Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Bernanke: 'We have lost control'
Economist recounts talk with Fed chairman
By Joshua Boak | Chicago Tribune reporter
September 17, 2008
NAPLES, Fla. — Several months ago, economist David Hale had a private meeting with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who was trying to ward off a recession by lowering interest rates and increasing the money supply in the economy.
The problem with that approach is that the value of the dollar plunged against foreign currencies, causing crude oil prices to skyrocket because oil is pegged to the dollar. It affected food prices, gasoline and family budgets.
"Ben, you are playing a very unique role in world economic history," Hale recalled telling Bernanke, an expert in the Great Depression. "You are the first central bank governor of the United States to preside over a recession with no decline in commodity prices."
Bernanke could hypothetically limit inflation in commodities by raising interest rates, a policy that would restrict the flow of money but potentially lead to an avalanche of bank failures. At a financial conference in Florida on Tuesday, Hale, a Chicago-based economist for investment managers, hedge funds and multinational companies, paraphrased the Fed chairman's response.
"We have lost control," said Hale, quoting Bernanke. "We cannot stabilize the dollar. We cannot control commodity prices."
In the past few days, Sheffield Wednesday Football Club has dropped its cases against some of its fans. I am now allowed to write about the worst example of legal bullying I have ever seen.
The club has had serious problems, on and off the pitch, and many of its fans use an internet forum - owlstalk.co.uk - to discuss them. They make the kind of comments you would expect to find on any talk board, and which would normally be forgotten within 15 minutes. Two and half years ago the club launched its first suit. Only now have the people who posted these comments emerged blinking from the labyrinthine nightmare of English law.
As Geoffrey Robertson and Andrew Nicol explain in their excellent book, Media Law, England's defamation laws date back to a statute created in 1275. The criminal offence of scandalum magnatum was devised to protect "the great men of the realm" from stories which could stir the people against them. Three centuries later, the Star Chamber allowed noblemen to launch civil actions for libel, to provide them with an alternative to duelling.
They made prolific use of this privilege until Fox's Libel Act of 1792 determined that the claimant (the person bringing the case) had to prove that the words used against him were false, malicious and damaging. This means that libel law 216 years ago was more liberal and more in tune with the principle of free speech than it is today.
During the 19th and 20th centuries, Robertson and Nicol show, "the common law was re-fashioned to serve the British class system from the perspective of ... the Victorian club". To protect wealthy people from criticism, the courts reversed Fox's burden of proof. They created a presumption that any derogatory remark made about a gentleman must be false. This remains the case today. Defamation differs from all other civil or criminal laws in Britain: the burden of proof is on the defendant.
In the U.S. the staff of the sec wanted to proceed with both of its inquiries. However, they were stopped abruptly in 1992 by the Commission itself, led by Chairman Richard Breeden, not long after British Prime Minister John Major spent a weekend with President George Bush at Camp David. Had Major persuaded Bush to call off the investigation, as British press reports speculated at the time? Both Bush and Major, through spokesmen, say they don't recall discussing Lloyd's. Former Chairman Breeden, who had been a key White House aide under Bush, told Time that the sec decision against proceeding "was not because Mr. Major and Mr. Bush said anything to each other" but because the SEC decided that disputes between Names and Lloyd's should be resolved in English courts. "We didn't make a judgment that the way (Lloyd's) allocated risks among syndicates wasn't sleazy," Breeden told Time. "We didn't make a judgment that their practices were honest."
Although the links between the Windsors and the Walker-Bush clan go back at least to the 1920s, the roots of this present crisis can be found in events in 1992.June 6-8, 1992
Prime Minister John Major
United Kingdom
Met with President Bush during a private visit to Washington, and Camp David (Maryland).
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/15738.htm1/8/03 HYPERLINK "http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-obit-mcclendon0108jan08,0,6212268.story" \t "_blank"
White House Reporter Sarah McClendon Dies
"If the people were to ever find out what we have done, we would be chased down the streets and lynched." -- George Bush, cited in the June, 1992 Sarah McClendon Newsletter
the SEC decided that disputes between Names and Lloyd's should be resolved in English courts.
barracuda wrote:http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-wed_oilsep17,0,4833605.storyBernanke: 'We have lost control'
"Ben, you are playing a very unique role in world economic history," Hale recalled telling Bernanke, an expert in the Great Depression. "You are the first central bank governor of the United States to preside over a recession with no decline in commodity prices."
nathan28 wrote:barracuda wrote:http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-wed_oilsep17,0,4833605.storyBernanke: 'We have lost control'
"Ben, you are playing a very unique role in world economic history," Hale recalled telling Bernanke, an expert in the Great Depression. "You are the first central bank governor of the United States to preside over a recession with no decline in commodity prices."
Whoops! So much for that. Oil down over 40%? Rice and wheat down? Gold down until today's safe haven flight? Still sounds like deflation to me.
freemason9 wrote:Sometimes it is hard to imagine just how incompetent leadership is.
DrVolin wrote:freemason9 wrote:Sometimes it is hard to imagine just how incompetent leadership is.
And as long as you keep thinking that, they'll have a free hand.
freemason9 wrote:DrVolin wrote:freemason9 wrote:Sometimes it is hard to imagine just how incompetent leadership is.
And as long as you keep thinking that, they'll have a free hand.
And as long as you keep thinking they are superhuman, you are already defeated.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests