This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Mike Krieger Sees Widespread Panic
Submitted by Mike Krieger of KAM LP
Widespread Panic
Right now, thanks in large part to Federal Reserve policy, Uncle Sam can borrow at an average cost of just 2.5 percent. The average borrowing cost over the last three decades was 5.7 percent. Our debt is now $14 trillion and scheduled to grow to $25 trillion by the end of the decade. If interest rates normalize over that period the added interest costs in 2021 alone will be $800 billion—more than 20 times the mere $37 billion in budget cuts that tore up Congress in March. It would take virtually all of the cuts in the Ryan budget just to cover that added interest, much less to start bringing down the national debt. Unfortunately, the Fed is now in a fiscal box. A normalization of interest rates would break the Treasury. Hence, a normalization of rates really can't happen—we're stuck in a world in which the Fed must keep rates artificially low in order to prevent a budget disaster.
- Lawrence Lindsey writing in the Weekly Standard June 13, 2001 (and you think we won’t print more!!!)
QUESTION: During the Japanese lost decade in the 1990s, you strongly criticized Japan's (inaudible)policies . Recently, Larry Summers suggested in his column that the U.S.is in the middle of its own lost decade. Based on those points, with Q.E. II ending, what do you think of Japan's experience and the reality facing the U.S.? Are there any historical lessons that we should be reminded about? Thank you.
BERNANKE: Well, I'm a little bit more sympathetic to central bankers now than I was 10 years ago.
- Q&A During The Bernank’s Second Press Conference Yesterday
The Bernank Flop: Part Deux
That’s two press conferences laden with softball questions from “the press” and two epic flops by The Bernank. Two extremely important things that came out of the disaster that was this event yesterday. First, I want to point your attention to the quote I pasted at the top. In response to the question of where The Bernank stood on monetary policy in light of his prior arrogant and cocksure statements a decade earlier about how the Japanese were being too passive in their methods he stated “Well, I'm a little bit more sympathetic to central bankers now than I was 10 years ago.” BINGO. That was far and away the most important thing he said the whole press conference. Why? Well, for several reasons. First, it was pretty much the only spontaneous unscripted thing he said the whole time. Second, because this is him basically admitting that sitting in an ivory tower telling others how to save the free world via monetary policy was a naive and idiotic thing to do (why people still believe in central banking, I mean planning, is beyond me). Talk is cheap and The Bernank now has had time to test his sad statist theories and guess what happened? He failed miserably in front of the entire world. By saying that he is “more sympathetic to central bankers” he is saying that theories are one thing and he now realizes that. This is HUGE. The Bernank has no clothes.
Ok, so what else did we learn? Well, what happened after the press conference was very significant. For one thing the stock market tanked. Interestingly, guess what else happened? Oil prices started to soar and closed up. While off their highs gold and silver were also strong on the day and the gold miners were up. This drove these guys absolutely nuts. Remember what happened after the first disastrous press conference? Gold soared and then flew higher again the following day. What was The Powers That Be (TPTB) response to that? Well they miraculously rolled out Bin Laden and then initiated the monster raid on silver immediately afterwards. The lesson that we all learned from that prior episode is that TPTB are petulant little children. When markets do not act as they decree they whine and lash out. Since they possess all of the mechanisms of control they can create certain moves in the short term and “pain” for those that bet against them. In light of that, we should have all expected a panicky response today…and boy did we get it.
Widespread Panic
So right on cue, TPTB freaked out and showed their desperation by coordinating a 60 million barrel release of oil from OECD inventories (of which 30 million barrels is to come from the U.S Strategic Petroleum Reserves). Brilliant strategy guys. First of all, the world consumes around 85 million b/d of oil so this release isn’t even one day’s worth of demand. It’s a joke. Second of all it just demonstrates how completely desperate they are to just delay the inevitable. Just like global leaders have shown no interest in dealing with the economic imbalances of the globe resulting from a pyramid scheme global monetary system where money consists of digital confetti that can be and is being printed into oblivion, they have NO INTEREST in dealing with the real issues of peak cheap oil. Just as the solution to every other structural problem has been to pretend it doesn’t exist and place band-aids on cancerous tumors, their solution to real, serious long-term issues in oil are to release reserves? My lord this is sad.
More than sad; however, this move makes me much more bullish on oil over the next two years than I was before. First of all, the Saudi’s just said that they would increase production to 10 million barrels of day on their own (from 9.3 million b/d), effectively ending OPEC as an organization. Because this didn’t do what the petulant children in charge wanted they resorted to this tactic. First it was speculators. Now it is supply and demand. What is it really? I’ll tell you what it is. They have no freaking clue what they hell they are doing. Just like The Bernank.
