Ben Bernanke

[xTYBALTx]

Please, please, please raise the interest rate Ben. Hasn't the dollar slid enough? Isn't $100/barrel oil expensive enough? Just do it. I know most will hate you, but a few of us still want to be able to actually BUY things with the dollars we earn, and we'll thank you.

[Trooper]

the most powerful person in the US is that man. He is able to control every aspect of our country from his pen. And usually its to late because he is listening to the economists.

[SloppyJoe]

The Canadian dollar is now worth more than the American dollar, as I heard on the radio today. Nothing against Canadians or anything, but given the vast resources and all that America has, seems a little askew. Oh well, with global warming and all that maybe it's time to become a kanuk anyways.

[xTYBALTx]

Of course, it's all actually Bush and Greenspan's fault. But Bernanke can start fixing it now.

[ScratchMonkey]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve

[Switchcraft]

This was made by the Columbia Business School in 2006, and it cracks me up.

[leejo]

I don't understand the problem. If I may paraphrase the great film character Dignan...

FACT: these guys know a ton more about managing the economy than any of us, so shut yer yap.
FACT: currency valuations are cyclical. So the dollar is the lowest since the last time it was this low. People were probably freaked out then too, but the sky didn't fall and the banks didn't crash and the dollar proceeded to rise as high as it's ever been, just like it probably will again this time.
FACT: pay attention to oil futures. EVERYONE I know who is in the oil business is taking money off the table. Why? With China and India coming online, and the fmr. Chairman of Total predicting massive infrastructural problems in meeting future oil demands (not enough refineries, sez he), one would think that oil should continue to rise. But since oil is pegged to the $, if people expect the $ to go up, then they also expect the price of oil to go down. Something to ponder...

I could be wrong, but I'll be shocked and amazed if the dollar hasn't risen significantly against some of the major foreign currencies this time next year. Soon enough we'll be griping about the trade deficit again as we rush from store to store buying cheap imports.

[Axis of Eeevil]

We have an economic crisis in the making. Oil prices are simply a stressor on the system. The system's real weakness is a prevalent short-term economic model, a credit system that is out of control, and a perception that credit is the same as money.
Just look a Citicorps' loan of 7+ million from Abu Dhabi, and the huge number of banks (worldwide) defaulting on credit loans:

Bank Default Swaps at Highest on Record Amid Writedown Concern
Steve Rothwell, Bloomberg, 11/21/07

The risk of banks defaulting on their debt rose to the highest on record as losses by mortgage finance company Freddie Mac fueled concern that lenders will add to more than $50 billion of writedowns worldwide.

Credit-default swaps on the Markit iTraxx Financial Index, a benchmark for the cost of protecting the bonds of European banks and insurers, rose 6 basis points to 63.5, the highest since its start in 2004. Contracts on Merrill Lynch & Co., the world's biggest brokerage firm, increased 25 basis points to 170, and Citigroup Inc. climbed 5 to 101.5, according to Phoenix Partners.

Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc., Japan's biggest publicly traded bank, posted a 63 percent drop in second-quarter profit because of losses linked to credit cards and U.S. home loans. Mortgage finance company Freddie Mac may need to raise as much as $6 billion to boost capital because of the worst housing slump in at least 16 years, according to Fox-Pitt Kelton analyst Howard Shapiro.

``Everything is signaling that the market may switch to panic mode,'' Philip Gisdakis, a credit analyst at UniCredit SpA in Munich, said in an interview today. ``The news flow is so bad and there is no relief in sight.''
Bank stocks dropped to the lowest in two years, according to the Bloomberg Europe Banks and Financial Services Index. The 3.5 percent decline to 230.25 was the steepest in one day since August.

[leejo]

Maybe some accountants can chime in on this. Writedowns aren't super duper for businesses, because shareholders don't like to lose money on anything ever. But these writedowns are often aggressive in that they tend to overstate the bad news, which news may be revised downward in subsequent quarters. For example, I may writedown $10B in an asset's estimated value today, but then next quarter decide that really the writedown should have been $9.25B. Oops, I just magically added $.75B to next quarter's bottom line.

These writedowns create gigantic piles of accounting money that CEOs can draw upon in subsequent finstatements to shore up numbers where they wish. Jack Welch did this for years.

The sky isn't going to fall. Pay attention to who is buying up what. People with deep pockets and vast experience are quietly buying up the financial stocks right now, and I bet will continue to do so for the next 120 days or so. Why would they do that? Because they're idiots who hate their money?

[xTYBALTx]

Bernanke knows more about managing the economy than me, yes I know this. The problem is that he knows he may lose his job if he doesn't lower rates.

[Kerostasis]

I thought that job was pretty much immune to being taken away by outside forces? Job security on the federal reserve board is only one step below the job security on the Supreme court.

[ScratchMonkey]

Speaking of credit and money:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money

[ScratchMonkey]

Repeal the legal tender monopoly:

http://action.downsizedc.org/wyc.php?cid=85

The proposed bill is pretty simple:

The text of the "Honest Money Act" is very simple. It reads as follows . . .

To repeal section 5103 of title 31, United States Code.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Honest Money Act'.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF LEGAL TENDER LAWS.

(a) In General- Section 5103 of title 31, United States Code, (relating to legal tender) is hereby repealed.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for subchapter I of chapter 51 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating to section 5103 and inserting the following new item: `5103. [Repealed]'.

Section 5103, the part repealed by the "Honest Money Act," reads as follows . . .

United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.

[Kerostasis]

As much as I like Ron Paul, he's still a nut. I don't know why he thinks repealing US Dollars as legal tender would be good for the economy. Yes, he's worried about inflation, but we haven't had any serious inflation in our economy for over 20 years now.

[ScratchMonkey]

"Serious" is a subjective term. We're still getting robbed by the Fed, just not as egregiously as in the past.

Inflation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:U..._Inflation.svg

Note how the value has been consistently positive since the 50's, and has seen huge positive excursions.

The CPI:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:U...ndex_Graph.svg

Note the rise in the blue line, indicating the devaluation of the dollar compared to actual goods.

Since productivity is rising, I should be able to buy more, not less, with the same dollar over time.

The point of a stable unit of value is to make economic prediction possible, to allow companies to plan future productive capacity reliably. With the dollar unstable and its value at the whim of a secretive government agency, businesses have to guess at whether the surge in demand is real or just a by-product of the Fed-induced booms and busts. The result is more booms and busts, temporary bubbles followed by recessions and layoffs. I, for one, would prefer stability to bubbles.

BTW, "nut" is ad hominem. One would hope for a more substantive criticism.