Nice. I was almost terrified of Twitter being the "entity" of the year. Or worse, "cute animals" and some long thought piece on the impact of "cute" on the world.
@psybab: Surprised kitty represents the joy and shock of anyone living in the midst of this global economic downturn. With hands that come out of nowhere—shades of Adam Smith’s "invisible hand"—this adorable little kitten is simultaneously new to the world, terrified of the world and ready to take on the world that it was born into: The financial hellscape of 2009.
When one looks at this surprised kitty, they are looking at a mirror if themselves.
Anticipatory question: shouldn't the people who think Bernanke is single-handedly destroying our country be the biggest backers of this obvious pick? I mean gosh, the guy who's orchestrating the New World Order plan to create one central bank to make us slaves to the Bilderberg Zionist Marxist Illuminati cabal (scary Jews!) is surely important enough for a frickin' magazine cover. I better not see any complaining, Alex Jones, much less a return to that Joker-by-way-of-John-Wayne-Gacy facepaint that creeped us out earlier this year.
I dunno, maybe they're all still too busy looking for tell-tale freemason symbolism in Lady GaGa videos.
@the tiniest mexican: I'm fine with Bernake creating a New World Order if he wants to, (shit, everyone needs a hobby) as long as he fucking raises interest rates soon, so the dollar stops sliding.
His policies have essentially increased the prices of everything I buy by 37 percent this year.
We have trillions of dollars in debt. Not just Federally - at the consumer level.
That debt goes away in one of two ways. Method one? Pay it off, in real terms. Method two? "Monetize" it, by decreasing the real value of dollars. Since debts are dollar-denominated, inflation makes them easier to pay. Ben, and Keynesians, are responsible for engaging in the latter strategy.
@drunkexpatwriter: Our country has given a lot of cheap talk about a 'strong dollar policy.' Bullocks. We have not had a strong dollar policy in over a decade.
I sympathize with your plight living overseas and the costs surrounding that. You probably are not paid in Euros (did Gawker pay your prize money in Euros? that would have been sporting of them.) Our family loves the south of France, but the weak dollar doesn't make that an attractive place to visit right now. Boo. I want to go back to Uzes and Eze. Maintenant.
@momof3wildkids: I'm paid in dollars - which is why I'd really, really like Bernake to raise interest rates - because every time he does that the dollar gets stronger and it gets easier to pay my rent.
Gawker hasn't paid me my prize money yet.
You should consider a vacation in Spain. Even with the strong Euro the Spanish economy is so fucked that it's still dirt cheap to vacation there.
I'm doing a long weekend in Madrid next month and the difference between what I'll spend on beer, cigarettes and food during that weekend compared to what I'd spend home in France will end up paying for my hotel room.
@drunkexpatwriter: I do like Spain, particularly Barcelona. I just really miss France terribly. Love the markets, love the people, love the food and wine. Plus, mrmomof3 and I want to bring the kids back to France. It has been so long since they have been there that they have no recollection of it. My son would be particularly fascinated by Pont du Gard and I'd love him to see it.
@drunkexpatwriter: Clearly we need an economic policy designed to benefit Americans living abroad.
@momof3wildkids: The cheap talk about a strong dollar policy is just that: cheap talk intended to assuage the fears of those (like China) who own US debt and dollar foreign reserves that we aren't going to totally fuck them. Of course, I can certainly also sympathize with the tragedy of your family not being able to summer in a villa in the south of France.
We don't even have any household debt but as someone who will most likely be paying taxes for at least the next 40 years, reducing the national debt in real terms sounds kickin' rad to me.
@Dare To No: Villa=house, you tool -- cheaper than a hotel. Summer? Nope, we spend about a week there.
Of course reducing the national debt by fucking over the value of the dollar takes priority over my vacationing in Provence (where it used to be very inexpensive to travel - cheaper than a trip to Florida). A cheap dollar policy has dubious long term benefits to our economy.
@Dare To No: Of course, a stronger dollar would also make most products cheaper for everyone in America as well.
Call me crazy, but cheaper fruit in the winter would benefit a good number of people, as would cheaper gasoline, clothing, etc... all of which is currently at an inflated price in America because of the weak dollar.
@momof3wildkids: A weak dollar makes almost everything more expensive for people in America.