As a result of this action and the direction that TPTB are heading in (price controls), my ultimate forecast for where crude might go is now higher than it was. Whereas I previously thought we would see $150-$200/b oil within the next two years I now think that it will be over $200/b. The reason for this is simple. The reason price controls like this do not work is because they destroy supply/demand signals, which then ends up causing supply shortages down the road. Let’s think about this pathetic move from two angles. First, from the perspective of an oil company. Oil exploration, development and production is extraordinarily capital intensive. From the exploration to the development phase of a large field we are talking at least 5-10 years. So let me ask you. If you are running an oil company and you see this type of action are you more or less willing to drill that marginal production or exploration well? The answer of course is much less willing. Furthermore, we have recently seen cost overruns all over the commodity space. Let’s look at what just happened with Woodside Petroleum’s flagship Pluto project offshore Australia. They just announced a 25% cost overrun and a 15 month delay to the project and Standard & Poor’s took down the credit outlook for the company as a result. I will tell you without any shadow of a doubt that this policy by the “authorities” to control oil prices via manipulation will kill the supply side relative to demand and cause oil prices to ultimately soar to unimaginable heights. Sad but true. This is Why Central Planning Fails 101.
Then what about the demand side? Well of course by unnaturally knocking down the price of the most important commodity in the world demand will be maintained at artificially high levels for longer. So demand is kept up artificially while supply growth constrained. Can you say complete unmitigated disaster.
This is all quite timely since it touches upon issues I discussed with Max Keiser last week. Here are the links, please have a listen.
Speaking of Panic…
Speaking of panic, it looks like after a couple of weeks of begging and pleading I have scored a ticket to the Widespread Panic show at Red Rocks this weekend. Apparently some guy that was driving up from Memphis for the show can’t make it so I get his seat. I am supposed to pick it up at the show so we shall see how this works out…Anyway, have a great weekend! God Bless the Central Planners. They are gonna need it.
Peace and wisdom,
Mike
»
- 38428 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
So farked we can't even grasp it.
anthropological global warming?
Hey I hadn't thought of that. Heat the world up and the oil flows faster.
Positive feedback ftw.
We are so boned.
That's impossible!! Lindsey Williams says we have enough oil on the North Slope to last the United States for a thousand years! And he should know. He carries a bible and sat in a meeting once with Mr X. Stop quoting geologists and petroleum engineers and get yourself some reliable sources!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yf7bbgL_XQ
Plan is to wrap the entire pipeline in live Caribou in order to keep that oil warm (I mean, fair is only fair, those Caribou have been warming their little shit asses on OUR warm oil for many years now). Film at eleven...
Ya, you can do that at that price, because all the investment already took place and it's the last drops in the reservoir coming out now.
Production from Prudhoe is down to 600K bpd, from millions of bpd 30 yrs ago.
The party's over pal. Get calibrated, or die.
Just in case you weren't being sarcastic.
http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/690171677.shtml
I do love ZH -- thanks for the link.
"digital confetti"
Awesome.
another wonderful piece of pure truth....thank you mike
I sorta feel sorry for Ben Bernanke. He'll be remembered for a hundred or more years as the guy who didn't do shit.
We talk about Nero fiddling while Rome burned. Bernanke will be remembered as the guy who played professor with the global economy while the world burned.
But I don't feel so bad that I'm gonna let him skate, no sir.
The Bernank should have admitted to his weaknesses early on and bailed out. Then we could have had Volker at the helm and dead banks in the nightly news, and 15% interest rates and we'd have problems oh yeah, but the usual kind of problems. Problems we could actually survive. As it stands now we're going to have problems like the world has never known.
+1
Academic Hubris of trying to impose linear solutions on non linear problems.
In some ways, economics is more difficult than "non linear problems".
Economics involves value, which is subjective and cannot be quantified. There is no such thing as a hedon - a unit of pleasure.
Yes it can. It's called utility (loss in statistics), which is really a probability. That is a way to quantify uncertainty. As long as we're here, probability is *subjective* if you view it from a Bayesian perspective.
You guys need to stop reading "mommy lit" about technical subjects; the writers and consumers (read you) always get it wrong.
And what units is "utility" measured in? Meters? Seconds? Plank constants?
If utility can be quantified, exactly how many utils do you obtain by posting nonsense? How many utils would be gained by posting something intelligent?
If utility measures a "probability", and I estimate a 60% chance of more drivel being posted, how many utils is that?
Is it valid or not for me to say that I enjoy eating a Whopper 1.64 times more than eating a Big Mac? Or that Bob is a good friend but Ralph is truly dear and I enjoy his company 2.31 times more?
Look it up dumbshit. It is unit free.
Thank you for your demonstration in basic stupidity.
For a fake science, that really is the best way to go about it. It makes the bogus equations look much more impressive and convincing.
You're probably wrong. I quantified it about as much as chaos theory allows.
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
Utility measures relative value, so it is denominated in terms of tradeoffs of other items. Two butters = one gun only represents a point on a utility curve of a given value ascribed to each. So it is still anchored in the subjective.
I don't know where you get the notion that utility is really probability, and I've done a whole lot of work in quantifying parametric and event uncertainty.
>Utility measures relative value
Got it. So you're saying utility is really ordinal, not cardinal. You can pretty much invent any numbers you want and just subject them to arbitrary monotonic transformations.
