What Credit Crisis?
12-16-2008, 07:41 AM
#1
With The Resistance
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
What Credit Crisis?
Fraudulent “Credit Crisis” Paves Way for Economic Disaster
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | December 15, 2008
Bernanke had claimed that businesses were “confronting diminished access to credit” when in fact “the opposite” was true, the study demonstrates.
Doing the kind of investigative reporting we should expect from the major media, a financial research and consulting firm has released a major analysis of the “credit crisis” that concludes that the claims made by Treasury Department Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke to justify a socialist takeover of the financial industry were demonstrably false.
The analysis, Flawed Assumptions about the Credit Crisis: A Critical Examination of US Policymakers, concludes that the result of the unjustified massive federal intervention in the economy could be similar to the economic crisis in the Weimar Republic of 1922, where disastrous hyperinflation made the currency worthless and threatened the nation’s political system and stability.
The analysis was released by Celent, a Boston-based firm that provides independent information and advice to financial services companies. The 30-page report, made available to Accuracy in Media, does not accuse Paulson and Bernanke of lying about the “credit crisis.” But it does say that “It is startling that many of Chairman Bernanke’s and Secretary Paulson’s remarks are not supported or are flatly contradicted by the data provided by the very organizations they lead.”
Using charts and graphs of data from the Federal Reserve and other agencies, the Celent study says that statements from Paulson and Bernanke about a “credit crisis” affecting businesses, real estate, banks, and state and local governments were just not true.
The report says there is “a contradiction” between what Paulson and Bernanke have said and the reality of the situation, as demonstrated in the official data. It calls these “discrepancies” and says that some of their remarks are “puzzling.”
Asked for comment on why he was able to uncover this information while the major media have not, Octavio Marenzi, founder and CEO of Celent, told AIM, “What we need from the media is more skepticism and more engagement. Too frequently statements are taken at face value. Also, most journalists are under such tight time pressure that they do not have the time to reflect and to dig deeper. They are on a conveyor belt and just trying to keep up with the required level of output.”
Paulson had claimed that, by mid-September, when he persuaded President Bush to go public with demands for Congress to approve a $700-billion bailout plan, the financial system had “seized up,” credit markets had “froze,” and interbank lending had been “substantially reduced.”
But none of this was true. “The freezing of the credit markets that Secretary Paulson cites is not visible” in the data, the Celent report shows.
Paulson also made the claim that blue chip industrial companies could not issue longer-term commercial paper. But this claim “finds no support” in the data, the report says.
Bernanke had claimed that businesses were “confronting diminished access to credit” when in fact “the opposite” was true, the study demonstrates.
The suggestion is made that Bernanke and Paulson were acting on behalf of “a particular set of businesses and financial institutions” and exaggerated the problem in order to justify “unprecedented levels of government intervention in the markets.”
It is implied that these firms were certain big banks and companies. But while they may have been having problems raising funds, the credit market in general was “working well,” the report said.
It declares, “Doubtlessly, a number of the leading financial institutions in the US are in serious trouble, as are a number of the leading industrial firms. However, credit difficulties surrounding a specific set of firms is not the same as a problem in the credit markets in the aggregate.”
The study says that, “A clear and cogent analysis of the credit crisis has not been presented by policymakers, despite the fact that unprecedented levels of public funds are being deployed.” As a result, the “massive injection of funds could well exacerbate the problem rather than help.”
The report says the money supply “has recently increased at a pace never seen before in US history” and could signal a pending bout of hyperinflation. It says the increase is “a staggering 74% in only 84 days” and explains, “Previously, this kind of jump would be seen over the course of a decade or more.”
It then concludes by suggesting that the real danger to the U.S. is not a great depression like that of 1929 but a hyperinflationary period comparable to the Weimar Republic in 1922.
While it is possible that Paulson and Bernanke have additional data supporting their hypothesis that there has been a general breakdown in credit markets, Celent says they have not shared this data with the public and there would have to be an explanation of why the data being released to the public is incorrect. Celent is skeptical that any kind of additional and therefore secret data exist.
The Celent study has gotten limited media attention, including a Reuters news agency report, and CEO Marenzi was interviewed on CNBC for about three-and-a-half minutes by a somewhat skeptical Larry Kudlow.
The minimal coverage is troubling because the Celent study suggests that the Bush Administration and Congress were panicked and stampeded into approving unprecedented socialist measures for the economy that were not justified by the evidence.
The “seizing up” of the credit markets, as reported by the media at the time, has so far resulted in promises of more than $7.76 trillion of taxpayer money in order to “rescue” the financial system, according to the latest Bloomberg News estimate. The money amounts to half the value of everything produced in the nation last year, Bloomberg reported.
Last week 83 members of Congress sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services, asking for the CEOs of institutions receiving some of the Paulson bailout money to testify about what has happened to the funds.
Meanwhile, the Washington Times on Monday reported that Bush has nearly doubled the national debt during his eight years in the White House. Reporter David M. Dickson reports that “the number was $10.66 trillion at the end of November, and it has been rising at an astronomical rate.” Today, foreigners hold more than 50 percent of U.S. publicly held debt, the story adds.
Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, is quoted in the article as saying that the “next big bubble” to affect the economy could very well be a “government debt bubble.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at [email protected]
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | December 15, 2008
Bernanke had claimed that businesses were “confronting diminished access to credit” when in fact “the opposite” was true, the study demonstrates.
Doing the kind of investigative reporting we should expect from the major media, a financial research and consulting firm has released a major analysis of the “credit crisis” that concludes that the claims made by Treasury Department Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke to justify a socialist takeover of the financial industry were demonstrably false.
The analysis, Flawed Assumptions about the Credit Crisis: A Critical Examination of US Policymakers, concludes that the result of the unjustified massive federal intervention in the economy could be similar to the economic crisis in the Weimar Republic of 1922, where disastrous hyperinflation made the currency worthless and threatened the nation’s political system and stability.
The analysis was released by Celent, a Boston-based firm that provides independent information and advice to financial services companies. The 30-page report, made available to Accuracy in Media, does not accuse Paulson and Bernanke of lying about the “credit crisis.” But it does say that “It is startling that many of Chairman Bernanke’s and Secretary Paulson’s remarks are not supported or are flatly contradicted by the data provided by the very organizations they lead.”
Using charts and graphs of data from the Federal Reserve and other agencies, the Celent study says that statements from Paulson and Bernanke about a “credit crisis” affecting businesses, real estate, banks, and state and local governments were just not true.
The report says there is “a contradiction” between what Paulson and Bernanke have said and the reality of the situation, as demonstrated in the official data. It calls these “discrepancies” and says that some of their remarks are “puzzling.”
Asked for comment on why he was able to uncover this information while the major media have not, Octavio Marenzi, founder and CEO of Celent, told AIM, “What we need from the media is more skepticism and more engagement. Too frequently statements are taken at face value. Also, most journalists are under such tight time pressure that they do not have the time to reflect and to dig deeper. They are on a conveyor belt and just trying to keep up with the required level of output.”
Paulson had claimed that, by mid-September, when he persuaded President Bush to go public with demands for Congress to approve a $700-billion bailout plan, the financial system had “seized up,” credit markets had “froze,” and interbank lending had been “substantially reduced.”
But none of this was true. “The freezing of the credit markets that Secretary Paulson cites is not visible” in the data, the Celent report shows.
Paulson also made the claim that blue chip industrial companies could not issue longer-term commercial paper. But this claim “finds no support” in the data, the report says.
Bernanke had claimed that businesses were “confronting diminished access to credit” when in fact “the opposite” was true, the study demonstrates.
The suggestion is made that Bernanke and Paulson were acting on behalf of “a particular set of businesses and financial institutions” and exaggerated the problem in order to justify “unprecedented levels of government intervention in the markets.”
It is implied that these firms were certain big banks and companies. But while they may have been having problems raising funds, the credit market in general was “working well,” the report said.
It declares, “Doubtlessly, a number of the leading financial institutions in the US are in serious trouble, as are a number of the leading industrial firms. However, credit difficulties surrounding a specific set of firms is not the same as a problem in the credit markets in the aggregate.”
The study says that, “A clear and cogent analysis of the credit crisis has not been presented by policymakers, despite the fact that unprecedented levels of public funds are being deployed.” As a result, the “massive injection of funds could well exacerbate the problem rather than help.”
The report says the money supply “has recently increased at a pace never seen before in US history” and could signal a pending bout of hyperinflation. It says the increase is “a staggering 74% in only 84 days” and explains, “Previously, this kind of jump would be seen over the course of a decade or more.”
It then concludes by suggesting that the real danger to the U.S. is not a great depression like that of 1929 but a hyperinflationary period comparable to the Weimar Republic in 1922.
While it is possible that Paulson and Bernanke have additional data supporting their hypothesis that there has been a general breakdown in credit markets, Celent says they have not shared this data with the public and there would have to be an explanation of why the data being released to the public is incorrect. Celent is skeptical that any kind of additional and therefore secret data exist.
The Celent study has gotten limited media attention, including a Reuters news agency report, and CEO Marenzi was interviewed on CNBC for about three-and-a-half minutes by a somewhat skeptical Larry Kudlow.
The minimal coverage is troubling because the Celent study suggests that the Bush Administration and Congress were panicked and stampeded into approving unprecedented socialist measures for the economy that were not justified by the evidence.
The “seizing up” of the credit markets, as reported by the media at the time, has so far resulted in promises of more than $7.76 trillion of taxpayer money in order to “rescue” the financial system, according to the latest Bloomberg News estimate. The money amounts to half the value of everything produced in the nation last year, Bloomberg reported.
Last week 83 members of Congress sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services, asking for the CEOs of institutions receiving some of the Paulson bailout money to testify about what has happened to the funds.
Meanwhile, the Washington Times on Monday reported that Bush has nearly doubled the national debt during his eight years in the White House. Reporter David M. Dickson reports that “the number was $10.66 trillion at the end of November, and it has been rising at an astronomical rate.” Today, foreigners hold more than 50 percent of U.S. publicly held debt, the story adds.
Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, is quoted in the article as saying that the “next big bubble” to affect the economy could very well be a “government debt bubble.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at [email protected]
12-17-2008, 08:11 AM
#4
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,261
Originally Posted by normajean21
conspiracy theorists believe all of north american currency will be extinguished and we will be under a new currencty the amero. however this is only a theory but it has happened in europe. so nobody knows.
The europeans had a darn good reason to go that route...the US does not. We gain nothing by sharing common currency with Mexico and very little with regard to Canada.
The europeans were operating as seperate states, which greatly hindered their ability to function as an economic and industrial powerhouse. The parallel to this would be if the US states each had their own currency! Well, guess what, our states DID have their own currency, but we fixed that over 200 years ago...the euroes are just now getting around to it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
