News & Analysis
The Bernanke Defense - Fail!
Bernanke (left) builds up a cushion as we dance on pins ... We are all of us balloons dancing in a world of pins, noted Sir Anthony Montague Browne, one of Winston Churchill's private secretaries. That seems to describe our economic condition. Share prices drop like stones in response to action by Greek civil servants, or an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, or an Israeli attempt to enforce its blockade against Hamas, or rumours that the Chinese regime is attempting to slow its economy. And then soar when Spain manages to borrow a few billion from unwary investors. Uncertainty is the order of the day. Which makes life difficult for economic forecasters, who are more comfortable basing their effusions on non-random, hard data that point in one direction. That happy circumstance is denied them. Just when the housing market seemed to be stabilising and the manufacturing sector to be recovering, along comes a report that only very few private-sector jobs were created last month. Retailers, seeing sales drop 1.2% in May, wonder just how much stuff they should order in anticipation of the Christmas season. And just when the financial sector is preparing to hire large numbers of laid-off workers, a 2,000-page financial regulation bill introduces an unnerving degree of uncertainty. Equally important, just when the American economy seems to be regaining its footing, news from Europe turns gloomy. Retrenchment is the order of the day; Germany refuses to stimulate domestic demand; the European Central Bank declines to loosen monetary policy to offset the new austerity programmes; and a shrivelled euro threatens the export market for American goods. – Times OnLine
Dominant Social Theme: The problems with Western economies are grave but not insurmountable if central bankers do the right thing.
Free-Market Analysis: It is so interesting to see the ways that people construct the various realities of modern day life – and their evolution. In our opinion, the London Times has gotten a lot more aggressive and honest in terms of covering the current economic crisis. This fits into our understanding of how elite messaging operates. As we tend to see it, the Anglo-American power elite uses the London Times as a mouthpiece (along The Economist newspaper and some others) to present theses that it wishes to promote. These have lately tacked hard toward libertarianism and frank acknowledgement of the West's financial mess.
In this article by Irwin Stelzer, we can certainly see a determination to acknowledge just how bad things are. This is necessary to set up the conclusion, which is of course not nearly so rational or forthright. Stelzer spends considerable time being blunt about the fix the West is in – but then when it is time to offer a conclusion, he pro-offers a predictable power-elite dominant social theme of the wise central banker. Who is Stelzer, anyway? Here is some background from Wikipedia:
Irwin M. Stelzer (born 1932) is an American economist who is the U.S. economic and business columinst for The Sunday Times (UK) The Courier-Mail The Guardian and a contributing editor of The Weekly Standard. He is also an occasional contributor to The Daily Telegraph. He resides in London and the United States. Stelzer has served as a managing director of the investment banking firm of Rothschild Inc and was co-founder and president of National Economic Research Associates, Inc which became NERA Economic Consulting and which was subsequently sold to Marsh & McLennan, Inc. ... Stelzer received his bachelor and master-of-arts degrees from New York University and his doctorate in economics from Cornell University. (- Wikipedia).
Quite a biography. And yet, despite Stelzer's obvious sophistication and economic knowledge, we can find areas of disagreement. We don't believe, for instance, that central banking is the antidote to the economic crisis or that individuals should be in charge of fixing the price of interest rates or the quantity of money. Not even bankers putatively as wise as Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. Here's some more from the article:
There is talk in Washington that soon after the November congressional elections the president's commission to reduce the deficit will come up with a combination of cuts in entitlement spending and increases in taxes, including some form of Vat. That will give Obama the occasion he needs to "pivot", as he calls changing course. If, as we now expect, the Democrats sustain heavy losses in the congressional race, the president will indeed pivot, and jettison profligacy for prudence, presenting himself to the electorate in 2012 as a born-again fiscal conservative. ...
Meanwhile, Bernanke, who says a double-dip recession "can't be entirely ruled out", will keep interest rates low. He wants to offset any budget tightening the president might be able to push through a Congress in which fiscally conservative Republicans have increased their presence, help the lagging jobs market to recover, give the economy a bit of a boost should the sinking euro cut into American exports, and buy some insurance against contagion rolling across the Atlantic.
That might, just might, make his forecast that the US will grow at an annual rate of 3.5% stand up to some of the harsher realities that have not yet been faced as the world economy pays the bills it ran up in the boom years. In short, Bernanke knows we are dancing on pins, and wants to have some recourse should we get a bit too heavy-footed and burst a balloon or two.
We can see, ultimately, in this editorial, an attempt to put the best possible light on Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve itself. The problems are spelled out clearly and then, as well, like a sub theme in a symphony, Obama's future fiscal moves are introduced. Stelzer has veiled contempt for these projected notions, and contrasts them unfavorably to what Bernanke has done and will doubtless do.
In fact, Bernanke is presented as a far-seer who is attempting not only to counteract various negative economic trends but must also deal with the destructive moves of fickle politicians. Yet Stelzer's approach is a non-starter in our view. In America, especially, the mythology of central banking is nearly as gutted as global warming. These fear-based promotions are punctured (like the balloons Stelzer refers to) and cannot in our estimation be re-inflated.
Let us be as blunt as Stelzer is in certain places in this article. We are curious as to how the power elite intends to defend its most basic memes, and always, these days, we are astonished by the responses. This article by Stelzer would have served its purpose at the end of the end of the 20th century but is a lamentable defense of central banking, in our humble opinion, in the 21st century.
From an investment standpoint, such articles deliver a kind of warning: The elite is running out of ammunition. This defense of central banking does not, for instance, attempt to explain how the world got into the state it is in (thanks to the very central banks that Stelzer is defending). Additionally, the article does not offer any radically new arguments for defenders of central banks to use.
The strategy is simply to push the thesis downfield (as we have discussed previously) and to thus realign the conversation so that it acknowledges the miserable reality of the economic situation with more frankness than previously. This is not so much a strategy however, as a cosmetic adjustment, the reapplication of an old playbook. The elite seems out of ideas. Could war be summoned as a final resort? (We have asked before.) Yet because of nuclear weapons, it may not be feasible to apply war as broadly or as violently as in the past.
The Internet continues to expose the promotional fictions that were so successful in organizing Western society in the 20th century. True, there are those who would argue that technology is ushering in an age of extreme control. But here at the Bell we have argued that technology is in a sense conspiring AGAINST those seeking total control of the West's sociopolitical systems and populations. Or at least that technology cuts both ways.
Conclusion: We suggest, as we have before that those who wish to be successful in the 21st century – professionally and from an investing standpoint – become dedicated meme watchers draw their own conclusions about the progress of elite fear-based promotions. From our perspective the elite is struggling and such articles as this one – analyzed above – do nothing to dissuade us.
Latest Daily Bell Articles
Feedback


Posted by Della Johnson on 06/29/10 03:36 PM
Reply from The Daily Bell
It is always difficult to revise misinformation that has been deliberately planted. Many have neither the courage or patience at any age. You are to be congratulated for your courage and perseverance. The more advanced in years you are, the more forcefully we offer our admiration.
Posted by Mark Voelker on 06/15/10 07:31 PM
Also important, is that when the crisis builds so that the average American is no longer comfortable enough to remain at rest, he/she will consider the Fed and its backers as likely culprits. No more invisibility for the kuroko (??).
By the way, the other half of the machine is the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, which keeps the share account books for the entire US financial market system. DTCC, like the Fed, is an officially private "self regulated" monopoly institution which conveniently never has to suffer a public third party audit. With the help of its shell holding corporation, Cede & Co., share ownership and quantity for any publicly traded company has become unverifiable by either shareholder or issuer. But hey...DTCC's management would never cook the books, right?
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks for this insightful commentary. ...
Posted by Mark Voelker on 06/15/10 07:04 PM
Reply from The Daily Bell
It will likely come in stages ...
Posted by Bruce C. on 06/15/10 05:12 PM
As far as auditing the FED, I can't get that excited about it. So what if the likes of Dodd and "the banking queen" get to see the books. (I highly doubt the contents would be made public. It would be reviewed in a committee only.) They, or their replacements, may not understand it or they may not be able " or even want " to act on what they learn. If organized crime is willing to kill/injure/destroy people for relative peanuts, why wouldn't world class financial sociopaths do the same to politicians?
Reply from The Daily Bell
Good point about Obama/fall guy meme. But they go in knowing what the deal is. Watch the way Obama "deals" with the "awesome responsibilities." He stays on the golf course.
![]() |
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 06/14/10 11:51 PM
Click to view link
Second, it would surprise me very much if a person with Dr. Stelzer's background were to offer a solution that departed radically from the existing banking structures; he is clearly a member of the old guard and isn't likely to promote radical approaches to world financial problems.
Honestly I found his discussion of the current problems superficial, hardly the incisive argument alluded to by the Bell. It hardly takes a man of his background to observe investors being wary of the casino gambling houses our so called 'markets' have become. I anticipate future growth in private banking as a result of our experiences over the past 15 years.
Reply from The Daily Bell
"Honestly I found his discussion of the current problems superficial, hardly the incisive argument alluded to by the Bell."
We didn't write it was incisive; we wrote it was fairly hard-hitting. It acknowledged grave problems and then was also fairly cutting about President Obama. It was a set up; Ben Bernanke was then contrasted a wise man. It was deliberate. We have read nothing else quite like it. We think it means something in terms of the larger discourse. That's our job here to try to point these things out, and we do it as best we can.
Posted by Weeble on 06/14/10 11:03 PM
Even thought the S&L crisis (post Dan Akroyd era) was a mighty fine bubble that burst (don't they all), a local credit union or S&L type place that has absolutely no pull, terrible interest rates, a silly focus on deposits, eye contact and and smiles as you enter, are good places to start. Although I am not currently living, working or driving through the USA, I think there are still some people smiling there. Look for a painted sign out front.
