Monday, February 11, 2013

Fed Follower and Gold Hater Joe Weisenthal on Top of Things as Per Usual

He wrote just a minute ago:
Janet Yellen head of the San Francisco Federal Reserve has a big new speech out about how slow this recovery has been, and why.
Well, first of all, Yellen hasn't been at the San Francisco Fed since 2010. She is in DC and the Fed's vice-chair.

From there it's all down hill. He comments on a Vice-chair Yellen chart:
Government spending, which usually provides a boost to the economy in the quarters following the recession, has been a net drag this time because the government is spending less than it normally does.

As this chart shows, in the initial 4 quarters since the start of ths [sic] recovery, government spending provided its standard boost to GDP.

But in the 8 quarter and 12 quarter period after that, fiscal policy has been a drag, as spending growth has been a lot slower than in past recoveries.

So yes, spending is the problem. We just need to crank it up.
Maybe Joe is looking at 2010 data here also, but current data shows that Bernanke's money printing is turning the economy around, as always, in manipulated fashion.  Stocks are near new highs and housing prices have been climbing for months. In other words, there is no logic based on current data for Joe's call for government to crank up spending, even if government spending could somehow magically boost the economy. But there never is for this Keynesian nonsense. Joe just makes it easier to spot.


  1. Having attempted to read it, the real question is can anyone even understand it? Is it even understandable?

  2. One has got to be a genuine moron to think that four straight years of trillion dollar deficits isn't enough government spending.

    1. Dude, the deficit has to be 1 trillion for the 1st year, then 2 trillion for the 2nd year, 4 trillion for the 3rd year, 8 trillion for the 4th year, etc. That's the only reasonable trajectory for government spending which can sustain a genuine recovery. If you cannot understand this, you must most assuredly be an idiot.

    2. met my friend Krugman?