Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bernanke: Get rid of the debt ceiling, it has no practical value
Washington Examiner ^ | January 14, 2013 | January 14, 2013

Posted on 01/15/2013 5:23:41 AM PST by Sir Napsalot

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke criticized the debt ceiling as an unusual device that can be used to prevent the United States from paying it’s bills, as he suggested that the country would be better off if the debt limit did not exist.

“I think it would be a good thing if we didn’t have [the debt ceiling],” Bernanke told students at the University of Michigan today. “I don’t think that’s going to happen. I think it’s going to be around.” Those remarks put Bernanke in agreement with Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who has said that Congress should eliminate the debt ceiling.

The conversation began when Bernanke was asked if the debt ceiling had any “practical value” as a matter of fiscal policy. “No, it doesn’t really have — it’s got symbolic value, I guess, but . . . no other countries in the world have this particular institution,” he said.

“If the Congress is approving spending and it’s approving taxing, and those two things are not equal,” Bernanke continued, “the way to addres it is by having a sensible plan for spending and a sensible plan for revenue and make decisions about how big the government should be or how small it should be.”

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: benbernanke; bernanke; congress; debt; debtceiling; stupidparty; thefed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last
Remember folks, 'the adults' are in charge now. "Sensible" no longer means what you and I thought it means.

Bernanke and Geithner have never run their own household, apparently. And they are the smarts to lead this country.

1 posted on 01/15/2013 5:23:48 AM PST by Sir Napsalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Figures. What an ass.


2 posted on 01/15/2013 5:25:19 AM PST by Gene Eric (Demoralization is a weapon of the enemy. Don't get it, don't spread it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Get rid of Bernanke and don’t replace Geithner. Bernanke is a detriment to this nation’s economy and our lives, but then so is the moronic, communist phony who has taken up residence in what is now the White Hut.


3 posted on 01/15/2013 5:27:20 AM PST by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Interesting. Members of the same crowd who believes we should limit magazine capacities and number of gun purchases per month. Spending limits, regardless of revenue, however, are arbitrary.


4 posted on 01/15/2013 5:33:24 AM PST by edpc (Wilby 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Bernacke and Geithner will be remembered as the most disastrous individuals ever to be appointed to high office. Whwn confronted with $11 trillion dollars of debt, continued deficit spending of $3 billion dollars a day, huge unfunded liabilities, and a declining less productive economy, they instituted policies and financial gimmicks that combined with Obama’a malfeasance assured the decline of America.


5 posted on 01/15/2013 5:35:35 AM PST by allendale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
See, that's EXACTLY what I've been trying to tell my bank about my VISA / MC accounts. Get rid of my so called "credit limit", as that's been cramping my style...
6 posted on 01/15/2013 5:35:41 AM PST by Rebel_Ace (Tags?!? Tags?!? We don' neeeed no stinkin' Tags!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

The FED is what has no practical value and should be done away with.


7 posted on 01/15/2013 5:35:57 AM PST by JohnKinAK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Of course it has no practical value if you continue to raise it every time. Treasury issue the bonds and the Fed pays for them with freshly printed dollars.


8 posted on 01/15/2013 5:36:17 AM PST by depressed in 06 (America conceived in liberty, dies in slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

“If the Congress is approving spending ...”

There’s your mistake Mr. Bernanke. Congress has not seen a budget bill since 2009 thanks to the despicable dems in the senate.


9 posted on 01/15/2013 5:38:30 AM PST by Ludicrous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Ben, I’m sure you told the cops the handcuffs weren’t necessary and have no practical value.

Likely the officer told you, “We have this policy for a reason, and the cuffs STAY!”


10 posted on 01/15/2013 5:39:53 AM PST by G Larry (Which of Obama's policies do you think I'd support if he were white?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

Bernake, another in a long list of puppets that need be purged.


11 posted on 01/15/2013 5:42:21 AM PST by Mouton (108th MI Group.....68-71)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Bernanke is right for once. This whole “debt ceiling” thing is a charade, giving politicians air time and the chance to engage in live theatre.


12 posted on 01/15/2013 5:42:57 AM PST by elkfersupper ( Member of the Original Defiant Class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
criticized the debt ceiling as an unusual device that can be used to prevent the United States from paying it’s bills,

No, assclown, it's a device designed to cut up Fedzilla's credit cards.

13 posted on 01/15/2013 5:48:16 AM PST by tx_eggman (Liberalism is only possible in that moment when a man chooses Barabas over Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
He is 100% correct. If Congress simply rubber-stamps every ceiling as it is reached, then it has no meaning, no value, and no impact.

