Charlie Rose

SharkswithfrikingLazers  03/24/2013 04:23 PM Report

Charlie, where is this update on the Federal Reserve?

"The amount of money the central bank parceled out was surprising even to Gary H. Stern, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis from 1985 to 2009, who says he “wasn’t aware of the magnitude.” It dwarfed the Treasury Department’s better-known $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP.

Add up guarantees and lending limits, and the Fed had committed $7.77 trillion as of March 2009 to rescuing the financial system, more than half the value of everything produced in the U.S. that year."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billi on-in-income.html

($8T? EIGHT TRILLION!!! Is the Fed now floating the stock market and creating the grand illusion of recovery? Will this be like "Argo" and we will have to wait 22 years to see the movie to get the story? Charlie, probability says our life spans won't make the wait so please ask now.)

charliesheep  03/23/2013 11:42 AM Report

THE WORLD'S A SALAD OF LIARS; SANS THE BALLS TO DO WHAT REALLY TAKES TO GIVE AWAY THEIR WORLDLY GOODS; TO EACH OTHER-HENCE, THE SELFISH DO SPAWN AND GROW, LIKE CONTAGION--THE-- COMING OF THE "LORD" CHANGES ONLY THOSE WHO ARE ALREADY-READY! HOLD UP THE STOP SIGN- THE BUS STOPS FOR IDIOTS -THE EXPRESS TO ?

tabs  03/22/2013 03:13 PM Report

NCP4:

Panic ensues when men lose the continuity of the narrative.

tabs  03/22/2013 03:02 PM Report

NCP3:

The following was written and posted on 3/17/13 as an editorial of sorts to another comment board.

The Fat Lady is warming up in the wings.

There is a notion among a great many Americans that all we need to do is get rid of President Obama, his acolytes,his policies and in their place institute common sense business friendly policies which will get America back to work. Conversely there are an equal number of American's that believe that if only America could be rid of an intransgent Republican House that obstructs reasonable, sensible and responsible Progressive policies that places greater emphasis and control in the hands of a central governmental role, that America would once again be prosperous.

However this is fallacious wishful thinking in laying the blame for the current malaise on a single causality. The problems facing America and the Global economy are many and varied. For America has transitioned itself from being a manufacturing economy to a service economy poorly with short term goals being paramount while long term thinking and planning has been bereft of virtually any planning or policy making.

More than that has plagued America in the last half of century, but a hubris of the powerful and wealthy has set in which has corroded the American soul and denied the reality that Global competition was encroaching upon America's post WW2 economic hegemony. That no matter what policies would replace an Obama doctrine or Republican intransgence, "It just won't be like it was," as Americans just don't display the same virtues of character that they once did. Instead Americans have placed their faith and future in the hands of a leadership that proclaims that,"it is a shame that a RICH nation like America has 45 million people without HC." And even after four years of struggling with a sluggish economy, high unrelievable unemployment and sky high deficit spending leading to an unsustainable sovereign debt burden the President has the arrogant hubris to proclaim that there is, "No debt problem."

In 2008 the illusion of American know how and economic hegemony was brought low by the financial collapse of the US financial system. Which was only saved belatedly by a stricken Presidential plea of, "We are in a melt down crisis." and a Congress which was so dysfunctional that it took two attempts to pass a "life saver" of a TARP bill. This was the defining moment for America. as CONFIDENCE in the American way was dispelled globally. From that moment on not only America but the world has had to reconcile a new normal in the process of establishing a new era of diminished American power.

So the question becomes what has America done since the great economic crisis of 2008 to rectify its problems? The answer is very simple, America has continued on with business as usual. Which on the political front has resulted in greater rather than lessor divisive polarity and dysfunctionality of the body politic as they argue over the diminished spoils of the national Treasury. While the Federal Reserve Bank covers a dysfunctional body politic by propping up a moribund economy with monetary policy. This state of affairs has consequences in that the world due to America's predominante political and economic position suffers increased turmoil and chaos as uncertainity increases. As such evermore desperate fiscal and monetary policies are enacted to maintain an equilibrium in both national and international economic/financial systems. The question that then comes to mind is when does confidence errode to the point that panic ensues?