People don't realize how much of the stuff they buy is in some way imported. From fruit and vegetables in the winter to oil to clothing - nearly everything is imported at some point in the process and if your currency is weak you have to spend more of your currency to buy things.
Dare to No apparently likes paying more than he has to for things.
@drunkexpatwriter: Do you not understand the circularity of the strong dollar / balance of trade phenomenon? As Frank Sobotka would say, "We used to make shit in this country, build shit. Now we just put our hand in the next guy's pocket." The reason we don't make shit anymore and instead import everything is because for decades it's been increasingly cheap to import it, due in large part to the strong dollar.
And yes, I do pay more than I have to for things all the time. For example, I buy regionally- and sustainably-produced food whenever possible (hooray roots and tubers!). I do this because I prefer the taste and nutrition but also because I value the craft of my fellow citizens and our natural resources.
Everything in life can be reduced to an economic choice, but that doesn't mean it needs to be.
An exploding national debt, a (financially and morally) bankrupt knowledge economy, and a culture that selects Ben Bernanke as Person of the Year are the features of America today. Is that the society that you want to live in? (Well, I guess not, since you don't.)
Before you talk about the relative wealth of America, remember that the previous 40 years of affluence hasn't been paid for yet and sooner or later the bill will come due.
@Dare To No: And you think a weak dollar will make it cheaper to pay off these debts?
Have you seen what's happened historically to other countries when they let their currency become weak? Read about the history of Argentina, or Germany.
@drunkexpatwriter: There's a difference between a gradual, controlled depreciation and a panicked default and devaluation. There are also many complicating factors in those cases you're ignoring, such as debt levels and currency pegs.
Nevertheless, you're right in one accidental sense: if we don't do something controlled while we still can, that's the direction we're headed.
Oh, and read about the history of Brazil or China, asshole.
@drunkexpatwriter: One other thing that most people do not realize is that even if one lives abroad, you still pay US taxes. So drunkexpatwriter has as much right to bitch and moan about US economic policy as any of us living in the US of A.
@momof3wildkids: I think we're all forgetting that one of the main reasons the dollar is worth less and less every year is that there are more dollars created year after year, causing inflation. The Fed prints more money, more dollars are put into circulation, and everyone's money is worth less. But there's more of it going around, so better get your share. The ship rises and falls with the ocean level.
Bernanke is fucking us. This discussion reminds me of an Onion headline from a little while back "Federal Reserve Exposed for the giant scam it actually is" or something.
Well, it's better than sticking a piece of aluminum foil on the cover and saying that You are the Person of the Year.
Personally, I voted for Jay Mariotti.
@drunkexpatwriter: The selection is not necessarily the most wonderful or effective person but one who, for better or for worse, had the most influence on the world during the year.
@son of spam: Right, but that wasn't Bernake. Paulson had as much effect on the economy as anyone and what really stopped this whole thing (while I hate to say it) is when the Bush people started pumping out money to financial institutions and letting people know we wouldn't let these major banks fall.
Bernake's control is somewhat limited and he didn't do anything about the credit crunch (even though that was totally in his power, because he could have set interest rates at a somewhat higher level, which would have given banks more incentive to lend money) so the economy is getting better but still teetering.
If I was going to give a Person of the Year award out to anyone for saving the Global Financial System it would be to the banking CEOs who managed to generate record profits this year and pay back the TARP money - thus restoring a shitload of long term confidence.
Though, really a more interesting choice would have been Glenn Beck - because while he's an asshole, he helped transform the political discourse while enabling the GOP to effectively nuke real health care.
Again, it's not good that Beck did that, but it had more influence on the year's events than Bernake did.
@drunkexpatwriter: Agreed. The biggest single action was Paulson allowing his competitor Lehman to fail. That was when the dam broke. (But that was 2008.) Bernanke gets a lot of credit for calming the waters - you couldn't have scripted a better 60 Minutes segment - but he wouldn't have been my choice either.
The fact that these guys are in such a rush to pay back the TARP $ tells me that the plan didn't work as expected. By paying it back, liquidity is reduced in the lending markets.
@son of spam: It reduces liquidity but shores up long term confidence because if people know that when there is trouble and we have to give them money that it will get paid back quickly and not go into a black hole it will make it easier to sell the idea of bailing them out again if another fuck up happens 10 years from now.