Posted by Sally Preston on 06/14/10 05:06 PM
Thank you.
Posted by Romey Ross on 06/14/10 11:12 AM
Click to view link
Click to view link
41st Congress, Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62; the Act of 1871;
federal corporation ; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ' purportedly only in District of Columbia ; established a second constitution, but this one is the "CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" instead of the original (organic) "Constitution for the United States of America" ; this is the basis for all U.S.C (UNITED STATES CODE) laws, for the Federal Reserve, IRS, BATFE, SS, etc. ;
more damage by the Trading With The Enemy Act (under Wilson), and the declared National Emergency of 09-March-1933 (under FDR) which has remained in perpetual effect to the current time ; all citizens' property put up for collateral, and essentially all employment indentured ;
equity law versus common law versus admiralty law (sometimes aka statutory law) ; two constitutions ' original (organic) & corporate
allodial title versus tenet on the land ; seizure under prize law ;
Click to view link
Click to view link
I look forward to seeing what you discover. I worry that we are so screwed that there may be no un-screwing . . . short of swabbing the decks clean, scraping the hull, re-fitting, and re-commissioning the vessel.
Reply from The Daily Bell
We have known of this information going on two decades now. What is needed is confirmation and publicity by a "respected" and "mainstream" legal entity or individual.
Posted by Lance E. Schultz on 06/14/10 11:07 AM
Posted by William on 06/14/10 10:26 AM
Until their re elections are directly dependent on main street interests, a dependency that has heretofore not come to pass as demonstrated by the passage of the health care bill in the face of majority opposition, we can expect lip service to main street with continued slavish actual service to private central banking and elite financial interests.
This is de facto economic fascism. Get used to it, because it is not going to change in substance until the tea party wins. Don't hold your breath. America is still far too comfortable to make the effort while the elite financial interests have virtually unlimited financing provided by the congress/Fed connection to see to it that their interests are preserved over any contingency.
The only leverage held by main street is the ability to deny the big banks use of their money, even in checking accounts and especially in retirement systems. Main street is going to have to turn to local regional banks not connected to the Federal Reserve system which presently sweeps small bank money into the big banks nightly for use in serving the financial elite who designed the Federal Reserve System. Look it up. Until the Federal Reserve System is denied the use of our money against us, main street is financing its own demise. Expecting Congress to help is like expecting a salesman to recommend the competition's better product. It's never going to happen.
It is now long past time to consider that the financial elite/Federal Reserve/Congress cabal is not main street's friend. Their power is increased by squeezing main street, which is why there will be no recovery until their power is broken. The present state of affairs is not an accident. Until main street wakes up, nothing is going to change for the better and, as history records, unless the power of the elite is broken, it can get unimaginably worse.
Reply from The Daily Bell
You may be correct. But many mistrust the Fed, more than in recent memory. We think that's evident ...
Posted by Chris F on 06/14/10 10:09 AM
80% of Americans want an Audit of the Fed. The Fed has gone from a secret bank that few knew about to being kicked out into the spotlight with all it's flaws exposed.
![]() |
Posted by Boatman on 06/14/10 07:40 AM
Posted by Puzzled on 06/14/10 06:54 AM
Posted by Mike on 06/14/10 06:26 AM
Posted by Floyd on 06/14/10 06:16 AM
Reply from The Daily Bell
Still - an audit is an audit ...
Posted by Steve H on 06/14/10 03:38 AM
It can be argued that the majority of people in the West are being asked to leave the fiat gravy train and are starting to ask "why?"
Alot aren't sure where to look bui Increasingly they are finding the answers in the alternative media.
Synapsetastic!
Posted by John Danforth on 06/14/10 02:07 AM
I'm not so sure, just yet. Perhaps a few percent of the people have been awakened, and it's spreading like wildfire. Something I thought I'd never see in my lifetime. Still, it's only a few percent of the population at present.
For most people the revelation, when it finally sinks in, is a life-altering experience. There is disbelief at the audacity of such a Grand Lie. It's like learning that there is no Santa Claus after all.
Reply from The Daily Bell
80% Favor Auditing the Federal Reserve
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Eighty percent (80%) of Americans now agree with Congress that auditing the Federal Reserve Board is a good idea, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
Just nine percent (9%) oppose an audit of the Fed, and 12% more are not sure.
This marks little change from December. But it's up five points from last July when Congressman Ron Paul's proposal began to gain steam in Congress.
Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has consistently opposed such an audit of the Fed's monetary policies, but it's included in the major financial regulatory legislation now being pushed through Congress. Forty-six percent (46%) of Americans oppose more government regulation of the U.S. financial system, but 37% are in favor of it. Just 27% favor giving the Fed more regulatory control over the financial system.
The survey of 1,000 U.S. Adults was conducted on May 21-22, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Investors support an audit of the Fed even more strongly than non-investors.
Click to view link