Gelles  03/21/2013 08:08 PM Report

"Elon Musk (born 28 June 1971) is a South African-born American entrepreneur. He is best known for founding SpaceX, and co-founding Tesla Motors and ..."--from Wikipedia: I spelled his name correctly.

Dean Kamen, now age 60+, is also spelled right. His story is chock full of genius.

I'll stop here. Check all these types of people out. They are our Benjamin Franklin's. Skip the Benedict Arnold's.

Gelles  03/21/2013 07:46 PM Report

In theory, Ben Bernanke could supply the liquidity and Barack Obama could supply the productivity to balance DEMAND to SUPPLY and balance SUPPLY to our energy and defense essentials.

But in practice, congress is supposed to spend the money and the private sector is supposed to develop the energy and defense resources to keep us ahead of shortages that might otherwise move us down as China and others move up in industrial power and global influence.

You would never guess from reading the comments here and hearing the interview to which they refer, that this was a new era and hyper mass production was in our future--not a repeat of the 20th Century.

True, I often remark that we appear to have learned nothing between 1939 and 2013. But our technologists have learned more than anyone would have predicted in that long period of change.

The instinct of Maynard Keynes, however, remains the true direction finder: money cannot be the flaw in the system that will enrich every human being at the speed of light.

Money is not a function of debt, it is a function of distribution for output we can't do without. Food, water, homes, and weapons to prevent another Hitler, are on the menu. America is the arsenal of democracy and all the ignorance among those who disagree with me cannot stop our progress or alter our mission that Obama and Bernanke are being forced to perceive at last.

Remnant is a remnant from the past. He has read history and understands none of it. Does he really wish for the predictions he hints are possible? I don't think so. I believe he is just so blind to what is happening around the world that he does not notice how close we are to reform of language, logic, law and money that only decades away will be the end of scarcity and all the nonsense we have built with that sad condition in the driver's seat.

Charlie Rose offers what Johnny Carson never did: an opportunity to think about architecture, engineering, production and common sense. This nation was born with slavery as the cancer in our bones. We still have wage slavery as a fading companion. Machines that need little of the time of the future's children to do the grubby work and all of their time to improve our language, logic, law and money, are taking over. With leaders like Dean Kamen, Ray Kurzweil, Elon Musk, and Peter Deamandis and countless others, whose examples show the way, we will get over the disease of ignorance that ties our hands behind our back. (Please excuse mis-spellings--my systems is kind of flaky and may crash if I interrupt this typing with available correctives.)

tabs  03/21/2013 06:18 PM Report

NCP2:

One is struck by the dicotomy that one is hearing as of late in the media. On one hand we hear of a stronger economy ahead, that unemployment, corporate earnings and the RE market is improving and all is looking like the Green Shoots of Spring are here again. Then as we watch the daily news cast we see Cyprus, hear from Grantham, Simpson Bolles, or watch the CNBC interview of Langon, Drunkenmiller, Warsh, and Carmel on how the economy is now being rigged by the Federal Reserve with its QE3 Infinity monetary policy and the dire back end consequences of a debased/devalued/diluted USD.

To give Mr Bernanke a break today, he has been dealt the deuce, seven off suit by the DC Playa's in the Big Poker game. So Mr Bernanke is forced to cover the dysfunctionality of the DC Playa's and the possiblity of the game going bust, by raising the bet with the implementation of QE3.

Isn't it interesting that since all of this talk about the dire back end consequences of QE3, that the chatter has evolved into how and when the Federal Reserve will begin to wind down QE3 and its balance sheet. Here we hear about 1937 and the 12% growth per annum that the US economy did from 1934 through 1936 and then the great pull back of stimulus in 37 that renewed the Depression. Did anyone ever think that the US economy was rebounding in those years because the pendlum had swung too far in one direction and it was a economy swinging back after being stablizied, rather than a result of Stimulus policy alone?

SharkswithfrikingLazers  03/21/2013 05:57 PM Report

Alan says more like 2% than 3% growth in GDP this year.

Jeremy Grantham says more like 1%.

So Charlie perhaps ask Alan about Jeremy's figures of 1.3 percent productivity, treating an increase in resource cost as a boost to GDP when we should deduct about 0.5% and only a 0.2 percent increase in hours offered to the workforce (women in workforce peaked in 2000 and population not spurting upward).

SharkswithfrikingLazers  03/21/2013 05:43 PM Report

Alan offers to grade the Fed: A+ on inflation and D- on employment.

The Fed's quantitative easing measures actually have saved or created more than 2 million jobs, according to the Fed's economists.

So is saving jobs part of that grade of D-?

(Professors and grading . . . hmpf.)

SharkswithfrikingLazers  03/21/2013 05:39 PM Report

The Federal Reserve actually has created new money by expanding its balance sheet. The Fed earned a $77.4 billion profit last year, most of which it gave to the U.S. government.

So that's pretty good. What rate of return are we talking about and how can we citizens follow the FED?

SharkswithfrikingLazers  03/21/2013 05:37 PM Report

We are told that there simply aren't any tools left in the Fed's toolkit to be able to help job growth.

However, some economists have noted that the Fed could target a higher inflation rate to stimulate job growth.

The Fed, however, has ruled this option out -- for now.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  03/21/2013 05:21 PM Report

We hear that business is hiring equipment instead of workers.

What does this mean--"60 Minutes" is right about robots?

SharkswithfrikingLazers  03/21/2013 05:19 PM Report

We hear that our financial sector is really big compared to the rest of the size of our economy.

Charlie, might we restrain the size of our fiscal sector?

Is a large fiscal sector like a large standing army?

tabs  03/21/2013 01:46 PM Report

Ahhhh...Mission Control We have a problem!

Mr Bernanke says there is a "Housing Recovery." Sam Zell the RE Tycoon says that there are 4M to 6M Foreclousures that the Banks are sitting on in the United States. RE prices at the begining of 2012 were begining to "tumble down" in price when the number of Foreclosures on the market were reduced in number, this lack of inventory has caused the rise in home prices and thus the housing recovery which has helped the general economy.

Now the Banks have all those homes sitting in inventory and are they about to unleash a flood of them into the market? The question then becomes, what will that do to the recovery in RE prices and how will that then affect the general economic recovery?

REMant  03/21/2013 12:44 PM Report

As soon as Bernanke stops printing money to buy Treasuries, the govt loses a major part of its funding and interest rates rise astronomically, along with them, prices, the markets crash and the country probably descends into chaos like Cyprus, with the govt looking for a scapegoat to justify starting it up again. That's what happened in the latter half of the '30s, (and probably in the late 1850s and 2001).

However, his wiggle room is reduced as asset inflation mounts with the money's depreciation. You can't just refinance ad infinitum without something happening and we are beyond something already.

While money may not produce "growth" in the economy, it sure does produce growth in prices. Unfortunately the Keynesians wouldn't see it if it smacked them in the kisser. All the signs are that this "recovery" is precisely the same as that which caused this crisis in the first place and like that which occurred in the mid-30s for the same reasons. And where would you expect excessive artificially-contrived wealth to go except into plant, equipment, and construction, if not gold, real estate, and commodities?

Keynesians like Blinder and Leonhardt (and Bernanke, too, if he's honest) will of course also have to argue that the spending is necessary in order to continue the money printing. The two are inseparable in a situation like this. So they trot out the old canard about "austerity."

As those in the 19th c examining its panics realized, the demand for money and credit increases rapidly just before a crash as its value depreciates. Thus the precipitous rise in prices, particularly of money itself. What we are seeing as the stock mkt rises is the diminishing opportunity for returns, bidding up prices, and it surely is not being generated by by the former. It's an indication that we are as an economy getting poorer, not wealthier. Only a mercantilist could think that, because possession not production is what matters to them.

If Bernanke were really as smart as he's been made out to be, he'd get the hell out of there and leave Yellen, who I gather would be the heir apparent, for we must have ppl like Obama's mom in govt, to take the rap.