Why is Ben Bernanke on the hot seat?

"Why is Ben Bernanke on the hot seat?"

Karma.

But seriously(!) -- what Bend-over Ben learned from studying the Great Depression was that maximum use was not made of the last one to increase the power of a small financial cartel over a very large nation (see also Barack Obama studying the Constitution for loopholes, same intent), and by cracky he found a way where those 30's pikers failed!

History is written by the winners, so the jury is still out on its verdict, but here's mine: Those of you who persist in labeling as "blunderers" this guy and all the others of his ilk miss the point -- has he not enriched his pals beyond the dreams of avarice? Does he not have the whip hand when it comes to finally achieving the long-sought cherished goal of breaking the American rank-and-file back down there where it belongs? Has he not done his bit in concentrating not only the wealth of the nation but also its real, effective political power into fewer and fewer hands?

One man's blunder is another man's bonanza; there are very few "unintended consequences" (a phrase invented merely to soothe ruffled feathers and avoid political unpleasantness) in the current program -- Ben & Company have known all along just exactly what they wanted to do, and are doing it.

Dollars to donut-holes he is reappointed -- after the standard issue "grilling" by Congress and a Very Stern Talking-To, to which he will very humbly listen before he and they go on about their business as though that "hot seat" had never happened.

PS -- Had he settled the debt and saved Medicare and Social Security with the bucks, there would be three less crises for Bam-Bam to exploit. Right: Just a few of those gosh darn unintended consequences, huh?

Months ago I said that Mr. Bernanke is going to get into the "between a rock and a hard place position. Many moves by the Fed are essentially sectret and therefore we do not know exactly "where the money went" which sound akin to an old toothpaste commercial. Aside from that, he is in troubled waters because whatever he did - it just ain't working. I keep hearing that old Ben is a student of the 30's depression and I have a lot of trouble believing that he ever got beyond "student" status. In the first place what we have today has little comparison to the 30's. If one wants a decent situation comparison - try 1893. Tiffany will report on Wednesday and are expected to show a profit. Guess what? In 1895 they, along with other high end retailers like Bailey, Banks & Biddle made profit also. That's a fact and in 1895 the doo-doo was hitting the fan all over the U.S. Matter of fact this period is the longest period of bumpy road economics that ever hit the U.S. Lasted until 1910. In the early 30's the high end retailers were either consolidating or in general, loosing their butt. Sounds screwy but there is an answer.
The 93-10 mess did not effect the very wealthy too much while the 30's did - mostly because there were so many new to the wealth arena. Now, if Ben is up on all of this he should also know that at least 30% of the 30's mess was due to the dust bowl. Line up 100 economists and let them tell us all how you solve a drought?
Getting back to the blog I think that there is a mounting chance that he will NOT be re-appointed. The heat is on Geitner and he is getting more than moral support from Summers. I bet Summers stays and he is worst of the bunch. As He is one of the 3 Libertarian gurus that created this mess, I cannot understand how he is still in a government position - no less one as an adviser, especially on economics?
Back to Ben -
The FOMC report of today tends to paint a "it's getting better" picture. Case Schiller says housing went up in price by .03. Couple days ago the NAR said something different. The government report says that the median price of a home dropped. We are being B.S.'d to death with confusing stats and that is going to be Ben's undoing.
Mr. Murphy said that too many facts confuse an issue and the old quote (att. to Abe) about fooling the people applies. Fooling all of the people all of the time is just not going to work.
Trivia:

The Brooklyn Bridge is held up by wire rope (it's a suspension bridge and people of the time liked watching this being done) It is held together with rivets. Complete in 1893-94? Roebling was it's engineer. The rivet gun was invented in 1886. The formula for the paint that he used is worth a Billion dollars. He did not tell.
Point I am making is (on previous blogs on gold) is that all are watching the yellow metal. Percentage wise Silver is up way more. Every hear the "bang/click" noise in a residential a/c unit? That's the contactor. Every electric fork lift has them too. The durable ones are silver alloy. When gold bombs, which I expect it too soon I don't think that silver is going to take that great a hit. If electric vehicles are in the future?

Bill --

What Lincoln did not mention was that the art of puttin' one over on a country does not depend on any of the alternatives he listed; as he very well knew, the trick lies in fooling just enough of the people just enough of the time -- and that, compadre, is accomplished with annoying regularity.

Thanks for the excellent historical run-down -- and have a great Turkey Day, y'heah?

Clickdawg: You right - we are being b.s'd to death.

More stats today - consumer spending up. Incomes up.

?? I give up.

Have a good one also.

Historical trivia aside - the paint is real. The coatings and finish industry spent about a 1/2 mil trying to find out what it was. Best they could do was the pigment came from Wyoming. Whatever it was it lasted near 40 years and the best that we can do today is about 7. It costs millions to paint a suspension bridge - and it never quits.
Whatever it was it was an elastic ceramic that air dries and if I knew what it was I would be first in line at the patent office.
Something like - cant see the forest for the trees?