i remember chairman bernanke saying that he would taper.e out, "what does taper mean?" and the minute people realized what "taper" meant, which is that, that the fed would step back from buying l these securities, and even though the fed said it w going to be gradual, it was going to be measured, the markets had a massive tantrum. >> the market selling off after federal reserve chairman ben bernanke said that the central bank could start tapering... >> it shows you how addicted the markets are. the markets went into a fit. became dysfunctional. it was known as the "taper tantrum." >> well, we all know it: when ben bernanke talks, and the federal reserve speaks, the markets listen. >> markets are like little kids. they want candy, and the minute you try to take the candy away, they have a tantrum. >> you have big wall street reaction, right? you have extreme volatility, where wall street says, "whoa, whoa, whoa, no! no, no, unacceptable!", and values plunge. and of course, the fed doesn't like that. nobody likes that. that's a, that's a prec

. >> bernanke was an expert in the great depression.oid another . >> the fallout from the mortgage mess deep in today. a major wall street firm reported its first quarterly loss in its 84 year history. >> bear stearns was an investment bank and investment banks are not the same as banks, they don't have small depositors, you and i cannot go in and open up a account. they are sophisticated investors who do and should know the risk of the institution when they do business. >> bear stearns was one of wall street's major firms with a riskier, edgier reputation. >> where goldman sachs is the queen and morgan stanley went to harvard, bear stearns was the guy flipping the bird in the corner. and it had probably a greater percentage of this toxic sludge mortgage-backed securities in its vaults than anyone else. >> the firm has been buffeted by constant rumors of a looming liquidity problem. they maintain that the capital petitions are all strong. >> questioning a wall street's firm liquidity is akin to yelling fire in a crowded movie house. >>

the tape tantrum, the biggest bourbon drinker in america called bernanke and said you don't go from while turkey to cold turkey overnight and this is, i think -- i knew steve would love that one but still here's the point the fed has been very deliberate here, it's not an overnight adjustment it's been a fierce adjustment and in my mind it's correcting for painfully excessive accommodation for far too long >> but, so you're leading to the idea that -- >> hey, scott. >> hang on, steve. you're leading to the idea that -- you speak of the pace. because of that pace, that it's inevitable that something is going to break how could it not >> absolutely. >> somehow all roads lead to the banks. >> and eventually lead to the fed. now, i do think because of this we're not going to see -- my guess is the odds of a 50% hike at the next meeting is very, very low we'll see a series of tie traces, 25 basis points going forward until we slay the inflation dragon signaling everything very openly up front. and asking whether they're banks or investors or anybody else, for them to adjust to the new wo

of the stability of the banking system and the former chairman of the federal reserve system, ben bernanke, in co-authorship with two other researchers, received this nobel prize precisely for this topic, therefore, it can be said that the year 2023 begins with this kind of testing of these theoretical developments, according to the tools for extinguishing panic, it exists , it is, and it is already being used. that is, it was it is stated that all funds will be received by depositors in excess of the amount guaranteed by the so-called deposit guarantee fund, no, all deposits will be received absolutely without exception and this is such a signal for all other customers to all other banks that there is no need to rush to reduce their sums of funds, there is no need to run away from banks, there is no need to take the money, that is, calm down, we will manage everything, that is, accordingly, these are the actions that can also be adopted by the national bank of ukraine, but i want to say that after the cleaning of the banking system, so to speak, which took place there from 2014 to 2016. a

we have now free and calm says, ben bernanke is 50 years old. went wrong and africa is the main continent that china accepts and a huge amount of chinese money comes these technologies to africa on a par with russia on a par with turkey on a par with brazil the same the most is happening in latin america and there is such a fantastic internationalization. and what matters is what he writes about now. american what they are very afraid of. yes? somewhere the realization of the world, as such, the internationalization of the yuan, not the transformation of the yuan into the national currency and the national means of payment of the whole world. and most importantly, what china is doing is opening the way to the sovereignization of national currencies. this is what the chinese people are talking about, wake up. now your currency is also sovereign. well, everyone is talking about it now and starting understand that, in general , the financial system is independent. it is better, and the saudis understand this. indonesia, the president of the vidos ,