“If the Congress is approving spending and it’s approving taxing, and those two things are not equal,” Bernanke continued, “the way to addres it is by having a sensible plan for spending and a sensible plan for revenue and make decisions about how big the government should be or how small it should be.”

Also correct, however we do not have politicians who are interested in such decisions... and it may very well be that we have a large percentage of politicians who WANT to "reset" this nation, by tanking its economy. They are protected by a media that are not interested in the "size of government" question, because they want to be a part of the control mechanism of this nation, and they know that those who want HUGE government are those who will use them to maintain that control. Their vested interested are massive, and yet their main supporters are taught that those greedy limited-gvernment folk are the actual problem. (Ironic, no?)

What we have is a political class that is in the same exact boat as China's authoritarian rulers. As long as enough people can be pacified with money, and as long as those who are opposed are kept separate, unsure, castigated, and unarmed, then those in power can remain there indefinitely, and seek ways to gain more power on the world stage.

14 posted on 01/15/2013 5:48:56 AM PST by Teacher317 ('Tis time to fear when tyrants seem to kiss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
So, the Framers gave the power of the purse to Congress as a check on Executive power, but we should instead listen to the ranting of a non-elected policy wonk who has never had to meet a business payroll?

Benanke is further proof that assuming academics have ‘special knowledge’ that is practically applicable is nonsense. We would be way, way better off if we had a moratorium on government involvement by those from the Ivies. We are most definitely not diverse enough when it comes to educational background in government.

15 posted on 01/15/2013 5:52:07 AM PST by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
“If the Congress is approving spending and it’s approving taxing, and those two things are not equal,” Bernanke continued, “the way to addres it is by having a sensible plan for spending and a sensible plan for revenue and make decisions about how big the government should be or how small it should be.”

Yes, that's what a BUDGET is for. Tell the senate to do one.

THEN we can talk debt ceiling.

16 posted on 01/15/2013 5:58:22 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
...the way to address it is by having a sensible plan for spending and a sensible plan for revenue...

Gosh...what a brilliant idea! Why...it might even be a good idea to have a budget to follow, as required by the Constitution. But then, this President could care less about the Constitution and Congress under Harry Reid hasn't had a budget in the last three years. Laws...schmals...who needs 'em. Obozo's plan is to run the country by Executive Order anyway, so who needs a House and Senate? Dictatorships are much easier, right?

17 posted on 01/15/2013 5:59:10 AM PST by econjack (Some people are as dumb as soup.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

““No, it doesn’t really have — it’s got symbolic value, I guess, but . . . no other countries in the world have this particular institution,” he said.”

What else doesn’t any other country have, Ben?

~The World’s Reserve Currency.

Does Ben think that the rest of the world who has accepted diminishing returns on their massive dollar holdings will continue to hold dollars if we can just pretend there is no end to printing fiat?

Perhaps he does. There IS that little matter of open-ended QE.


18 posted on 01/15/2013 6:00:24 AM PST by OpusatFR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

“no other countries in the world have” 16.3 trillion dollars of debt.


19 posted on 01/15/2013 6:00:47 AM PST by listenhillary (Courts, law enforcement, roads and national defense should be the extent of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
The idea that Bernanke is non-partisan is nonsense. This is all being orchestrated by the WH. Who cares what Bernanke thinks about what is a political issue.

Congress has a right to control the purse. If there is no practical value because the USG must pay its bills then how far does that extend? We have over $60 trillion in unfunded liabilities in the form of Medicare and SS. This does not include Obamacare and Medicaid. These programs are not engraved in stone. They can and must be changed or they will consume the entire federal budget. How much debt will it take to get Bernanke's attention?

When we raise the debt limit, we are forecasting what additional debt is needed to pay our bills. The limits we set will and should affect program changes.

20 posted on 01/15/2013 6:04:15 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
Q: Who cares if the dollar has any value?

A: Not Ben.

It's coming folks, prepare accordingly...

5.56mm

21 posted on 01/15/2013 6:05:05 AM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
It there is no debt ceiling, and spending is not tied to revenue collected, then, why even bother with collecting taxes. Get rid of taxation.

Just print whatever money government needs to pay for the spending. Mint a 100 trillion dollar coins and be done with worrying about raising revenue. At least, without taxation, people and businesses would have more to spend on growing the economy and creating jobs.

Let government pretend that, they don't have to be tied to the economy in any way, and we'd be a lot better off.