And it deals with hypothetical, unmeasurable, hidden preferences, not actual demonstrated preferences.
And the utility functions vary for two different people and even vary for the same person at different times. (Don't forget marginal utility, like how two vasectomies aren't valued twice as much as one vasectomy.)
And all these nonsense assumptions lead to outlandishly complex, intractable mathematical problems when only a few people and goods are involved. Not even Deep Blue can figure out whether I'm going to order a burger with cheese or without cheese when I'm at McDonalds.
When your kids go hungry, be sure to remember the pseudoscientist buffoons and their childishly playing games with numbers. If only you had given them more money for more powerful maths!!!!
"...when I'm at McDonalds." Now I know why you know McMath - no irrational numbers, complex numbers or real numbers, just natural numbers; empty like fast food.
You still don't get it. Utility is *subjective* but it has to be coherent , so no, you cannot "invent any numbers you want and just subject them to arbitrary monotonic transformations." Your stupidity really is noteworthy.
Hmm... still no answer to my math question. I guess math isn't your forte. Here's another chance.
Math problem #2.
a) show that 2 / sqrt(5) * 3 / sqrt(10) * 5/sqrt(25) * 7/sqrt(50) * ... = 2 * pi * 5^(-5/4)
where each numerator on the left hand side is a prime number and each radicand is the square of the corresponding prime, rounded to the nearest multiple of 5
b) show that 2/sqrt(5)*3/sqrt(10)*4/sqrt(15)*5/sqrt(25)*6/sqrt(35)*...=sqrt(5^(7/4)/(pi*sqrt(gamma)*(2cosh(pi/5)+gamma))),
where each numerator on the left hand side is 2, 3, 4, 5, ... and each radicand is the square of the corresponding numerator, rounded to the nearest multiple of 5, and gamma = (sqrt(5) + 1)/2
>You still don't get it. Utility is *subjective* but it has to be coherent , so no, you cannot "invent any numbers you want and just subject them to arbitrary monotonic transformations."
Wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotonic_function "this is the case in economics with respect to the ordinal properties of a utility function being preserved across a monotonic transform "
If you say u is a valid utility function, then so are u^3 and u^5 and 81u^93 or 20u^7+42 or an infinity of other choices.
BTW here is the answer to math question #1 that you didn't solve
Consider the formal series 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + .... = S. Then
1 + 1/3 + 1/5 + 1/6 + 1/7 + 1/9 + ... = S-(1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16+...) = S-1
1 + 1/5 + 1/6 + 1/7 + 1/10 + 1/11 + ... = S-1 -(1/3 + 1/9 + 1/27 +...) = S-1-1/2
1 + 1/6 + 1/7 + 1/10 + 1/11 + ... = S-1-1/2 - (1/5 + 1/25 + 1/125 + ...) = S - 1-1/2-1/4
etc.
1 = S - 1 - 1/2 - 1/4 - 1/5 - 1/6 - 1/9 - 1/10 - ...
substituting the initial expression for S yields
1 = 1/3 + 1/7 + 1/8 + 1/15 + 1/24 + 1/26 + ...
which solves the problem of summing the reciprocals of each number one less than a power.
And I thought captcha was tough.
that makes 2 of us, +1.
Dude, your Diophantus analysis problems (which you did not think of - just borrowed; you f'n parrot) are boring!
It is an easy mathematical argument to make, but I cannot go into detail here because of the lack of the ability to write equations. Never the less, here goes. Let C** be the sup consequence of decision (d) and let C* be the inf consequence of decision. It can be established (rigorously), that associated with every consequence C with (C**>C>C*), there is a number u which is an element of [0,1] such that C is equally preferrable to C* with chance u and C** with chance 1-u. Note that u is a utility and behaves exactly like a probability (a measure on the set [0,1]), such as if C**>C (read C** is preferable to C), then u(C**)>u(C), etc. These utilities are following the exact rules of probability, thus they can be thought of as a probability. They both describe normative behavior. What does this buy us? It leads to the principle of maximization of expected utility:
Extending the notion via the law of total probability, we have Pr(C|d)=sum{Pr(C|d, e_j)*Pr(e_j)}=sum{u(C_j)*Pr(e_j)}, where e is an event. This is nothing more that the expected value, and the decision problem is therefore to choose that decision for which the expected utility is a maximum.
Here is a great paper on a statistical approach for the coherent assessment of utilities.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2286328
> It can be established (rigorously), that associated with every consequence C with (C**>C>C*), there is a number u which is an element of [0,1] such that C is equally preferrable to C* with chance u and C** with chance 1-u blah blah blah blah
In other words, an outcome like getting the HIV would be rated really badly, like 0.001, because there is like 0.1% chance that I'd like having the HIV as much as I'd like winning a million dollars (100% chance I'd like that). And for getting the HIV and winning a million dollars simultaneously, then I'd like that 10% of the time, since probabilities multiply.