it reminds me of something bernanke used to say. he would talk about is it the right tools for the right job. monetary policy or inflation. and other tools. if conditions remain relatively stable in terms of the banking sector it does suggest the fed could have a route 2 hiking interest rates. interestingly i think today we see that strong inflation, and of course you got the ecb tomorrow which is going to remind us about the issues central banks have tied to inflation. francine: as things stand there's little in the data to suggest they should keep their eye off of inflation. there's also the danger if they don't hike at all it seemed to signaling to markets they have little concerns about the banking industry. jane: i think that's right and it's another reason for them to go ahead and hike next week as conditions -- as long as conditions remain stable. what does it mean for further down the line further into the summer. i think it's a valid debate. it will be interesting to see how the fed addresses those concerns next week. one t

bernanke, they were pros. now, i will tell you there is degrees.ld say at the top of the list would be volcker and mcchesney martin but right now i think the talent is there. the will to fix it is not. i'm sorry to be so brutal on the fed but i think they all ought to resign. i don't know how anybody can have confidence in the federal reserve board right now based on what is going on in america. i don't know how. i don't. but, neil -- neil: you're pretty big, got pretty big influence to look at that, but finish that thought, ken, i apologize. >> neil, don't forget the underlying theme of my belief, don't sell america short. yes, we have serious problems. yes, they need to be addressed. but do not, america is still the finest and best place to be in the world. it is and it always will be. we're going through a rough patch right now, neil, but we'll fix it. we'll get it right. maybe it will take us longer. maybe it will require more pain but i have no doubt about this great nation. we're going to be fine. i'm fully invested. neil: ken, you embody tha

i am captain bernanke. lera is difficult to rescue.here is no way out. we 'll have to break the ceiling of the cabin, break the ceiling of the cabin. it's a damn long protocol that banned its presidents. something is wrong with the mission to feed, i'll wait for pierrot a little more. thank you where is he where is the psycho you met? no, he signed. you are he yes, they told me, we missed each other just for a minute. yes, producer richard grandpierre. yes, but where? i'll be at the notary's in half an hour my cousin. of course, in the evening the director. jan kuna no no. it suits me well. great. see you in the evening, then. good evening, yuning. good evening. where is the guest with mademoiselle in the library? thank you

fewer dissents on a percentage basis with powell than under greenspan, bernanke and yellen. he will change the statement or do what he has to do probably to keep more people onboard. there's a lot going on behind the scenes. >> give us a second. over to steve weiss. give us five more minutes. i know you have to get out of here soon. somebody who nobody calls mr. consensus, steve weiss. please stick around. >> thank you for properly identifying me as an opinion leader. look, the fed will go 25, i believe. if they don't the message that they send maybe the banks are in trouble, maybe they can't tolerate another 25. the most insidious factor that can affect the economy and the people that can least afford rising prices. the message really will be in the dot plot. what is that going to tell us? i believe a mandate which is employment and inflation. they're going to pursue their policy along that. they are responsible for the financial health of the banks. silicon valley bank, it's not up to the fed to make a policy decision. i think that they go ahead, i think the hawkish dialog

you know, bernanke got a nobel prize for being the fed chairman.re the ones that caused the problem. they want to bail us out. you know, my final words, it's not what they're doing, it's what you're going to do. that's my concern. >> neil: you recommend people put their money in commodities, metals. you've been big on silver and gold. explain why they're good bets in this environment. god and silver are but by god. they're god's money. people don't like bitcoin but bitcoin is people's money. it's centralized. that's why i like it. the fed and the treasury and these guys are centralizes, which is marxist. a centralized bank. i'm asking people, it's not what they're doing, what are you going to do. that's my biggest concern. >> neil: so this is a haven for you? this is something that is beyond central banks' control? >> correct. they caused the problem. they're the arson. they're trying to fix it right now. i'd rather have stuff that they can't print. like i own cattle, i own real oil, i own land. anything that they can't print, i want. anything that