The next step is to make it profitable for banks to lend money to small businesses and consumers again. I suspect raising benchmark interest rates would go a long way in this direction.
With just a little extra credit out there, companies might be able to sell off a good deal of their backstock inventory which would give them reasons to hire more people to manufacture new inventory, which would put more money into the system, leading to more sales and hiring, etc...
I get that that couldn't happen while we were propping up banks like an Argentinian despot, but now even Citigroup (or whatever they are called these days) is going to pay back stuff, so let's help them profit from consumer and small business lending practices.
@drunkexpatwriter: Good points. I would argue that the implied assistance of the US government if future bailouts are needed is in fact a moral hazard.
And, let's face it, it's no fun doing business with the government. Too many strings are attached, particularly when it comes to compensation rules. That's why they paid it off in a hurry.
Let's let consumers and small businesses drastically reduce their debt burdens. Then we can stop relying on long-term financial slavery of the middle class as the basis of our "economy."
@son of spam: Which is why it's good that the strings were attached.
The implied assistance is a moral hazard, but, on the other hand, if it stops bank runs in the future it's practical.
As far as I can tell money, the economy, the stock market, all of it is simply about confidence. If it takes a moral hazard to create that confidence I can accept that compromise.
The promise of assistance is, in and of itself, a moral hazard.
The housing bubble, for example, was fueled by the implicit Treasury banking of GSE's - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They rapidly took on mortgage portfolios that dwarfed the rest of the world. Implicit government banking creates too much "money."
Now that all major commercial banks are subject to the same protections, the size of previous asset bubbles will be nothing but a quaint memory.
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
When one looks at this surprised kitty, they are looking at a mirror if themselves.
This kitty is America. And surprised we are.
12/16/09
12/16/09
In the last second of life, they're gonna show you how
How they run this show, sure, run it into the ground
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
I dunno, maybe they're all still too busy looking for tell-tale freemason symbolism in Lady GaGa videos.
12/16/09
His policies have essentially increased the prices of everything I buy by 37 percent this year.
12/16/09
You can't monetize debt by making money expensive.
12/16/09
12/16/09
We have trillions of dollars in debt. Not just Federally - at the consumer level.
That debt goes away in one of two ways. Method one? Pay it off, in real terms. Method two? "Monetize" it, by decreasing the real value of dollars. Since debts are dollar-denominated, inflation makes them easier to pay. Ben, and Keynesians, are responsible for engaging in the latter strategy.
12/16/09
I sympathize with your plight living overseas and the costs surrounding that. You probably are not paid in Euros (did Gawker pay your prize money in Euros? that would have been sporting of them.) Our family loves the south of France, but the weak dollar doesn't make that an attractive place to visit right now. Boo. I want to go back to Uzes and Eze. Maintenant.
12/16/09
Gawker hasn't paid me my prize money yet.
You should consider a vacation in Spain. Even with the strong Euro the Spanish economy is so fucked that it's still dirt cheap to vacation there.
I'm doing a long weekend in Madrid next month and the difference between what I'll spend on beer, cigarettes and food during that weekend compared to what I'd spend home in France will end up paying for my hotel room.
12/16/09
Maybe next year. Feckin dollar.
12/16/09
12/16/09
I propose a toast to a stronger dollar.
12/16/09
@momof3wildkids: The cheap talk about a strong dollar policy is just that: cheap talk intended to assuage the fears of those (like China) who own US debt and dollar foreign reserves that we aren't going to totally fuck them. Of course, I can certainly also sympathize with the tragedy of your family not being able to summer in a villa in the south of France.
We don't even have any household debt but as someone who will most likely be paying taxes for at least the next 40 years, reducing the national debt in real terms sounds kickin' rad to me.
12/16/09
Of course reducing the national debt by fucking over the value of the dollar takes priority over my vacationing in Provence (where it used to be very inexpensive to travel - cheaper than a trip to Florida). A cheap dollar policy has dubious long term benefits to our economy.
12/16/09
Yes!
12/16/09
Call me crazy, but cheaper fruit in the winter would benefit a good number of people, as would cheaper gasoline, clothing, etc... all of which is currently at an inflated price in America because of the weak dollar.