Great, I'm glad you can invent cute mathematical toy models. These mathematical models might work empirically for simple problems, but have nothing to do with how real people think or operate. And there is an obvious flaw: there is no C*, or worst state, or C**, a happiest state. There is no limit to how subjectively bad or how good an outcome is that a person can contemplate. What if my best outcome C** is intentionally violating your model?
Love Jstor.
And as usual you guys are arguing over nothing. Qualitative analysis is not as unscientific as most would believe. Quantifying real life experiences is impossible.
But it's interesting to watch the thinker debate the greeny.
A probability is any positive, finitely additive measure on an algebra of subsets of Q, assuming value 1 at Q.
So just construct a measure space of utility functions, then normalize them into a probability space.
Edit: Dude's got it. Should have read the thread before I posted.
LOL.
I guess you don't recognize that utility is a value choice, but there are other value systems where utility is not the measure of value. Aesthetics immediately comes to mind, but there are other possible value systems including ethics and religion(s). Simply taking utility as an assumed superior value system doesn't make it superior, or necessarily correct in all cases.
When the only tool you have is a hammer, all problems look like nails. Spare us the technical hubris. Values are at their core a philosophical problem, not a technical one.
word.
Cathartes Aura, you saw that Fukashima disaster coming in March, or was it an earthquake? Is there anything else in the pipeline you see for the near future?
They laid the ground work for this massive clusterfuck when they started thinking of "economics" as a science. All mathematic-y and ponderously ponderous.
Economics is a religion with no more predictive power than witchcraft. It works if you believe in it, and it stops working as soon as your faith wavers the least bit.
And I practice witchcraft so I know all about it, and let me tell you something if you are practicing witchcraft for the predictive power then you are no better a scientist than an economist. Fact.
+100 and beer.
PS. Do Cougars drink beer?
Hell yeah we do. You find yourself out in the woods alone facing down a hungry painter, toss him a brew and see what happens.
We prefer artisan beers for best results. Trappist labels work really well. To avoid being devoured on the spot and your bones left to bake in the sun, don't go hiking without bringing something for the cougars.
What fuckwit junks alcohol consumption? Especially GOOD Alcohol consumption?
Coors drinker.
Haterz gonna hate.
We have some crafty brews out here in California.
In fact we have a bunch of Beer Festivals coming up next month all over the Bay Area...
+ Stone IPA (even if it's radiated now, worth dying for)
I agree. Arrogant Bastard is incredible.
I'm currently enjoying a Breckenridge Vanilla Porter...
Being a Midwestern boy, I like Summit Extra Pale Ale.
Mmmmmmm.... hops.
Shiner Bock is the bomb. All the rest might as well be artsy fartsy horse piss.
"It works if you believe in it, and it stops working as soon as your faith wavers the least bit."
and therein lies the secret of the Secret. this is why i love clif high's work so much, cuz the world as we will see it is as only as we believe it to be.
knowing this, the next question is: what will we choose to believe?
ahhh, the relativity of reality, if folk only knew.
/agree.
Economics for prediction purposes is useless, agreed. It fails because of its dependency on the proverbial "ceteris parabus" - the notion that everything else that might influence the key causal relationship will sit still. Never happens.
But, economics is pretty darn instructive in terms of fundamental understandings. How else would we know that the markets are rigged when loads of money are chasing zero and negative returns?
.
>There is nothing wrong with first order (linear) approximations (Taylor or Laurent expansions) to nonlinear problems.
Except when you are dealing with value, which is subjective, unmeasurable, and ordinal and cannot be summed for two people or compared between two people or even compared for the same person at two different times.
Better mathematics will simply never render central banking or pseudoeconomics valid.
>"Math is hard, lets go shopping"
Not really. What is the sum of the reciprocals of each integer that is one less than a power, i.e. 1/3+1/7+1/8+1/15+1/24+1/26+etc.
There is nothing wrong with first order (linear) approximations (Taylor or Laurent expansions) to nonlinear problems. The error can be small or large (look at the remainder.) The user just has to realize that the result is an approximation and should not be treated as gospel. That is where the problem lies.
The user, because of the crappy educational system and work ethic of students today("Math is hard, lets go shopping" or "Thinking causes wrinkles"), ignores this because he/she doesn't understand real or complex analysis. This in turn leads to failure and the uttering of idiotic statements like "...Hubris of trying to impose linear solutions on non linear problems."
Religious practitioners seldom see anything wrong with their approximations
Yeah, math as a religion.... It's sad, but I can actually see the thought of math in your head:
All these equations and numbers are like miracles - you take some numbers or an equation and add them, they magically become a new number or a new equation. No one can explain this to me or my cohorts, so I have to take it on faith, which just means it is a religion....
Good luck with that.
I believe the topic was economics.
Try to stay focused...
>"Math is hard, lets go shopping"
Variance Doc, you still haven't answered my question. What is the sum of the reciprocals of each number that is one less than a power, i.e. 1/3+1/7+1/8+1/15+1/24+1/26+etc.?
It appears the science of economics is not your forte; let's see if perhaps you have some math skillz.
Great. Now show me a formula that predicts an economic event on a particular date.
Oh you can't? So none of this is relevant?
I see, so you're an idiot with an understanding of college-level math. Thanks for the update.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reification_%28fallacy%29
Do you possess an original thought in your head, or are you merely a parrot?
Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance.
- Immanuel Kant
This is a quote from your esteemed Wikipedia article on reification:
"Another common manifestation is the confusion of a model with reality. Mathematical or simulation models may help understand a system or situation but real life always differs from the model. In extreme cases, the butterfly effect causes the model to rapidly diverge from what is occurring in real life."
The butterfly effect is a layman's way of saying sensitivity to initial conditions which pertains to differential equations, used to simulate certain physical phenomena. Thus, the author of the Wiki article is using a mathematical simulation to show that mathematical simulations are bad representations of reality. Maybe Dr. Acula could weigh in here with another infinite series that even many math PhDs would have a hard time solving, save for math prodigies, like the Dr himself.
Actually he did admit his weakness and he was asked, no begged, to join and then stay. But he (actually his peeps and crew) presented his weakness as his strength.
He was proclaimed wide and far as an expert on what caused the Great Depression. Right there he was telling us he knew exactly how to cause the Great Depression 2. It was widely presumed that since he knew what caused the first one he would know how to stop the second one. This is not a logical conclusion.
The problem and the solution, in Bernanke’s eyes, are one and the same: monetary policy.
Bernanke, like all Monetarists, believes that the Great Depression was primarily caused by a fall in aggregate demand, which, he would tell you, was mostly a result of the "tight" monetary policy of the Fed in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Bernanke’s whole understanding of economic crisis in general is guided by this categorization of the depression. Because tight money caused the depression in the 30's, printing now, in the wake of the GFC is the only solution.
Personally this logic is insane, both in its characterization of the depression and as a recipe for success now. While the helicopter drops may have postponed Ponzi collapse the real problem is lack of aggregate demand, wage deflation (last thirty years) and price inflation (last decade). Printing solves neither the demand problem nor the wage problem. As we have seen, the only real impact has been on prices at the store, at the pump and for the RUS2000.
Its obvious that putting more currency in the hands of the rentier class does little to boost demand.
He wrote "Essays on the great depression" and I can't wait for his next book "EGT: how I created a bigger one".
The only sane people yearning for 15% interest rates are rich SOBs with a private income, or the utterly uninformed. This isn't the 70s.
Who said anyone was yearning? I said we would have those kinds of problems and we know how to survive them.
I don't know what kind of problems BB is dragging us into. 150% inflation? 5000%? Complete collapse in lending for 20 years? Wars sparked by commodity prices?
Feeling lucky, are you?
Cuz I'm not.
Sorry I misread your post Coug. You didn't say that at all.
Reco'nize my homie
+1
Anyone else find it odd that the same day that SPR announcement is made that the Saudis threaten to flood the market to control Iran?? This is getting truly surreal...
Whatever happened to:
1) It's just speculators holding this price up and if we just prosecute, that will deal with the problem, because the market is fully supplied and the world is awash in oil and there is no need for more supply.
2) Saudi Arabia will replace all of Libya's shut in oil.
3) The Bakken will produce more oil than anyone could ever want.
Turns out TPTB realize there is inadequate supply.
Simply that. They realize there is inadequate supply.
Well, guess what sports fans. That's forever. These tanks have to be refilled, and probably at a higher price. Shrewd.
At the same time that Obama is drawing down troops in Afghanistan. Someone order me up a Gulf of Tonkin incident!
Right now as we speak, there is widespread panic buying of BBBY....
And widespread panic selling of gold and silver.
Margin calls hitting the gloomer crowd, I guess.
Funniest comment on this thread and it has 26 junks. Wow.
What will be funnier tomorrow is GDP and Durable Goods Orders at 8:30. Yup
You are such a total fucknut. I don't know why you are allowed to keep breathing.
AFLAC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One of the few commenters on zerohedge worth reading.
ive been panicking since 2008
Try xanax.
and a cocktail or two.
Through a glass darkly...
snap
The two Bernanke "News Conferences" were disasters because everyone watching got that sinking feeling that the Fed is in a tough spot, with few ideas how to get out. That message was inadvertently communicated, but the results speak for themselves. This is coming at a time when the global and US economy are inching closer and closer to the cliff-edge and Bernank is trying to keep up appearances
Keeping up appearances.
This comes from running an entire nation as a scam. It's been little more than scams and diversions since Nixon. It might have hit a nerve at some point but before it did, everyone was already on the bandwagon. When it's all about Ponzi, you do the Ponzi and may the Devil take the hindmost.
40 years of lying and greed, someone's going to wake up with a headache. It's going to have to burn. Just burn. Real fire and combustion for realz burning shit up.
That's what appearances has been hiding. We appear like we're on top of our game, but we're really just a nation of clowns and showman grifters and the circus is about to fold up the tents, then set fire to them, then let the wild animals loose to devour anyone left who didn't have the proper sense to run for their mortal lives.
40 years of lying
I laugh to myself when I see the famous "Debt Clock". Thirty years ago, in the era of "greed is good" and "shop till ya drop" the national debt clock was running near TImes Square, started by people who were rightly concerned. But TPTB scoffed and Laffered it off as being on the lunatic fringe. Deficits didn't matter , ya see. So it became policy to triple the Federal budget deficit during just one administration. And today I saw Boehner getting up in front of the cameras and talking about debt. For a brief moment on CNBS they put up the ever accelerating digits of the national debt clock once again. And I had to laugh at the irony of those who were so quick to spend down the wealth of the country now in a rush to give it a second whammy by feigning being "Born Again" about the debt.
Right on Cougar. We're basically a nation of trailer trash with some trailers fancier than others. Our upper class is what you might call "gilded trailer trash". "And this has been brought to you by the Geraldine R Dodge Foundation." Yeah right--like her family coat of arms goes back to the middle ages.
So Bernanke et al are just hucksters with shiny gold fillings and we believe in them due to their "trappings". Insta-trappings like the wood paneling one sees in Izod Lacoste stores in your local strip mall. The pretentions of the upper class in this country are such a sorry joke. Send your kid to Choate and Harvard. Let him soak up the 150 year old traditions of those schools with a summer stint at Oxford thrown in for good measure. This will barely make a dent in your shoe polish fortune and think of the patina it will give your family name.
The Fed! The Fed! What is wrong here is everyone trying to use the Fed as the scapegoat of all that has been upended and destroyed in this country in the last forty years. The liberals started the drumbeat of "compassion" under whose guise this country was deconstructed, littered with third worlders (professional scammers that they are), a giant welfare class (visit walmart, sit and sip on a drink and watch...and you'll be saying...icky...and taking a shower as soon as you arrive home), and schools that are nothing more than sexual and liberal political indoctrination centers. It aint' about the Bernanke. The Bernanke can't fix what society is sucking up, alternatively, we can choose to rededicate ourselves to the resurrection and reconstruction of all that created this country and made it great. The one aspect that stays with me is this: look around you...the WWII vets are dead so we don't hear them saying, "how could you do this to the country I died for...illegals taking over, and I died for this?" what you don't hear the Vietnam Vets saying is, "the horrors of that jungle are still with me, and you give my country away to the illegals like Vargas. For this, and because of this, I hang my head and weep deeply..." (recently admitted by correspondent Jose Vargas that he Forged documents to steal a driver's license and that he lied endlessly about being a legal resident and Vargas says, "I am an American and you can't take that away to which the Vietnam Vet say, "really? really? didn't see you or your parents there in Vietnam?)
We are either the United States of America, a sovereign country which no one, No One may appropriate a citizenship of by theft, guile, or manipulation, or we are simply a raft of dead floatsam on the sea of historical dustbin countries. The liberal slike to whine that "we are a nation of immigrants." Which is, of course, not true. We have had Legal Immigration when it was needed by virtue of work to be done, now we have work to be done and it shoudl be done by our own (the welfare fatties) rather than illegals who then use that "work" as a claim of citizenship. this is it, folks. Where do you want your children to live? In the horror of the third workd trash where everything is red and tooth and claw, where the illegals and the foreigners band together to steal this country and turn it into a cesspool like Delhi or Beijing, or do you want it to be the United States of America again, that place whereby the people who created and built this country: the American whites and the American blacks, have a country to call...Ours.
Bernanke's bailouts have now cost more than all of America's past wars combined. Think that money went to "liberal causes" ?
I'm with ya kumquat. I don't understand the junking, must be either illegals or the folks rooting for our sovereignty to get flushed down the toilet like Greece, Ireland and the rest of the PIIGS. People can't seem to understand how the illegals undermine our cohesiveness as a nation and how it is part of the plan of deconstruction of our country by the PTB. Oh well, fuck em and keep fighting the good fight!
Maybe the junking is because he's a simplistic douchebag who sees some of the symptoms as the cause of the problem?
If only we threw all of the little brown people out and elected properly conservative people to represent us all would be well.
This isn't left vs right any more, and any one trying to turn it into that is effectively a disinformation agent. This IS about the Fed because if you can't control your country's financial system and the issuance of its currency (backed by gold? backed by nothing? social credit?) what can you control? The national debt would be unserviceable if rates were higher. And its still growing!
Wake up, the 'Democrats' and the 'Republicans' of the last 30 years have been interested in one thing only: expanding the Corporatist empire.
also the FED's bastard half brother the CIA. I'd have to say they've been ultra sucessful at destroying much of the freedom, discussion and innovation by classifying everything top secret or higher while looting the economy through industrial espionage using inside information and black market drug and arms sales to make some very connected people very wealthy using dummy corporations.
Something about that quivering lip just frightens the shit out of me.
Hilarious going to Bloomberg and seeing Treasury yield completely collapse.
Then go to General Jim's site and on the left column, you see gold collapsing and the USD skyrocketing, while he chain-posts all the disasterous items that are supposed to sink the dollar and send PM's to $1,650 and beyond....
LOL....
There's a lot of mom and dads out there remodelling the basement with bedrooms and a bathroom for the returning kids.
Hey! One of my kids returned and I think it is great. Wonderful conversation with him as an adult now, and the opportunity to simply enjoy rather than enforce, rules are agreed upon and kept, money changes hands for room and board, what's not to like? Shame on ya'll for thinking that family togetherness is a problem. Nothing hurts our children more than the opportunistic propaganda that our children should spend every penny they can make on living expenses because they aren't real adults, or they should be laughed at, if they live at home. For shame on the media promoting that one. I've read so many articles where the CEO of a company lived in the basement to start a (now) successful company. I love having my child living at home, and I'd welcome any and all to live at home. The More the Merrier.
Amen to that K, and somebody junked you! LOL.
<Edit>
Wow 3 more ppl junked you since I first read this. I'm curious why ppl would junk a someone willing to help their child?
<\Edit>
Worked out okay for Fritzl
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritzl_case
Because they shouldn't NEED to help their child. 26 year old "children" should be grown-ass adults.
My parents have to remodel their basement for my sister to live in because she spent 6 years in college learning nothing valuable. When I was 26 I already owned a home with equity and was debt free. You know....as a grown ass adult.
This is called a decreased standard of living. In America, one family used to be able to buy their own home. Now we have multi-generations living under one roof and call it fine because the "value" of the house goes up in federal reserve notes.
Can't wait until they pass a law saying my day needs to put his 401K into treasuries...then they can move in with me! Yay! Ain't it all grand? Oh well, when my kid is 26 and can't find a job then he can wipe his grandpa's ass for him so i don't have to pay someone else to do it.
These ideas are radical. Why someone might suggest that granma stay at home with them instead of moving to a "retirement" home where they suck the lifeblood of saving out of her estate.
That doesn't bode well for the national healthcare plan.
Just push AGQ below 150, ok?
Will you self-immolate when gold goes through $1,650 later this year?
Robotrader will be mocking gold when it passes beyond $2500. It's the only talent he has -- mocking.
Why all the hate toward Bernanke? Really, ya'll tick me off. Mr. Bernanke held this country and the world together in the great crash after Lehman in fall of 2008. Nothing is more infuriating than the oversimplistic pilloring of a man who will go down in history as a hero. Whatever you think about QE1 and QE2, they did pump some money back into the system, and keep the walls of the economic system buttressed. Is it perfect? Hell no, we need to refactorize this country, to end welfare and put the fat hinnies in those factories working for minimum wage and make them buy irons to look half way decent and force them to scour their bodies of tattoos and stop rewarding them for sexual cesspool babies (who dat baby daddy?). This country is in the gutter and its time to hose it off and remember who we are: a nation of pride, self-reliance, and self-respect. Mr. Bernanke have any tattoos? No. Overpaid? No. A slut? No. A deadbeat who hasn't paid his taxes? No. Stop complaining about Bernanke and start a factor and end immigration. Those two things alone will save this country. Oh, and say yer prayers they way yer mama taught ya.
King Canute once ordered the tide not to come in and wet his feet.
Aren't there any trolls left who even try to be funny or witty?
Aren't there any trolls left who even try to be funny or witty?
Nah. Zhedge is the worst shift in the shill business. It's so bad that's where they place the newbies.
The people Bernanke works for shipped all the factories to whichever country had the cheapest slave labor, the harhest dictatorship, and the least environmental regulation. They're the same people who loudly proclaimed the virtues of unfettered globalized capitalism and then turned around and stole trillions from the taxpayers us via the bailouts. Now they've got you looking in the wrong direction and blaming it all on immigrants. What's the word I'm looking for?...Oh, yeah...f*cktard.
"Why all the hate" you ask? Because The Bernank (and that fraud, Greenspan) CAUSED the banking/economic problems.
Not sure who said (Ben Franklin?), goes something like this: "Never trust those who created the problem to provide the solution."
As for the rest of your post, I stopped reading after "ya'll"
I stopped reading after "ya'll"
I stopped after Mr. Bernanke. You win.
Dude, you don't give credit to an arsonist who puts out a fire he created. The Fed caused even your simpleton excuses for what it is harming this country. Factories I assume is the loss of manufacturing jobs, easily explained by the decades of weak dollar policies, over regulation, and misallocation of resources to the retail/services sectors from low interest rate policies. Immigration? Guess what all those people were here doing... Building houses during a housing bubble the Fed created and encouraged and was fully aware of.
The only thing the bernank saved was the bonuses of investment bankers and GE capital. All of those motherfuckers should have been fired. Yet they rewarded for failure. That's not saving an economy. That's damning it.
+1650
My favorite place to see Panic is at Red Rocks......evening everybody!!
"God Bless the Central Planners.
They are gonna need it. " ...LOL
Looks like I picked a bad decade to quit smoking.
only if you can grow your own. otherwise, the only thing you're missing out on really is helping pay the interest through taxes.
looks like a picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmW-ScmGRMA
p.s. get an e-cig setup before uncle sugar starts using his reasonable force via ATF to get all the "outlaws" selling.
if one assumes 2mg of nicotine per cig. then the large bottles of juice at madvapes.com are about 50 cents a pack.
TYLER
Ron Paul´s committee hearing on US Gold Reserves audit taking place right now.
Stream: http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia-live/financialserv/16489/300_financialserv-qwertyuiop_070131.asx
Hell yeah, my dividend money came in today...I caught it on tape.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdQuCx3Cv9Y
Layin' low.....hunkerin' down..........plenty of necessary survival stocks.........ready for the nicotene riots of 2012.............
Bernanke has everything under control.
Really.
Creating chaos that leads to misfortune for nearly all, and fortune for a very few, isn't that difficult.
He doesn't even have to be able to track the fine details. All he has to do is push the boulder over the side of the cliff.
Maybe Hugh Hendry panicked too early? Maybe to Ben, "more sympathetic to central bankers” just means that now they pay him more? His "naive and idiotic thing to do" was incompetence, not conspiracy? He should've been smarter about the whole 'giving away lots of money to bankers' thing. Doh!? He's "failed miserably" but he's still wealthy, well-paid, and near a well-stocked helicopter?
Good comments.
That is a bullshit mea culpa from the bernank. He never had any intention of helping anyone but the banksters. Oh gee, nobody benefitted from my grand experiment but jamie dimon? I had no idea... BULLSHIT!!!
"Operation Iranian Liberation"
I gotta go with the Hugh on this one. There is one way out of this freaking mess and that is for US to shoot someone. It doesn't really matter who just that a body hit's the floor and makes a sound. Might as well be the little hitler with all the oil. Que Blackwater and Halliburton in 5,4,3,2....
Waiting for the false flag in 5,4,3,2......
No land war in Iran. Too hard. Never happen.
A covert "Kill all Nuclear Scientist" operation might be a good start. Afterall they are surrounded by US troups in more than 10 countries, complete with numerous ships curb crawling the Arabian Sea. So when I glance at US Banks sitting on a cool Trillion of Excess Reserve, I can't help to think that there's enough in there to fund a big chunk of WW3.
You mean preparations have begun? I am shocked!
On the one hand the elite were smart, because they knew they couldn't develop China into a powerful ally and then leave the West militarily weak and dependent on China's goodwill. We have an entire generation of not only combat-ready young men, but combat hardened. China's advantage is numbers. But of course, the edge goes to whoever is on defense. In America, Americans have the edge, in China, Chinese would definitely have the edge.
Does OPEC exist? Wow, Mike has stumbled onto something there.
I agree with Mike, OPEC exists in name only.
On second vid, at Bilderberg meeting "we have it all, now let's secure it"
see photo below.
http://i.imgur.com/Z2x5r.jpg
Notice the DHS emblem on door.
http://www.spartacus-news.com/search/label/bilderberg2011.html
from someone that covered the Bilderberg meeting
Holy #uck... look at silver and gold.
I'm waiting for silver to tank big time...
Two months ago, this was easy to say... now it's getting close to the time to belly up to the bar and buy.
Any time is a good time to buy gold and silver.
I hope tomorrow is even better, as I have time to drive to the coin shop!
PANIC!
A big drop in the paper market might not help much- the coin shop I generally buy from has always checked the spot price at the time of purchase, but they've now decoupled and are charging more. Still a fair price, and not outrageous, but I don't blame them for not wanting to lose their own shirts if the price does crash for a little while.
Communism doesn't work. I'm not sure why every generation needs to relearn that lesson.
Honest people just can't understand true evil.
People who haven't had their lives ruined by a sociopath, you mean?
SOCIOPATHS RUIN LIVES
^---- +++ you guys.
By the way, I already linked some hours ago to the post of Max Keiser containing those 2 videos in the article about the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
Congratulations.
Whistling past the graveya....OOOH! DONUTS!
sounds like mike krieger just lost a bunch of money gambling on oil prices going up.
you got owned mike, admit it.
the iea calls the sauds, the sauds call the squid, the squids sells the futures, another day in the rigged casino.
all the frogs are in the pot.....and the water is getting hotter and hotter
Ever notice that the bumbling store owner who has trouble counting out change always errs in his favor?
Everyone assumes that the Fed is bumbling and stupid. But did you ever notice that they always errs on the side of TPTB?
+$14T
This makes me want to snap into a SlimJim bitchez.
I'm glad that gasoline prices are crashing in Los Angeles.
http://www.LosAngelesGasPrices.com/retail_price_chart.aspx?city1=LosAnge...
Can be had at $3.67 all day long now. We were paying $4.20 just weeks ago.
How much for greasepaint and a big rubber nose?
: O )
This article assumes that Bernanke is actually TRYING to save the economy and doesn't understand what he's doing. Truth is, everything that the Fed does is calculated. Bernanke isn't "accidentally" destroying the US and global economy. He's doing it intentionally.
Seems pretty simple to understand. Why do people keep indulging the fantasy that he's dim or "in over his head"?