. >> since 2008, right, really when ben bernanke first came in with quantitative easing part one we'veeen training investors the last year that every time the fed eases or you know, reduces interest rates that's been that ringing of the pavlovian bell that signals the dogs to start to salivate. buyers every time there is talk about the fed pivot, right, or if the fed, if market even thinks the fed will pivot we start rallying. there is this, we had the fear of missing out. charles: right. >> in 2021. now we have the fear of missing out on the bottom. so every time we start talking about this fed pivot investors start buying stocks and we're seeing that right now as well. charles: what do you make what is happening with the federal reserve? all of the actions that they have taken now? we've seen the balance sheets spike. you're not supposed to call it quantitative easing. the market, a lot of folks in the market are saying hey, it is helping in some way. will that have stimulative effect on the economy, on the stock market? >> well, this goes back to pavlov, right? again the balance she

indeed, several years ago in testimony to the senate, federal reserve chairman ben bernanke praised for maintaining confidence in state-issued bonds. now, this is not to endorse or prolong impasse over the debt limit. but the full faith and credit of our country is fundamental to paying all of those other bills and that's why we should prevent any president from threatening to default on that credit. the most preposterous claim we hear is this prioritizes paying china before other obligations. well, the fact is most debt is held by americans, including most likely your pension fund. china holds about 3.2% of our bonds. the debt limit is there for a reason. if your family is living beyond its means and needs to seek an increase in its credit limit, it had better sit down around the kitchen table and have a very serious discussion over the circumstances that have gotten it in its predicament and what takes we need to get it out. that's why we have a debt limit, to have that discussion as a nation. which is why it's so disturbing that the president says he's not willing to discuss the subj

bernieben bernanke told us in ts cycle the problems of subprime would remain contained.oes up there with neville chamberlain's peace in our sometime and alan greenspan initially thought the tech wreck was just a unanticipated ininventory withdrawal from the economy. charles: right. >> then in january of turn 2001 cutting interest rates 50 basis point intermeeting no, it is inflationary debt nation of the technology capital stocks. these are human beings. charles: sure, david, let me ask you -- >> but they make mistakes. pardon me? charles: i want to jump in here, yeah, they make mistakes but they are selected for this job because they should make fewer mistakes and maybe some of these mistakes at some point to compare it to neville chamberlain seem to be unforgivable. so having said, having said that credibility plays a big role in all of this. how much of the selloff is about yesterday credit suisse or confidence or lag of confidence everyone with jay powell associated with this can keep this in check and do the job? >> you have the treasury secretary giving a speech in

another, which is also bad your forecast dmitry vyacheslavovich very good words were said by ben bernanke said that the key to the success of the united states of america is not the eternal blackmail of the whole world. and this is primarily the development of its own production. as it was 560 or 70 years ago, no one followed this principle. why when money can be made out of thin air, it’s so good when some can be intimidated to pump four resources from someone, by and large, your task is to have a silver spoon and always shoot this chaff, but what a number of analysts come to in 2017. they say that in 2018-19 we will not bypass the crisis of the banking system. but here is a miracle happening coronavirus and this coronavirus, as it were, washes away this banking crisis, and many american politicians believed that it would always be like this, but in fact, by and large, nothing has changed. banking crisis. it was simply pushed back in time and many predicted that it didn’t happen for 22 years, they filled it with money , that is, by and large, they became everything with money, and at the

. >> you have to almost wonder whether chair powell will pull a play out a fed chair ben bernanke's playbookry brilliant in many ways. the testimony, the first day tough. we clearly had the markets going down on what was perceived to be a more hawkish fed chair, although i would argue he did not say anything new. it is the markets accepting the idea that the fed will be hiking. let's see whether we can get a pop on the day. one of the pressures on stocks yesterday, the two year yield rising, and this is a small amount relative to pulling it back on the year, a big backup, but the 10-year yield is coming in, so you have that difference there as the bond traders are reworking their fed bets, and that short end pressing on stocks overall, but the idea that you have some relief maybe creating a bifurcation, at least for tech, over the last week. it is outperforming. the s&p 500 itself, let's check in and see what support is doing, whether it is holding it. here is the sideways trend we have in the s&p 500. here is the uptrend out of the october low. the 200 day moving average in yellow. it appea

