants cheer him on.

As many anti-bailout/anti-stimulus posts as have been put on this site, there is no one cutting the Fed any slack. I'm sure Congress will make certain the financial industry feels a fair share of any burden from spending cuts and tax raises.

Plus, keep in mind that Congress voted to authorize the bailout. The same Congress that the peasants voted for. Perhaps the peasants should more carefully choose those they elect to represent them.

 

[Misthos]

Quote from endsongs:

As many anti-bailout/anti-stimulus posts as have been put on this site, there is no one cutting the Fed any slack. I'm sure Congress will make certain the financial industry feels a fair share of any burden from spending cuts and tax raises.

Plus, keep in mind that Congress voted to authorize the bailout. The same Congress that the peasants voted for. Perhaps the peasants should more carefully choose those they elect to represent them.

For the most part, the peasants have been sold out. I'm not saying they are completely irrelevant, but they don't rank anywhere near Wall Street.

Wall Street donated twice as much to the Dems last election cycle than they did to the Repubs. Guess what's going on now? The numbers are evening out now - they are hedging for a possible Republican takeover. Scott Brown's win was heavily financed by Wall Street.

The peasants have no shot. They're toast. Only a third party, or an Amendment to the Constitution on campaign finance will change things.

 

[Illum]

France faced an interesting situation long ago. They owed a tremendous amount to foreign bankers. They called them satanic and burnt them at the stake, no more debt.

 

[endsongs]

Quote from Misthos:

For the most part, the peasants have been sold out. I'm not saying they are completely irrelevant, but they don't rank anywhere near Wall Street.

Wall Street donated twice as much to the Dems last election cycle than they did to the Repubs. Guess what's going on now? The numbers are evening out now - they are hedging for a possible Republican takeover. Scott Brown's win was heavily financed by Wall Street.

The peasants have no shot. They're toast. Only a third party, or an Amendment to the Constitution on campaign finance will change things.

A turning oint in this Country's history was when Ross Perot dropped out of the election back in 1992. He was actually ahead in the polls I believe. When he came back, people did not trust him anymore. If Perot had stayed in and won, we would have a viable three+ party system, as you speak of, now.

 

[Misthos]

Quote from endsongs:

A turning oint in this Country's history was when Ross Perot dropped out of the election back in 1992. He was actually ahead in the polls I believe. When he came back, people did not trust him anymore. If Perot had stayed in and won, we would have a viable three+ party system, as you speak of, now.

I was in college and voted for Perot in 1992.



If he won, things would have been very different right now. He was addressing unfair trade agreements, deficit spending, entitlement costs... well before they reached crisis levels.

I see the Republicans getting a huge bump, if not control of the Senate in November. That would be great, because I don't see things getting any better for a long time. If anything, I'd say the odds for another financial crisis before 2012 are pretty high. We still have commercial real estate, option arm mortgages, and many private equity financed companies ready to tank.

So, with both parties in control as things get worse, it will be pefect timing for a third party candidate. Both parties will be at fault and the single party voters that blindly follow their party will finally look elsewhere for leadership.

 

[DrPepper]

Quote from Misthos:

So, with both parties in control as things get worse, it will be pefect timing for a third party candidate. Both parties will be at fault and the single party voters that blindly follow their party will finally look elsewhere for leadership.

Maybe Ron Paul will run as a Republican presidential candidate.

http://www.ronpaul.com/

 

[rcaldwell]

Quote from Misthos:

Where was the "truth" when he monetized over a trillion of Wall Street's bad loans?

Where was the "truth" when he orchestrated the backstopped bailouts of Bear and Merril, and Wachovia... etc...?

I get it. Wall Street is taken care of - Capitalism, when it is dangerous to Wall Street, must be ignored.

But those old people expecting their Social Security checks need to abide by "fiscal responsibility."

I can't believe quite a few posters here fell for that testimony. Bernanke is a creature of Wall Street first. He took care of Wall Street, and will do so again when the time comes... just as the Fed helped with LTCM, AIG, Bear, Merrill, the GSEs, and all the former Investment Banks that now get special access to the Fed.

What did the Fed do for you?

I'll answer that: Bernanke just said that the Fed will do SHIT for you. Don't get me wrong, the Fed should not be in that role to help every insolvent person or entity anyway. But it smacks of a doublestandard that the Fed bails out Wall Street with no strings attached, and then gets cheers for saying no one else should expect anything - that the peasants should not be getting uppity and expect anything.

In my view, Bernanke did not all of a sudden get "religion." He is Wall Street's mouthpiece. He basically said that even though Wall Street just got an historical bailout, the peasants now need to expect cuts.

And the peasants cheer him on.

He and Fischer are now on record as saying the Fed will not monetize. Of course, they could both be liars as Bernanke told a few in 2008 with the waffen ss Paulson threatening the country with martial law. For some reason, I think Bernanke knows exactly what is going to happen and his conscience is finally bothering him. On the other hand, I could have him pegged wrong and he is actually a useless pile of refuse like the rest.

 

[ET99]

Quote from 700express:

There is a fine difference between constructive criticism and bashing. Hopefully I don't need to explain it to you or point out how your posts are not constructive. (Hint: back it up with something).

Sorry, I didn't know we were being so incredibly technical. When I clicked your post count, and scrolled down, it was just generally negative things with little evidence.

wait till China stop buying US bonds.

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/business/2010/02/28/chang.china.train.expansion.cnn

 

[fkbsuhites]

I do hope the republicans win back congress and the presidency.

When everything collapses, the dumb voter will finally figure out the blighted cancer that is the republican party and its voters.

Quote from Misthos:

I was in college and voted for Perot in 1992.



If he won, things would have been very different right now. He was addressing unfair trade agreements, deficit spending, entitlement costs... well before they reached crisis levels.

I see the Republicans getting a huge bump, if not control of the Senate in November. That would be great, because I don't see things getting any better for a long time. If anything, I'd say the odds for another financial crisis before 2012 are pretty high. We still have commercial real estate, option arm mortgages, and many private equity financed companies ready to tank.

So, with both parties in control as things get worse, it will be pefect timing for a third party candidate. Both parties will be at fault and the single party voters that blindly follow their party will finally look elsewhere for leadership.

 

[700express]

Quote from ET99:

wait till China stop buying US bonds.

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/business/2010/02/28/chang.china.train.expansion.cnn

Either country pulling the trigger on the other would be pulling it on themselves as well. As it is right now, both countries are very reliant on each other, despite what the media tries to tell you.