It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ben bernake interview on 60 minutes

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 06:21 PM
link   
Its going on now on the east coast. Pretty sweet so far I must say he has gone up a few levels in my list. Doesnt seem like a bad or nefarious guy at all. Unlike some others, I will give full synopsis of interview at the end.


Also love how he openly admits how AIG infuriated him the most as it should.

Link to interview www.cbsnews.com...


[edit on 15-3-2009 by Desolate Cancer]




posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Yeah, he might be NWO

But he is astoundingly smart isnt he?.. Everytime he talks and Obama keeps his mouth shut the market goes up, which coincides with my charts (on up to the minute thread)

Check it out



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Desolate Cancer
 


So far all I see are softball questions...........Why not ask who is the Federal Reserve? or maybe a question like who is your boss? Or maybe a question like will you submit to an audit?

Sure he seems like a nice guy and very well educated as well. Thats why Rothschild has him in this position........

[edit on 15-3-2009 by Cloudsinthesky]



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Cloudsinthesky
 


I mean as much as us on ATS and others would like to see those kinds of questions they are not plausible in msm setting.

Yes Ben does seem very smart and likable and I hope to god obama and his people shut their mouths for a couple days so the market can rally a bit,(even if its fake).

I mean it makes sense on the ptb part to have a likable person in that position during this time.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Desolate Cancer
reply to post by Cloudsinthesky
 


I mean as much as us on ATS and others would like to see those kinds of questions they are not plausible in msm setting.

Yes Ben does seem very smart and likable and I hope to god obama and his people shut their mouths for a couple days so the market can rally a bit,(even if its fake).

I mean it makes sense on the ptb part to have a likable person in that position during this time.



Have you seen him getting grilled by the finance committee? He handles any question in stride, and then throws it back in your face.

Might as well admit it, this guy is a financial machine



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 


Nice pic of Tiesto there
With that being said this was a good interview. Bernenke needed to get in touch with Main Street to let them know he is on their side. Watching interviews like this make me not want to believe in the international banking conspiracies...especially after seeing where he came from.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Ben Bernanke is a nice mascot...a songleader for the Federal Reserve.
The bubble has popped and he is trying to reinflate the bubble!
So yes his voice seems to soothe some, but not for long.
It can not be done.

www.abovetopsecret.com...'



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 07:08 PM
link   
He lost any credibility when he said that the big banks are solvent.
A cursory look at the balance sheets and 10Ks of at least three of the "big banks" show that to be a blatant lie. That doesn't even address the off balance sheet entities that can only be speculated upon.

He came across as personable and human, and I honestly don't think he's a monster. As covered in the piece, though, Mr. Bernanke's entire career has been about preparing for the very events we're experiencing now.

Imagine you worked and studied for 30 years, day in and day out, to determine that the best way to put out a fire is to dump water on it. One day a massive chemical fire breaks out, and you, being the foremost expert, are called upon to extinguish the fire.
You immediately order everyone to start pouring water on the fire, but it doesn't seem to be helping. More water, more water!! Pour on more water!! But the fire starts to spread; it's taken over nearby buildings. MORE WATER! Pump every drop of water we have onto the fire!!
But because it's a chemical fire, the water won't work - you stand there, watching 30 years of research, education, and experience in firefighting utterly fail before your eyes. You were so sure you would know what to do, how to put out the fire, but nothing is working.
You continue to order more water to be pumped even though you can see the fire taking over the whole block, then the neighborhood, then the entire city. You don't know what else to do.

That's what Ben is experiencing now. His core philosophy has always been the half-Keynesian solution of "throw money at it!", only throwing money at it isn't going to work on this type of fire.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Sure he answers the question............like where did the money go?? "I am not going to tell you"

So if you consider that throwing it back in there face............



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cloudsinthesky
Sure he answers the question............like where did the money go?? "I am not going to tell you"

So if you consider that throwing it back in there face............