But, when government is doing its own thing with unending "monopoly money", who's going to accept their form of payment for any kind of spending they do?
22 posted on 01/15/2013 6:05:05 AM PST by adorno (Y)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ludicrous
“If the Congress is approving spending ...”

Yes 0dumbo is making an argument for the repubs [who won't even make an argument on their own.]

The reason we require a budget is to avoid committing too much money that will subsequently result in a needed debt ceiling increase.

So dammit, require a passed budget BEFORE any debt ceiling talks. Just damn! It isn't that hard!!

RNC called last night and I let him have it, politely. No way in hell am I going to give to the Rs who just don't fight for me. I did tell him that if the Tea Party ever organizes a TPNC and calls that my checkbook will be open...

23 posted on 01/15/2013 6:05:17 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Bernanke was appointed Fed Chairman by President George W. Bush. He was a major contributor to the Bush legacy of deficit spending and financial irresponsibility. Geithner was appointed President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York during the Bush administration. He began his career at Kissinger Associates (remember Henry Kissinger and the Nixon administration?).

As bad as Obama’s economic policies are, some key players in this drama were put on stage by Republicans, not Democrats. The blame for this economic disaster belongs to both parties.

The appropriations power, granted to the House of Representatives by the Constitution, gives Boehner and the Republican House the ability to fix this mess anytime they choose. They can simply pass a responsible balanced budget and debt ceiling bill and then go home. If Reid’s Senate does not pass the budget, the government is not funded and the fault lies with the Senate. If the Senate passes and the president vetoes, the shutdown is his fault. Bernanke and the Fed have absolutely no Constitutional authority in the debt ceiling and spending debate. The fact the House does not use its power and acquiesces to Harry Reid’s refusal to pass a budget suggests the Republicans are happy with the current situation.

Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Bernanke, and Geithner are all irresponsible. They are enabled by the Republicans. It is long past time for Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans to use the appropriations power to do the responsible thing. Our founding fathers would be shocked to see the people’s House failing to check the tyranny of the Senate and the Executive. Why the absence of responsible behavior by the Speaker and his majority?


24 posted on 01/15/2013 6:07:28 AM PST by Soul of the South
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ludicrous

Yet most all of them in congress have voted for continuing resolutions to keep kicking the can down the road.


25 posted on 01/15/2013 6:08:23 AM PST by listenhillary (Courts, law enforcement, roads and national defense should be the extent of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Get rid of the debt ceiling? No, get rid of Bernanke: he has no practical value.


26 posted on 01/15/2013 6:10:07 AM PST by windsorknot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: adorno
It there is no debt ceiling, and spending is not tied to revenue collected, then, why even bother with collecting taxes. Get rid of taxation.

Well played adorno.

27 posted on 01/15/2013 6:10:40 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

If the Dems win the house in ‘14 this will happen ten minutes after Pelosi takes the gavel.


28 posted on 01/15/2013 6:11:58 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Principled

I think that is why the treasury recently shot down the idea of the trillion dollar platinum coin.

Why collect taxes?


29 posted on 01/15/2013 6:12:34 AM PST by listenhillary (Courts, law enforcement, roads and national defense should be the extent of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

“United States from paying it’s bills”

wwe are so screwed if the “journalists” can’t use contractions correctly. Should be “its” bills dummies

http://www.elearnenglishlanguage.com/difficulties/its.html


30 posted on 01/15/2013 6:12:34 AM PST by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allendale

First, Bernanke and Geithner had zero to do with the continued deficit spending. That was all Congress and Obama.

Second, both Geithner and Bernanke were absolutely masterful in guiding us through the financial crisis of 2007-08. You might not like TARP and the other things they did at the time but they were the right things to do and they worked. Bernanke has also done a great job through accommodative monetary policy which is the exact right prescription for the massive asset deflation we have been experiencing over the last 4 years.

We have huge fiscal issue that will cause a financial collapse in the future if not addressed. But those were caused by our pathetic Congress (GOP and Dems alike) and our radical socialist president not Geithner and Bernanke.


31 posted on 01/15/2013 6:15:41 AM PST by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

“If the Dems win the house in ‘14 this will happen ten minutes after Pelosi takes the gavel.”

LOL! If they do take the house, your assets will belong to the FSA in less than five.


32 posted on 01/15/2013 6:16:09 AM PST by OpusatFR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Bernanke says it has a symbolic value... since it has been raised every time we bump up against it (by both parties controlling Congress) he’s right. Congress will raise it again in February. It accomplishes nothing and is meaningless.


33 posted on 01/15/2013 6:20:44 AM PST by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

“If the Congress is approving spending ....”

The problem is indexed entitlements that put spending increases on autopilot. Let’s get rid of indexation, and also the concept of “entitlement,” and make ALL spending subject to the annual budget process.

The working model for this, and a perfectly sensible first step, would be the recent Republican proposal to block grant Medicaid and turn it over to the states.


34 posted on 01/15/2013 6:20:59 AM PST by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

A trillion here and a trillion there, and pretty soon we’re talking real money.

And the enslavement of our posterity.

At least that bit of posterity that we haven’t paid the abortionists to slaughter.

We’re witnessing a slow-motion national suicide, economically and physically.


35 posted on 01/15/2013 6:25:05 AM PST by EternalVigilance (It's amazing how expensive "free" can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Bernanke to Congress: Do your job, Pay the Bills

by Bill McBride on 1/14/2013 05:35:00 PM

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke was very clear. The “debt ceiling” is about paying the bills, not about new spending. He urged congress to do their job, raise the debt ceiling, and pay the bills. His preference was to abolish the “debt ceiling” since it is redundant.

From the WSJ: Bernanke Calls on Congress to Raise Debt Ceiling

“It’s very, very important that Congress take the necessary action to raise the debt ceiling to avoid the situation where the government doesn’t pay its bills,” said Mr. Bernanke ... “Raising the debt ceiling gives the government the ability to pay its existing bills–it doesn’t create new spending,” he said.

At another point, Bernanke said the “debt ceiling” has “symbolic value”, but he prefers eliminating it. He was very clear that Congress should do their job and raise the debt ceiling.

Bernanke also expressed concern about the long run sustainability of the debt (over decades), but that we also shouldn’t cut the deficit too quickly and impact the “fragile recovery”. He thought the fiscal cliff deal would subtract about 1.5% from GDP this year.

CR Note: As I’ve noted before, the “debt ceiling” sounds virtuous, but it is really just about paying the bills. Not paying the bills is reckless and irresponsible.

By stalling, Congress is scaring people and is probably already negatively impacting the economy. Congress should do their job. Today. I remain confident Congress will authorize paying the bills, but this delaying is embarrassing.

Read more at http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2013/01/bernanke-to-congress-do-your-job-pay.html#5zBbhrQKq2cDXoAF.99


36 posted on 01/15/2013 6:27:35 AM PST by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sphinx
You can't expect our politicians to hand over the distribution of goodies. Where's the fun and power go when you can't control the money?

Look at who paid for the signs.


37 posted on 01/15/2013 6:29:20 AM PST by listenhillary (Courts, law enforcement, roads and national defense should be the extent of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Since it’s never been enforced, in my memory, it has no practical value.


38 posted on 01/15/2013 6:31:17 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch
Second, both Geithner and Bernanke were absolutely masterful in guiding us through the financial crisis of 2007-08.

Geithner wasn't the Treasury Secretary in 2007-8. TARP was pushed by Bush and Paulson. So was the auto bailout. I don't consider the handling of the fiscal crisis to be masterful. It is just more kicking the can down the road and bailing out the big banks and insurance companies. Instead of being held accountable, the taxpayer picked up the tab. The huge Porkulus bill and increased spending has led to an additional $6 trillion being added to the national debt in four years. We will pay a fearful price for this "masterful handling" of the fiscal crisis.

The Fed has exceeded its authority and is operating without the proper oversight and control. Holding interest rates artificially low is helping to debase our currency and will eventually lead to the rest of world going to a different reserve currency. Once that happens, Goodbye USA, Hello Weimar Republic.

39 posted on 01/15/2013 6:37:01 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Bernanke is looking more like Karl Marx every day. Coincidence? I think not.


40 posted on 01/15/2013 6:48:15 AM PST by txrefugee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
"“No, it doesn’t really have — it’s got symbolic value, I guess,..."

So, NOW he admits it. What a lot of people already knew.

Hope Bernanke and Geithner watch out...especially for the 'under the bus' thingy.

Or is this all an Obama plan?

I trust none of them.

