(9AM EST – promoted by Nightprowlkitty)
“We can do this! Just tells us where you want it!”
Drug-addled fifth columnists: “C’mon, Holmes. We don’t want it. At all.”
“Uh-oh. Robert Gibbs is going to be very, very cross come November.”
“Yeah? Well, he can suck my fat debt!”
3 comments
Author
to editorialize. It will never happen again.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/…
ruh roh, the beltway not likey
They’ve been ignoring this forever, too. Deliberately.
Fannie and Freddie’s Last Rites
14 million underwater now,
20 million homeowners projected to be underwater by end of 2011
http://www.housingwatch.com/20…
whuppa whuppa whuppa whuppa
… that the nonsense he peddled in his Money and Banking text was just that … except being a typical mainstream economist, “finding out” fact is the first step for finding a mathematical model that says that particular inconvenient fact does not matter.
(1) Easy monetary policy can accommodate fiscal policy in depressed conditions, but you can’t push on a string … monetary policy can’t make people want to invest in new productive capacity if there is no demand for that product because the economy still sucks ….
By contrast, allowing states to adopt a feed-in tariff for wind power would make businesses want to invest, establishing a Steel Interstate and Electricity Superhighway would make businesses want to invest, and the most direct way to target unemployment is to offer people a job.
(2) The Fed showed in its fling with monetarism in the 80’s that it can’t hit monetary targets. Despite the purely ideological “model” of Friedman, monetarism is based on a lie about how a modern money system actually works. What the Fed can control is the short term cash rate … it can’t control the quantity of money supplied, when over 90% of money is supplied by commercial banks.
(3) The Fed system as it was designed to operate could never go bankrupt. But now that an increasing amount of the Fed balance sheet is commercial debt rather than sovereign debt, Bernanke is setting up a Fed that could go bankrupt, which is about as criminally idiotic an undertaking as the decision to encouraging people to bet on whether someone else’s company was going to go broke.