12/16/09
People don't realize how much of the stuff they buy is in some way imported. From fruit and vegetables in the winter to oil to clothing - nearly everything is imported at some point in the process and if your currency is weak you have to spend more of your currency to buy things.
Dare to No apparently likes paying more than he has to for things.
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
And yes, I do pay more than I have to for things all the time. For example, I buy regionally- and sustainably-produced food whenever possible (hooray roots and tubers!). I do this because I prefer the taste and nutrition but also because I value the craft of my fellow citizens and our natural resources.
Everything in life can be reduced to an economic choice, but that doesn't mean it needs to be.
An exploding national debt, a (financially and morally) bankrupt knowledge economy, and a culture that selects Ben Bernanke as Person of the Year are the features of America today. Is that the society that you want to live in? (Well, I guess not, since you don't.)
Before you talk about the relative wealth of America, remember that the previous 40 years of affluence hasn't been paid for yet and sooner or later the bill will come due.
12/16/09
Have you seen what's happened historically to other countries when they let their currency become weak? Read about the history of Argentina, or Germany.
12/16/09
Nevertheless, you're right in one accidental sense: if we don't do something controlled while we still can, that's the direction we're headed.
Oh, and read about the history of Brazil or China, asshole.
12/16/09
12/16/09
Douchenozzles.
12/16/09
Bernanke is fucking us. This discussion reminds me of an Onion headline from a little while back "Federal Reserve Exposed for the giant scam it actually is" or something.
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
Personally, I voted for Jay Mariotti.
12/16/09
12/16/09
This would be like naming Lindsay Lohan Anti Drug Crusader Of The Year.
Or
Naming Courtney Love Mother Of The Year
Or
Naming Tiger Woods Husband Of The Year.
Fuck it.
I've decided that in my own personal alternate universe, Octomom is Person Of The Year.
12/16/09
12/16/09
Bernake's control is somewhat limited and he didn't do anything about the credit crunch (even though that was totally in his power, because he could have set interest rates at a somewhat higher level, which would have given banks more incentive to lend money) so the economy is getting better but still teetering.
If I was going to give a Person of the Year award out to anyone for saving the Global Financial System it would be to the banking CEOs who managed to generate record profits this year and pay back the TARP money - thus restoring a shitload of long term confidence.
Though, really a more interesting choice would have been Glenn Beck - because while he's an asshole, he helped transform the political discourse while enabling the GOP to effectively nuke real health care.
Again, it's not good that Beck did that, but it had more influence on the year's events than Bernake did.
12/16/09
The fact that these guys are in such a rush to pay back the TARP $ tells me that the plan didn't work as expected. By paying it back, liquidity is reduced in the lending markets.
12/16/09
The next step is to make it profitable for banks to lend money to small businesses and consumers again. I suspect raising benchmark interest rates would go a long way in this direction.
With just a little extra credit out there, companies might be able to sell off a good deal of their backstock inventory which would give them reasons to hire more people to manufacture new inventory, which would put more money into the system, leading to more sales and hiring, etc...
I get that that couldn't happen while we were propping up banks like an Argentinian despot, but now even Citigroup (or whatever they are called these days) is going to pay back stuff, so let's help them profit from consumer and small business lending practices.
12/16/09
Is it?
Google "discount window."
12/16/09
And, let's face it, it's no fun doing business with the government. Too many strings are attached, particularly when it comes to compensation rules. That's why they paid it off in a hurry.
12/16/09
No.
Let's let consumers and small businesses drastically reduce their debt burdens. Then we can stop relying on long-term financial slavery of the middle class as the basis of our "economy."
12/16/09
The implied assistance is a moral hazard, but, on the other hand, if it stops bank runs in the future it's practical.
As far as I can tell money, the economy, the stock market, all of it is simply about confidence. If it takes a moral hazard to create that confidence I can accept that compromise.
12/16/09
12/16/09
The promise of assistance is, in and of itself, a moral hazard.
The housing bubble, for example, was fueled by the implicit Treasury banking of GSE's - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They rapidly took on mortgage portfolios that dwarfed the rest of the world. Implicit government banking creates too much "money."
Now that all major commercial banks are subject to the same protections, the size of previous asset bubbles will be nothing but a quaint memory.
12/16/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
08/09/09
08/09/09