41 posted on 01/15/2013 7:00:19 AM PST by hummingbird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch
“It’s very, very important that Congress take the necessary action to raise the debt ceiling to avoid the situation where the government doesn’t pay its bills,”

yet

“debt ceiling” has “symbolic value”

Good grief, this guy is just a crony whose job is to keep the grifting/debt running smoothly/growing. The Federal government has plenty of assets to sell off that would of payed for TARP, the Treasury, and serving preexisting debt. Bernanke in the private sector and public officials who were covering for the problems they unleashed on the financial sector (Which screwed the pooch) should of not had their loses socialized. My kids and their kids should not have to deal with the mistakes that past generations have placed on them, like half-baked Keynsian policies that only deal with the here and now. Enjoy admiring your witch doctors, they sure have you spellbound.

Debt ceiling = responsibility, it should be lowered not abolished. Bernanke is drinking Keynes' Flavor-aid. Like I said, the Fed gov have trillions in assets they could sell off without raising taxes and thousands of regulatory "decrees" if eliminated that would grow the economy (Thus more receipts) to pay their bills, but your heroes in the economic world are arguing to just green light more spending/debt growth by calling for the end of this "symbolic" ceiling. I guess your groupie mentality has blinded your being able to see the end game going on; Bernanke's insistence that Congress should have the perpetual freedom to grow the debt to infinite and not be restrained by "symbolism". Bernanke's words brings orgasms to tax and spenders, yet he is brilliant or whatever undeserving glorifying adjective you used for him.
42 posted on 01/15/2013 7:00:49 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: kabar
Geithner wasn't the Treasury Secretary in 2007-8. TARP was pushed by Bush and Paulson.

I never said Geithner was Sec Tres. He was head of the NY Fed and was instrumental in arranging the "marriages" of many of the banks. He worked extremely closely with Paulson and was part of the team to come up with TARP.

So was the auto bailout.

Never said I agreed with the auto bailout...

It is just more kicking the can down the road and bailing out the big banks and insurance companies. Instead of being held accountable, the taxpayer picked up the tab.

you do realize that if the government had let all the banks and insurance companies go the "Great Recession" would have been thousands of times worse right? The impact of the huge amount of derivatives would have wiped out many trillions more of wealth (of you and me not just banks) and the global economy would have completely collapsed. Credit markets would have frozen for years. It would have made the Great Depression look like a mild dip. Oh and the vast majority of TARP finds have been repaid.

The huge Porkulus bill and increased spending has led to an additional $6 trillion being added to the national debt in four years. We will pay a fearful price for this "masterful handling" of the fiscal crisis.

Again this was Obama and Congress not Bernanke and Geithner and I agree that the Porkulus bill was a disaster.

Holding interest rates artificially low is helping to debase our currency and will eventually lead to the rest of world going to a different reserve currency.

We are still in a very slow recovery so low rates is the proper mechanism. Raising rates now would choke off what little growth their is and make the fiscal situation worse. It is interesting that despite the "massive debt problem" that the "flight to safety" remains UST's...

43 posted on 01/15/2013 7:08:30 AM PST by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi
How does the "debt ceiling = responsibility and Bernanke's insistence that Congress should have the perpetual freedom to grow the debt to infinite and not be restrained by "symbolism"" if it has always been raised by Congress and Presidents of BOTH parties?

What would have been the impact on "your kids" had the financial sector, through the wiping out of trillions of dollars of derivatives, been allowed to fail and not "bailed out by TARP which has been substantially repaid in full?

I agree with you on the "half-baked Keynsian policies' and have never said otherwise. Again, that was all Obama and Congress. If you don't believe in Keynesianism what sort of economics do you believe in and what is the proper response to a deflationary spiral? TIA.......

44 posted on 01/15/2013 7:17:02 AM PST by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch
Do you want C/P games? Ok. First "your people".

<"People who are opposed to bailouts of any kind like to argue that TARP was not really necessary. Banks could have been allowed to fail and the economic fallout around the world would not have been so dramatic. This was, of course, the view taken by policy makers in 1929–31, after the Great Crash. Top people at the Federal Reserve and Treasury argued that the United States had experienced a financial mania (true), that a fall in asset prices was long overdue (quite likely, at least for stocks), and that the right approach was to stand back and — in the unforgettable words of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, let the private sector "liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farms, liquidate real estate." The result was the Great Depression. No responsible policy maker would want to run that risk again."



http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/30/tarp-the-long-goodbye/

Next, what actually happened which pro-TARP, the end is near people refuse to acknowledge (PS if you use Wiki I can too)

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

Hoover's own TARP, "repaid" by the way, did not stop the depression, just gave FDR more of an excuse to "liquidfy" and spend, yee-haw.

