dagblog - Comments for "In Praise of Gentle Ben" http://dagblog.com/politics/praise-gentle-ben-16888 Comments for "In Praise of Gentle Ben" en Ben missed the obvious http://dagblog.com/comment/179626#comment-179626 <a id="comment-179626"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/politics/praise-gentle-ben-16888">In Praise of Gentle Ben</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Ben missed the obvious irrational exuberance of easy money under Greenspan. He didn't notice that it created the real estate bubble which ultimately led to the 2008 collapse on Wall Street.</p> <p>QE I, II, III and QE infinity, did rescue the TBTF big banks with 0% free money while it stiffed savers with 0.05% interest, enticing more borrowing and debt. The FED printing money, and sending it over to those with already too much of it, on Wall Street, for more profit seeking and speculation doesn't seem like a sustainable long range plan for an economy.</p> <p>What is the difference between the FED's current and growing by $85 billion a month 'portfolio' and federal deficit spending? It escapes me? I know Congress would have to act,  but wouldn't that $3 trillion in paper at the FED bought from banks, be better spent on infrastructure projects and jobs?</p> <p>Currently, late speculators/suckers to the 0% FED rate housing 'echo' bubble party are <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-18/wall-street-raising-reits-causes-subprime-hangover.html">already losing money </a>as the boys on Wall Street dump the stuff as shares of REITs.</p> <p> </p> </div></div></div> Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:27:33 +0000 NCD comment 179626 at http://dagblog.com "I can't actually imagine http://dagblog.com/comment/179629#comment-179629 <a id="comment-179629"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/politics/praise-gentle-ben-16888">In Praise of Gentle Ben</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><blockquote> <p><em><span style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12.727272033691406px; line-height: 16.988636016845703px;">"I can't actually imagine that Obama has been displeased with Bernanke."</span></em></p> </blockquote> <p><span style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12.727272033691406px; line-height: 16.988636016845703px;">Really? Even after seeing the photo that accompanied the article? </span><img alt="wink" height="20" src="http://dagblog.com/modules/ckeditor/ckeditor/plugins/smiley/images/wink_smile.gif" style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12.727272033691406px; line-height: 16.988636016845703px;" title="wink" width="20" /></p> <p><img alt="Ben Bernanke and Barack Obama" src="http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/51c0d814eab8ea9907000010-300-225/former-fed-governor-obama-basically-fired-ben-bernanke-on-the-spot.jpg" /></p> <p> </p> <p>Have you noticed how the press published photos of Obama have been far less flattering since the AP kerfluffle?</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:53:04 +0000 EmmaZahn comment 179629 at http://dagblog.com