It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Bernanke forgot the US used to be debt-free [video]

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 08:07 AM
Watch this video to see how incompetent and ignorant the head of the Federal Reserve really is.

At the semi-annual Monetary Policy Report hearing in Congress yesterday[March 1, 2011], Chairman of The Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke smiles like a kid that has just been caught with his hand in the cookie jar when Senator Mark Kirk gives him a history lesson on currencies and federal debt

Kirk: Although i will say we had a currency for many years, without federal debt
Bernanke: Ummmm...when was that?

With this level of intellect at his level, and his apparent lack of concern, it's no surprise that our economy and dollar are in horrible shape.
edit on 6-3-2011 by BenIndaSun because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 08:16 AM
If Bernake is saying that he doesn;t think the US can be debt free, he is saying the truth, it can't

But the really sick thing is that he is not saying it from an OH NO BAD NEWS point of view. Secretly he will be saying HAHAHAHAH we have you now,


1, Who issues all the "debt" i.e. money to the US Gov - Federal Reserve
2, How issued all the bail out money i.e. Debt = Federal Reserve
3, Who collects all the interest payments? - Federal Reserve
4, Who is manipulating the market price of gold and silver making it impossible for the US Treasury to be in a possibility to print it own money based on gold whilst paying off the debt - Federal Reserve
4, Who sets the interest rates at which the US government has to repay for it's debts - Federal Reserve
5, If IF all the captial debt was paid back, there would be NO MONEY in circulation not one penny, and the US Gove would still be in debt for the interest of the capital, which means that it would default.

As Ron Paul says this is a defacto state of bankruptcy, and the Fed has put the US in this position, under the noses of the US people. But don't worry you're not the only ones in the position. it's just you debt and interest payments are enough to keep Ben in beard trimmers and head wax for about the next 3 trillion years!!. No wonder he is smiling!!

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:51 AM
The US is debt free.

American's have been forced to get car insurance since the 50's when the Federal Highways were made. For decades Generations of Americans have been paying into those bonds until they died. There are Hundreds of Trillions that were put into those bonds.

Those Bonds were used to invest in countries around the the dollar amount is in the Quadrillions on that money invested alone.

We ain't really been spending what we've said we were spending on DOD and Veterans Affairs. Their money has been invested abroad since Trumans idea to use their money to loan countries abroad to buy our military hardware with the Foreign Sales Program. They have hundreds of Trillions from those investments.

If we pulled all of our money from all countries we invested in there would be no country with any currency. Therefor we have no debt. We own the world. Funny isn't it?
edit on 6-3-2011 by Pervius because: Odd thought isn't it?

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 11:18 AM
reply to post by Pervius

Except that the "money" loaned out is based on nothing, produced from nothing and has interest applied against it, all by the Federal Reserve meaning that it can never be repaid. He knows this, and as a private company is well pleased at the best revenue stream his company could ever have had.

At the end of the day, it's not his problem that the US Gov has so much debt, they were the ones that went cap in hand to the Fed in the first place.

Maybe these congressional affairs committees should remember that the Fed is not part of government. and that is why Bernanke is smirking!!

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 11:19 AM
reply to post by Pervius

Odd alien induced double post!!
edit on 6/3/2011 by JakiusFogg because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 08:52 PM
reply to post by BenIndaSun

Umm... he's right? .. There has never been a time when the US had no debt. In fact there was a period after our founding where debt was considered astronomical and out of control. There was another time where our debt led to the complete loss of our Gold stores. Our time of lowest debt, though not zero, was in the 1830's. By far the worst being in the 1940's, 1946 specifically.

Yes.. you can still have National Debt under the Gold Standard, or any other standard, or any fiat currency. Debt has plagued nations since before Rome.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 08:54 PM
The USA has always had debt. In fact it has been much worse than this before I believe. Such an instance would be WW2 and I also think right around Jackson's presidency.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 08:59 PM
yea that was a couple days ago, i saw it live... not in HD tho.

it's at least jaw-dropping

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:01 PM
I was off on the Jackson comment. Came about 30 years after him.

Regardless, here is the US Debt to GDP Graph. Looks like the highest was in the 50's.


posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:40 PM

Originally posted by Dance4Life
I was off on the Jackson comment. Came about 30 years after him.

Regardless, here is the US Debt to GDP Graph. Looks like the highest was in the 50's.


Would it be fair to make this assessment:

World War II drive the debt high against GDP and then the post-war boom with manufacturing of white goods and emergence of an affluent middle class drove it back down? By contrast, now there is a much lower manufacturing base and with jobs having moved offshore, and now the debt is being addressed through monetary expansion and policies and manipulation than it is by a robust manufacturing sector.
edit on 6-3-2011 by surrealist because: Spelling mistake

edit on 6-3-2011 by surrealist because: Added comments

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:48 PM
reply to post by Dance4Life

Nope, 40's, WWII, 1946 was the highest peak of debt to GDP.
50's did see a recession, but deflating debt.

post-war boom with manufacturing of white goods and emergence of an affluent middle class drove it back down?

After the war manufacturing dropped off a cliff, and hundreds of thousands were laid off. The real boom of building came with rebuilding Europe, as well as being the largest manufacturing base in the World at the time.. if you needed machinery you bought US, but it didn't kick in till the mid 60's. The 50's are portraited as a time of affluence in the US, but it really wasn't.. our dollar was strong, so goods were cheap compared to wages, but from 1950-1960 approx 3 years were spent in recession periods. We also had government spending on the Korean War, a war that we lost.

However you are right in that the economy was completely different, and because of it, jobs will fuel growth. Now however the move is toward more production with fewer Humans needed, thus lowering the wage value of every Human in the work force.. essentially, we can see economic growth without worrying about unemployment, but at the same time the actual bulk of our so called economy is "consumerism" in which we need poor people paid enough to buy the garbage the corporations produce.

IMO, it's inadvisable to compare this recession with any in the past, and the compare the Federal reaction to it with previous cases or other nations experiences.. because no one has any idea what's going to happen.
edit on 3/6/2011 by Rockpuck because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 09:52 AM
reply to post by Rockpuck

Your first paragraph is an interesting one RP.

I was having the same conversation with someone else earlier about the manufacturing jobs that used to be in the USA. These jobs being currently phased out here and minimally brought back in other less industrialized countries.

My argument was that these jobs are not "efficient" anymore, and it is actually to the USA benefit that we got rid of these jobs. An example being that we can use technology more efficiently ( as in the case of building cars ) and not have to worry about paying pensions and insurance (..etc..) to these median wage earners.

Moving forward, my idea is that within 100 years you will need to be a specialist in something in order to be in demand anymore. This will most likely be best in some sort of programming technology, but also could be an exterminator, if you are highly skilled that is. There will be no more classic "manufacturing" jobs, as technology has made them all much too inefficient.

I think these types of careers are far in the rear view mirror.

new topics

top topics


log in