Ive watched about 99% of his interviews with the senate finance committee, please be more elaborate

And I love Ron Paul and all, but Bernanke owned him too, but youre not going to hear that on this website either...



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by anachryon
He lost any credibility when he said that the big banks are solvent.

He came across as personable and human, and I honestly don't think he's a monster. As covered in the piece, though, Mr. Bernanke's entire career has been about preparing for the very events we're experiencing now.

Imagine you worked and studied for 30 years, day in and day out, to determine that the best way to put out a fire is to dump water on it. One day a massive chemical fire breaks out, and you, being the foremost expert, are called upon to extinguish the fire.

You continue to order more water to be pumped even though you can see the fire taking over the whole block, then the neighborhood, then the entire city. You don't know what else to do.

That's what Ben is experiencing now. His core philosophy has always been the half-Keynesian solution of "throw money at it!", only throwing money at it isn't going to work on this type of fire.


Great analogy. I would say that maybe this is true and I geuss in this chemical fire the best thing to do is what? Let the fire burn itself out while trying to cordon off the area around it..... forget the analogy lets refer it to the real situation (I did like the analogy a lot though).

Do we take the free market approach & let the banks fail and then allow for the smaller banks who are solvent to rise up and take over the failed ones places, through mergers and acquisitions?

Do we do a govt supported free market approach and force the real pricing of the toxic assets so that private buyers become interested?

What would you recommend? I personally think the true free market approach is the best even though it will be painful in the short term.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Desolate Cancer

Originally posted by anachryon
He lost any credibility when he said that the big banks are solvent.

He came across as personable and human, and I honestly don't think he's a monster. As covered in the piece, though, Mr. Bernanke's entire career has been about preparing for the very events we're experiencing now.

Imagine you worked and studied for 30 years, day in and day out, to determine that the best way to put out a fire is to dump water on it. One day a massive chemical fire breaks out, and you, being the foremost expert, are called upon to extinguish the fire.

You continue to order more water to be pumped even though you can see the fire taking over the whole block, then the neighborhood, then the entire city. You don't know what else to do.

That's what Ben is experiencing now. His core philosophy has always been the half-Keynesian solution of "throw money at it!", only throwing money at it isn't going to work on this type of fire.


Great analogy. I would say that maybe this is true and I geuss in this chemical fire the best thing to do is what? Let the fire burn itself out while trying to cordon off the area around it..... forget the analogy lets refer it to the real situation (I did like the analogy a lot though).

Do we take the free market approach & let the banks fail and then allow for the smaller banks who are solvent to rise up and take over the failed ones places, through mergers and acquisitions?

Do we do a govt supported free market approach and force the real pricing of the toxic assets so that private buyers become interested?

What would you recommend? I personally think the true free market approach is the best even though it will be painful in the short term.



The gains in C and BAC are real for the first two months.. but please keep shorting these stocks, you may be squeezed for everything you have



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   
I just googled and pasted the first site I came to...........

We "The People Have The Right To Know Where The Money Went"

www.newgeography.com...



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cloudsinthesky
I just googled and pasted the first site I came to...........

We "The People Have The Right To Know Where The Money Went"

www.newgeography.com...


What does that have to do with Big Ben?



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Fed Chairman Bernanke went to the Senate Budget Committee yesterday to testify. The Senators asked him at least four times, and in different ways, where he is burying the loot that is being shovelled his way. And, at least four times, he refused to answer.


discuss.epluribusmedia.net...

Geeeezzzz............I hate when I have to spell things out that have been in the mainstream media



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Desolate Cancer
Great analogy. I would say that maybe this is true and I geuss in this chemical fire the best thing to do is what? Let the fire burn itself out while trying to cordon off the area around it..... forget the analogy lets refer it to the real situation (I did like the analogy a lot though).

Do we take the free market approach & let the banks fail and then allow for the smaller banks who are solvent to rise up and take over the failed ones places, through mergers and acquisitions?

