3 ms·
The strength of your argument seems to rest on the statement "he was never right about anything before". If it is literally true, you have a very strong point.
by gloob 17y ago
The strength of your argument seems to rest on the statement "he was never right about anything before". If it is literally true, you have a very strong point. If it is only true in some handwavy, "you-know-what-I-mean" sense, then your argument is itself handwavy. While I admit to being undereducated in these types of discussions, my suspicion is that your statement is closer to the second option than the first one.
- jswinghammer 17y agoBernanke consistently believed that there was no systemic risk in the financial markets, that the Fed could handle anything that came up without trouble, and that there was no housing bubble. On the major issues of our time he has never been correct. I'm no economist but I have read a few books on the topic of varying degrees of depth. I saw this crisis coming and got out of the stock market and went to a job that was far safer than the one I had (which was based on the housing industry continuing to grow). Check out the Peter Schiff Was Right videos on Youtube for some humor on this topic.