Also how can the derivatives disaster be fully repayed, lol? Bankers, many going out with millions thanks to the protection of the government were sure glad, but the taxpayers got a blank return (Look at ALL the data BTW) plus all those non-Wall Street INDIVIDUAL citizens whose assets went way down, currently swimming underwater waiting for their "liquidation" to their own accounts, are never getting any of that stuff fresh off the printing press.
45 posted on 01/15/2013 7:37:03 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

If it has no practical value, why go to the trouble of changing it?

The practical value of the debt limit is undermined by a Fed Chairman (Bernanke) who is perfectly willing to buy government generated debt with out limit and monetize it. If he got what he deserved, Bernanke would be hauled out and hung by a mob of hard-working Americans (not to mention their children), from whom he is stealing on a massive scale.


46 posted on 01/15/2013 7:37:09 AM PST by RatRipper (Self-centeredness, greed, envy, deceit and lawless corruption has killed this once great nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

There’s a debt ceiling on my credit card. There was a debt ceiling on how much I could borrow to buy my house. Any lending institution will place a limit on how much a borrower can borrow.

Our debt ceiling is our country’s self-imposed credit limit. It forces our government to address the question of how much borrowing is prudent. It requires legislation to be changed. It is a braking mechanism for our expansion of debt.

Our big-spending administration is having a fit over this barrier to their spending. Obama lies when he says increasing the debt spending won’t increase spending.

We already have more than enough debt. Every available means needs to be used to avoid or at least minimize further increases.


47 posted on 01/15/2013 7:37:20 AM PST by cymbeline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch
I never said Geithner was Sec Tres. He was head of the NY Fed and was instrumental in arranging the "marriages" of many of the banks. He worked extremely closely with Paulson and was part of the team to come up with TARP.

So TARP was a good idea?

you do realize that if the government had let all the banks and insurance companies go the "Great Recession" would have been thousands of times worse right? The impact of the huge amount of derivatives would have wiped out many trillions more of wealth (of you and me not just banks) and the global economy would have completely collapsed. Credit markets would have frozen for years. It would have made the Great Depression look like a mild dip. Oh and the vast majority of TARP finds have been repaid.

Those were the fear tactics used to bail out those too big to fail. It helped stampede Congress into signing on to it. It is so easy to make those statements just like stomping my foot in my living room in VA keeps the elephants away. TARP After Three Years: It Made Things Worse, Not Better

TARP Inspector General: TARP was a Failure

Again this was Obama and Congress not Bernanke and Geithner and I agree that the Porkulus bill was a disaster.

Geithner supported the Porkulus bill and wanted to make it even bigger. The idea that you can separate Obama and Geithner in terms of policy is nonsense. And it was passed by a Dem-controlled Congress with almost no Rep votes. It was rammed down our throats just like Obamacare. Both Obama and Geithner claimed that Porkulus saved millions of jobs and was key to getting us out of the fiscal crisis.

We are still in a very slow recovery so low rates is the proper mechanism. Raising rates now would choke off what little growth their is and make the fiscal situation worse. It is interesting that despite the "massive debt problem" that the "flight to safety" remains UST's...

The interest rates are being held artificially low. With our huge and growing federal debt, when interest rates return to their historical norm of 4% to %5, our debt servicing costs will increase exponentially overnight.

The artificially low rates are not helping growth and they mask our serious debt problem. They are also causing the devaluation of the dollar and undermining the dollar as the world's reserve currency.

It is interesting that despite the "massive debt problem" that the "flight to safety" remains UST's...

Right now the Fed is buying 70% of our T-bills. China has decreased its holdings. The SSTF holds the greatest amount of T-bills--around $2.7 trillion. The Fed holds about $2.1 trillion. $11.4 trillion is held publicly with the foreign owned portion being around $5.4 trillion. China has actually decreased its holdings of T-bills.

You can take solace that investments in T-bills is the best options compared to all the other options, but the reality is that none of these options are good and the whole global economy will collapse like a house of cards once the dollar does its inevitable swan dive. We are headed the way of Greece.

48 posted on 01/15/2013 7:41:09 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Ludicrous

The house shares the blame. ya, budget die in the senate.

The house keeps passing CR’s.

shut it down.


49 posted on 01/15/2013 7:50:22 AM PST by cableguymn (The founding fathers would be shooting by now..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

He’s right though. And while we’re at it, or rather, while Obama’s at it, “we” don’t matter anymore, I say, while Obama’s at it, he should get rid of the House, Senate, Supreme Court, and all state and local governments. If it takes all that to get rid of the BCS, it might be worth it.


50 posted on 01/15/2013 7:50:41 AM PST by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson