Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama keeping Bernanke is him playing Chess right?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
LovinLife Donating Member (366 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 01:53 AM
Original message
Obama keeping Bernanke is him playing Chess right?
It has to be. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 01:57 AM
Response to Original message
1. .......

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:01 AM
Response to Original message
2. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. Obama got fucked just by following the last administration,
Edited on Fri Dec-04-09 02:17 AM by FrenchieCat
and he's getting fucked again now,
by those who would act as though
they didn't hear him state what he
would do before you decided whether to
vote for him or to keep your ass home,
or whatever.

Otherwise, considering you knew very well,
you voted to get fucked.
And look, you won!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. Silliest response to a post ever.Why does Obama keep Berneke?
Edited on Fri Dec-04-09 02:36 AM by saracat
Surely those who think he should be retained are in the minority? Sanders put a hold on his nomination! And plenty of others are unhappy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ima_sinnic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #7
47. you really keep basically insisting people should not have voted for Obama
you act as if you'd rather he were not elected at all than to have to listen to anybody complain about him because they had to compromise and vote for the "lesser of two," er, "evils."
I believe you will not have this problem in the next go-round. Those who worked their butts off for him are largely bailing. At that time you can wish that the Democratic candidate had really been sincere in calling for "change."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spiritual_gunfighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #7
54. You are getting totally ridiculous Frenchie, stop now n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:06 AM
Response to Original message
3. Do you even have a vague cliff's notes version of history regarding the Fed and a new President?
Edited on Fri Dec-04-09 02:07 AM by PBS Poll-435
Do ya?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LovinLife Donating Member (366 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:08 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Nope. Don't want one. This isn't the change I voted for. Bernanke is clearly pro wall st. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:10 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. The name of the game is "stability"
We are in an recovery now. Why risk messing with that? (It's how it has pretty much always been)

How do you think Clinton got Greenspan?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:13 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. By selling out - the same way Obama decided to refoist Bernanke on us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:28 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. What, specifically, is Bernanke and the Fed doing to you?
The Fed basically has 3 tools to influence the economy.

Sell/Buy US securities (Treasury Bonds, etc)
Regulate what percentage member banks must keep with regard to deposits and lending
Set the discount rate (the interest rate member banks charge each other for overnight loans to maintain the reserve requirement)


Interest rates are are at historical lows. The reserve requirement has not changed. The Fed purchased a bunch of US bonds. And they have been more bullish on an economic recovery than most.


What's your beef?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:33 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. You make it sound so innocent
if they're so innocent, then why is the Fed so opposed to having their books audited?
why are they fighting tooth and nail against Grayson's bill to have them audited and make them transparent and accountable to the public? they are the FEDERAL reserve after all, aren't they? what are they trying to hide?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:37 AM
Response to Reply #9
11.  Bravo.Well put. Innocent indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. The whole point of having a separate entity such as the Fed
Is to keep politics out of it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:50 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. You mean sort of like the banker bailouts?
the public has no right to know what the banks did with 700 billion tax payer dollars either, right? the bankers have the right to enrich themselves with millions of dollars in bonuses and raises and that's none of our business either right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Huh?
Edited on Fri Dec-04-09 02:56 AM by PBS Poll-435
Grab a newspaper as soon as you can. The Fed can not seize taxpayer money. I think you mean the Department of the Treasury and its Capital Purchase Program (Under TARP)

Not all of the 700B was spent/distributed.

Most of the recipients have either paid it back (with dividends!) or have made specific plans on paying it back.

:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:02 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. I didn't say it did have the power
you still haven't provided one valid reason for opposing an audit of the Federal reserve.

'keeping politics out of it' is not a valid or meaningful response to the question.








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:08 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. Actually, "Keeping Politics Out of It" is a very meaningful response
The Fed is not part of the Federal Government. It was set up this way to avoid political pressure.

What would you say if Marsha Blackburn(R-TN) wanted to inspect the notes regarding a Supreme Court decision by a liberal Justice?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:13 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. Say what?
what a ludicrous analogy. what the hell does the Supreme court have to do with it?

we are talking about the banking policies that have a direct impact on the economic health of the country. the public has every right to KNOW what those policies are.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:16 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. The Supreme Court was set up to be shielded from political pressure
As was the Fed with the urging of Alexander Hamilton.

And banking policies that affect everyday Americans are handled by the Comptroller of the Currency, the FDIC, the FTC, and the Department of the Treasury.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:39 AM
Response to Reply #21
26. Free from political pressure?
Edited on Fri Dec-04-09 03:57 AM by rollingrock
you do realize, for example, that George W. Bush was APPOINTED to his first term of office by the Supreme Court, don't you? If you think the Supreme Court isn't subject to political pressure, then you are dreaming.

Nothing is free from political pressure. The Federal Reserve, like the Supreme Court, is subject to the politics of the men who run it or serve on it. Alan Greenspan was a follower of the right-wing lunatic Ayn Rand, for example and Greenspan's extremist libertarian views influenced all of his decisions at the federal reserve, decisions which ended up contributing to the near-collapse of the economy, something from which it may never recover in the long run (ie: the collapse of the dollar seems to be well on its way). I sure don't want people like that conducting their business in secret.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:47 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. No he was the winner by default.
Edited on Fri Dec-04-09 03:47 AM by PBS Poll-435
The Supreme Court agreed that there was an equal-protection question. (7-2) The remedy was the issue. (5-4)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:56 AM
Response to Reply #27
29. 'Winner by default' lol
according to who? Glen Beck? what the heck is that supposed to mean anyway?

you proven my point. the 2000 election was decided by the Supreme court decision to stop counting the votes. it was decided by politics, not the voters.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 04:08 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. 7/9 said that there was an equal protection argument. The remedy was the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 03:23 AM
Response to Reply #21
43. Then why did the Supreme Court appoint George Bush president if the Court is supposed to be shielded
from political pressure?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:05 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. If you believe that
I hear there's a bridge for sale in Brooklyn you might be interested in.

'Most of the recipients have either paid it back (with dividends!) or have made specific plans on paying it back.'


lol, yeah sure.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:13 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. What percentage of TARP was dedicated to the Capital Purchase Program?
700B was not given to banks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orwell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 02:42 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. Don't talk sense...
...when the crowd calls for blood.

Viva la Revolucion'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:18 AM
Response to Reply #8
22. The 22 trillion dollars they pledged to the banks no strings attached.
The toxic assets they bought at full nominal value knowing that they weren't worth two shits much less two percent of that.

The open threat of martial law they used to muscle it all through.

The stonewalling on bank reform.

The threats made today to Social Security.

Please don't insult our intelligence with this Broderist filth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:20 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. Really?
:rofl:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:26 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. Not much of a response.
But then there isn't any case to be made for Bernanke, except the case that bank execs are spessssssshhhhhhul.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:31 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. Ok. The Fed is actually the Federal Reserve System
Regional banks(12). Your checkbook routing number depends on what "region" you are in. (I am in region '11')

-Snip-



Which bank execs, specifically, are you upset with?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 03:51 AM
Response to Reply #25
28. Go google them, I'm not your admin assistant..
And I ain't got time for Geithnerite jibber jabber.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 04:04 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. Again, what, specifically, is your beef with the system in place? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. I already told you in plain English.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #22
35. 22 trillion? man give me a hit of what you're smoking...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. Watch and listen to Dylan Ratigan, and learn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ima_sinnic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #22
52. absolutely! double+1! (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #5
50. A "jobless recovery" is a misnomer... However,
I will remain patient. Most people won't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #4
33. I dislike the guy. But the stock market actually listens to him.
If you bernanke says it's up---it will skyrocket. If bernanke says it looks bad----it drops to hell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waterscalm Donating Member (104 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 02:54 AM
Response to Reply #33
56. We are happy little peons when the stock market is happy. joy joy.
:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hatchling Donating Member (968 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
34. I don't think he's been playing chess at all.
I think he's been playing Risk.:scared:

The primary object of the game is "world domination," or "to occupy every territory on the board and in so doing, eliminate all other players

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. No, not chess. Or Risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iceman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
38. Maybe he was told to keep Bernanke or else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
39. So this Bernanke is someone we are supposed to hate?
Do we hate him more than Geithner?

Or Rahm?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salguine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-04-09 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
40. I haven't read the chess analogy in quite a while. It seems the
Obama-Can-Do-No-Wrong crowd has even given up on that fantasy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #40
44. It's about time! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
natrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-05-09 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
41. this won't end well
the finance regulation bill going through congress will create a permanent bailout for the top 20 or 30 financial firms at the discretion of the white house with no congressional input. This will not end well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HamdenRice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-05-09 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
42. Bernanke isn't Geithner and isn't Paulson. He's been one of the best Fed chairmen ever, but ...
Edited on Sat Dec-05-09 01:21 PM by HamdenRice
explaining why is probably lost on this audience.

Let's just say that lots of people are screaming about how "trillions" were loaned to the "banksters" and not to regular folk, while not realizing that for the first time in 70 years, the Fed was turned into, basically, a wholesale bank, that made available almost all the inter-bank, consumer and business credit that was available during the crisis.

If you have a student loan, car note, credit card, mortgage, business line of credit or other loan, then there's a good chance it's because of Bernanke's radical reinvention of the Fed, based on his years and years of study of the Great Depression and how to avoid the next one.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #42
51. Your viewpoint is accepted...
Trouble is, people with credit cards, did they expect their APR to go from 14 to 30%?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HamdenRice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #51
53. Which is what the banks, not the Fed, did
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
45. Must be. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 07:44 AM
Response to Original message
46. Just protecting the status quo. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 08:32 AM
Response to Original message
48. You can snub it at much as you want...but many on DU you support this.
This is why I don't bother with these little snide comments---because the situations are cut in half now. Even people who may like to use this whole chess thing in a snide way, seemingly support the Pres in this move. But I'm not about to shout people out. They're already here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
49. At this point, I've got to say "No, it isn't". Unless,
the President can eloquently explain why keeping Bernanke will do the country good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
55. Says the person who posted an OP titled "Marc Rubio is the GOP Barack Obama"
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beyond cynical Donating Member (150 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
57. Not really...
Obama is in favor of low interest rates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
58. Bernanke is a unsung HERO in regards to the steps he took during the financial crisis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 11:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC