Ben "Helicopter" Bernanke - "The FED caused the Great Depression"

Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
117,537
Ron Paul vindicated yet again.

Quotes from a speech given by Helicopter Ben in 2002:

At a Nov. 8, 2002, conference to honor Friedman's 90th birthday, Bernanke, then a Federal Reserve governor, gave a speech at Friedman's old home base, the University of Chicago. Here's a bit of what Bernanke, the man who now runs the Fed – and thus, one of the most powerful people in the world – had to say that day:

Thus the Fed saw no particular need to try to stem the panics. At the same time, the large banks – which would have intervened before the founding of the Fed – felt that protecting their smaller brethren was no longer their responsibility. Indeed, since the large banks felt confident that the Fed would protect them if necessary, the weeding out of small competitors was a positive good, from their point of view.

In short, according to Friedman and Schwartz, because of institutional changes and misguided doctrines, the banking panics of the Great Contraction were much more severe and widespread than would have normally occurred during a downturn. …

Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.


http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59405
 
That is the biggest load of crap I have EVER heard......

We didn't increase the money supply enough during the depression so It was the Fed's fault???.....we wont do it again....???

You already have.....but even WORSE THAN BEFORE.......

The money supply is key indicator.....

During the 70's Nixon increased the money supply by 20% leading to what happened then.

During the depression the money supply was increased 40+% under FDR leading to the depression......

Our current criminal government has increased the money supply 60%+ with more to come......

Let the cards fall where they may......

HELICOPTOR BEN.....IF YOU REALLY THINK INCREASING THE MONEY SUPPLY HIGHER THAN 40% LIKE DURING THE DEPRESSION.......YOU ARE INSANE OR INCAPABLE OF RATIONAL THOUGHT.......

THERE IS ONLY 1 POSSIBLE ENDING TO WHAT YOU ARE DOING.....HYPERINFLATION FOLLOWED BY DEFLATION......
 
Last edited:
Ah yes, Bernanke. Along with Greenspan, Jim Rogers has colorfully referred to these Fed chairman as idiots, on CNBC (you gotta love Jim for that. :D )

Many of Jim Rogers' economic ideas are nearly exactly like that of Ron Paul's word for word (and he is most certainly an avid Paul supporter). But... I managed to reread an interview with him on the book "Market Wizards" by Jack Schwager, and here's what he has to say:

"The idea that gold has always been the great store of value is absurd. There have been many times in history when gold has lost purchasing power - sometimes for decades"

(True, but when TSHTF, it certainly seems to be the currency of last resort)

and

"Well, damn, for 5000 years [Gold] has not been different from every other commodity. There have been periods when gold has been very bullish, and other periods when it has gone down for many years. There is nothing mystical about it. It has been a store of value, but so has wheat corn copper -- everything. All these things have been around for thousands of years. Some are more valuable than others, but they are all commodities. They always have been and they always will be."

Which makes me curious what Rogers' stance on fiat money is...
 
Last edited:
I remember hearing Jim Rogers say last year that a gold standard currency has never worked--in fact, no monetary system has ever worked--because government, politicians and banks are always messing around with it. I agree. I don't know if he's a proponent of 100% reserve gold system, but he seems like a competing currencies type of guy.

Which makes me curious what Rogers' stance on fiat money is...
He's always saying that fiat currencies are flawed, some are just less flawed than others (meaning, some haven't been as debased as others). So who knows, I'd very much like to know more of his thoughts on this subject.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top