Doug                Casey on Bungling Ben Bernanke
 L:                I wonder how much we could get for the Statue of Liberty? She’s                got to be feeling uncomfortable in a country that no longer wants                anyone’s tired, poor,                huddled masses, yearning to breathe free.
              
Doug:                That’s a good question.                The copper alone is worth a lot of money at this point.
              
L:                A quick web search shows two frequently cited figures for Miss Liberty’s                copper skin: one of about 60,000 pounds, the other 179,000 pounds.                At three bucks a pound of copper, that’s                either $180,000 or something over half a million bucks – a                drop in the ocean of America’s                national debt.
              
Doug:                I would have thought it was more, but of course the dollar isn’t                worth a damn anymore. The real value would be as a work of art,                of course. Although it must be said that considerations like that                didn’t stop peasants                in the Middle Ages from melting down Roman bronzes and disassembling                classical buildings because they needed the raw materials. I wonder                what it would fetch at a Sotheby’s                auction? I’d guess                the Chinese might be willing to pay half a billion or even a billion                dollars to take the lady home. It’d                be a good deal, since the ideals behind the statue are as dead as                the Constitution itself.
              L:                Yes… we’re                not using the Constitution either, maybe we should sell that to                them as well. But even a billion dollars would still be a drop in                America’s ocean of                debt.
              
Doug:                A billion is only a thousandth of a trillion, and they’re                now thinking in trillions. Obama may soon have to ask his science                czar what comes after a trillion. 
 I’ve                thought about what I’d                do if I were president of the United States, or chairman of the                Fed, if my choices were limited to what’s                politically possible. The right thing now, which is to bring on                a deflationary collapse that would liquidate much of the malinvestment                of recent decades, is not politically possible. With more than 50%                of the people in the United States being net recipients of government                largesse, no one can get elected, nor stay elected, who applies                the breaks to the gravy train. The system is totally corrupt at                this point.
We’re                going to have a social revolution anyway, and it’s                probably better to have it sooner rather than later. This whole                house of cards should have been collapsed back in the ’60s, as opposed                to having been built 40 stories higher since then. That just means                it’ll be an even bigger                mess when it does collapse. So, from at least a personal point                of view, there’s nothing                to be gained by doing the right thing. Although history would vindicate                you, you’d be ostracized                now.              
L:                That just raises an already impossibly high bar. The U.S. won’t                be able to pay, when the bill comes due.
              
Doug:                Yes. One of the most distressing things about this whole debacle                is the total lack of intellectual honesty among any of the participants                and decision-makers responsible for what’s                going on with Bernanke being perhaps the worst of all.
              On July 1,                2005, Bernanke stated with great confidence that the U.S. was not                experiencing a housing bubble, saying: “I                think what is more likely is that house prices will slow, maybe                stabilize, might slow consumption spending a bit.”
             
L: Wow                could he possibly have been more wrong about anything more important?
              
Doug:                 In November of the same year, he talked about derivatives, saying,                “With respect to their                safety, derivatives, for the most part, are traded among very sophisticated                financial institutions and individuals who have considerable incentive                to understand them and to use them properly.”                He also said, “The                Federal Reserve’s                responsibility is to make sure that the institutions it regulates                have good systems and good procedures for ensuring that their derivatives                portfolios are well managed and do not create excessive risk in                their institutions.”
             And a couple                months after that, back on housing again, he said, “Our                expectation is that the decline in activity or the slowing in activity                will be moderate, that house prices will probably continue to rise.”              
             
 L:                So much for the wisdom of the expert…
[The rest..]
Fred