Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumlimpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)She's pretty good. I like her.
truth2power
(8,219 posts)some living entity. They're an economic construct.
People need to look at what Prof. Richard Wolff has to say about markets. Maybe I can find it.
Canuckistanian
(42,290 posts)Well, then. Problem solved.
Goodnight, everyone!
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)I have been looking for this, and figured DU would come thru, as always.
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)The video clip stops at that point, but my next question would be, "So why don't we, Ben?"
But of course we all know the Republicans would never go for that. They have no problem with CORPORATE welfare. Even free insurance to big Banks worth $ 83 Billion a year. Welfare is only bad when it helps actual people.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Wonderful to see an elected official stay true to their campaign promises.
grandpamike1
(193 posts)Can't the Democrats find more people to run for office like Senator Warren ? There should be an easy answer for this, but apparently neither the Dems or Reps want to delve into the financial snake pit that is our financial system. I just hope they keep televising these hearings so that many more voters will see the mendacity of our elected Government.
Bravo Senator, Bravo.....
efhmc
(14,726 posts)slime pit which is our current political system is very hard and has the potential to get even worse.
Iwillnevergiveup
(9,298 posts)beginning at 1:46.
What is so interesting is that Vitter came on right after Elizabeth and agreed with her!
He said there is evidence that "too big to fail is alive and well."
http://www.c-span.org/Events/Fed-Chair-Bernanke-Presents-Monetary-Policy-Report-to-Congress/10737438337-1/
supercats
(429 posts)is the best thing to happen to our senate in a long time! She is actually doing what she said she would do, and I love her for it!!!
Amonester
(11,541 posts)take $3 Billion of it to set up and pay for a true Public Campaign-Funding program to share between each qualified candidate
render lobbying illegal
then take the remaining $80 Billion to avert the sequester
voilà.
onwardsand upwards
(276 posts)She stands up to Bernanke very well.
Bernanke's answer, overall, is a classical economist's bob-and-weave: it's not possible for these extra profits to exist with rational expectations -- therefore, rather than tax them (oh, heavens, no) we just need to adjust people's expectations to be more rational. The problem isn't that banks are fleecing the people -- it's that the people are too stupid to trust us that we wouldn't bail the banks out again (in the way the we always, always, have). Assume the issue doesn't exist, and it doesn't exist! His smug little professorial smile betrays how much he enjoys this type of argument.
I'm not quite sure what he means when he says "Now we have the tools". He seems to be implying that the Fed had its hands tied, in 2008, in a way that it doesn't now. That sounds good but, given that the Fed is a corporation owned by the big banks, it seems pretty unlikely that they'd do anything other than act in their interests when push comes to shove.
In any case, it's such a pleasure to see someone asking these questions in such a forthright way.