Do we do a govt supported free market approach and force the real pricing of the toxic assets so that private buyers become interested?

What would you recommend? I personally think the true free market approach is the best even though it will be painful in the short term.


Some chemical fires are so severe, or the chemicals involved so dangerous, that all you can do is cordon off the area and let them burn out.

Just two months ago I would have said to take the free market approach and let the insolvent banks fail so that smaller and/or new, healthy banks could take over.
I don't know if that would be enough, though. I think that would only be part of the solution. There are so many other factors in play, many of which revolve around us as a society.

No, not everyone in America deserves to own a house, to drive a new car every three years, or to have a big screen TV. Unfortunately that's become expected, and that has to change. We can't reinflate the bubble, but that's exactly what everyone wants to happen. They just want it to go back to the way it was 5 years ago and stay there forever. That's not sustainable. We have to get over ourselves.

We hear a lot in the news about "confidence;" there's no confidence in the market, confidence has to return, but how do you do that?
Regulation needs to make a swift and severe comeback when it comes to financial institutions and vehicles. No more under the counter derivatives. No more off balance sheet. No more accounting magic. The market knows that certain entities are insolvent, but because of all the prestidigitation involved from balance sheets to the boardroom, these entities are still alive in the manner of "Weekend at Bernie's." Yeah, I'd want to invest my money in a company that's only still in business because they know how to lie real well. I have no confidence that Bank X is in good shape, and as such I have no confidence that Bank Y, who happened to do pretty much exactly what Bank X did, is in good shape either.
Oh, the ratings agencies say that Company Z is a "buy?" Didn't that same ratings agency give MBS tranches 'investment grade' ratings just a couple years ago when they were chock full of subprime sludge?

We are a nation of consumers. We're a service economy.
What do we, in America, produce? Not a whole hell of a lot anymore. We consume. Most of our jobs are based around encouraging consumption, enabling consumption, or arranging that consumption materials make their way here. If we don't produce, we're never going to fully recover because America is tapped out.

I dunno. There's no easy solution to any of it and I don't envy anyone who's expected to make things all better. Right now it seems they just want to reinflate the bubble, or a bubble, any bubble - but, really, is that going to work? Not after the giant cluster-youknowwhat circling the globe. Who's going to invest in the next attempted bubble? Shoot, we haven't even realized the full effects of Alt-A mortgages (coming soon to a theater near you!) OR what is shaping up to be a hideous pile of poo from the CRE department. Who's going to invest in this crap to help us reinflate?
China'll buy Ts as long as it looks like the US will continue to exist as a country, but stuff like securities is dead in the water for the foreseeable future.

I suppose we need to let the Weekend at Bernie's companies unwind, get the bad debt out of the system, and rebuild with strict oversight and accountability - and never, ever let the toxic crap we've allowed to build up to happen ever again. We need to start producing here instead of importing everything, because that's the only thing sustainable.




Originally posted by GreenBicMan
The gains in C and BAC are real for the first two months.. but please keep shorting these stocks, you may be squeezed for everything you have

Perhaps you should educate yourself as to the meanings of EBIT and operational profits before you try to "educate" ATS, my friend.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by anachryon
 


Perhaps you should hit the books and come back with a more researched answer



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cloudsinthesky

Fed Chairman Bernanke went to the Senate Budget Committee yesterday to testify. The Senators asked him at least four times, and in different ways, where he is burying the loot that is being shovelled his way. And, at least four times, he refused to answer.


discuss.epluribusmedia.net...

Geeeezzzz............I hate when I have to spell things out that have been in the mainstream media


So, this is your second attempt..?

Wow, no bias in that article, but keep these links coming, they are showing you, like others, are easily herded into one opinion..



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Here is a link to interview for anyone who wants to watch it.

www.cbsnews.com...

Its interesting if nothing else.




top topics



 
1

log in

join