volcker inflation fight and -- by no way am amaking comparison of the banking crisis with '08 but bernanke's challenge with the banks right now. the fed has to tighten they have to continue their inflation fight, but i don't think the fed is really the big driver here. i think we have to really focus on interest rates and if you go back and look at the last three tightening periods, 2016 to '18, '04 to '07 and '99 to 2000, at all times the two-year treasury led the fed higher and at all times when the two-year treasury broke below fed funds, that marked the peak of the interest rate cycle we just saw in the last 30 days the two-year treasury drop below the fed funds rate so if you go back to the last three tightening periods and correlate that with the situation now, we're in for a lower interest rate environment. now as you know, we're underweight equities and long-term bonds. and it's a strategy we would continue to apply regardless of whether the fed tightens or not next week. >> why does next week have anything to do with using your words, abandoning the fight on inflation or not one mee

and along the way alan greenspan became the maestro for saving the market, ben bernanke became a hero0, jay powell was considered a winner. what they all had in common was no shame when it came to printing and priming the press. i suspect even though powell wants to impress the folks at social club that he can be paul volcker and crush this economy, he ultimately will opt out instead for the adulation of the masses and start to prime the pump yet again. we'll see what happens, you know? a lot of people, almost everyone on the show odd the said the fed's going to to stay the course. i believe though the way things are happening beneath the surface in this country, at some point this summer or earlier you're going to see the fed not only pause, but they'll start to to hint. liz claman, heir going to warm up the helicopter, so be ready. liz: yeah. and we still don't know, as i said yesterday, what's really going on underneath the skin of these banks. charles: right. liz: oh, boy. well, we're going to see, because here is the big question as we kick off the final hour of trade, will trade

bernanke said that cascading failures can cramp economic activity. over the weekend. the key issue is the separation of principal. that's the view that if you do bank supervision and regulation correctly, then you have a free hand on monetary policy. there is a dark side to the separation principle. if you decide to deflect the course of your on a terry policy, you are admitting you didn't get it right. lisa: which is the subject of an investigation right now. why they didn't see a bigger problem here to begin with. there is an issue. if they did come up with this program to stave off some systemic risks, is there a greater risk in your view then inflation getting out of control and have a problem that has already been solved? >> i will admit that looking at the report brought back terrible memories of the first facts that came through on long-term capital management. what was interesting about that was they are both in the public domain. there is a bit of similarity in that regard. then the question is in retrospect, do we think it was appropriate t

ready to scatter money from a helicopter and received the nickname ben helicopter, and last year ben bernankeuh, means of scattered helicopters is called the amount of mitigation and the united states uh. in all seriousness, they proposed just such an effective modern economic theory, if the crisis has come on the territory of the united states, uh, throws in money. there , from a helicopter, a helicopter and, in fact, everything will go smoothly. of course, we all perfectly understand that this is all. it's based on confidence in the dollar, and we all know the government debt figures in the united states and that it's growing and that these are just empty papers that are not backed by anything. it seems to me that this has already been absolutely clearly clarified, but the problem lies in what it has been for 15 years. i i hear, in part, our economists who rightly point to these figures. i say again, the state has not been provided with the dollar for a long time and they say that, well, it seems, how everything objectively goes to the fact that the dollar should finally collapse, but the p

as the piece lays out in 2007 bernanke took a few of his closest advisors and made a decision at jackson hole summit in 2007 to take interest rates down zero bound before beginning large-scale asset purchases, what we call qe. that decision never had to have been made. my point we never had to have come down to the sear are rebound. if you look at chair powell's 2012 trans sent when he was rookie it would be difficult to exit zero rate policy when the time came. that is exactly what he is experiencing. charles: right. >> my point, we'll have to normalize monetary policy at some point or agree to get rid of the fed. only thing u.s. economy can handle supposedly a democratic economy, take it to zero bound, leave it there, every single treasury note monetized by the fed. get rid of it. put it under the treasury department. normalize, grow up. charles: you have all the grayest people turning over in their graves that attended meeting at jekyl island. let me bring in phil blancato. markets trading 28 minutes. why the indecision right now. >> the course is uncertain. dovish door is open. marke

that was ben bernanke's idea. the problems with the gold standard, maybe it was the national recovery act as is emily's. it says maybe the the the contradiction of capital ism the contradiction of trying to raise prices relative to wages in industrial monopolies and trying to raise wages relative to prices by unions and. raising one relative to the other will make them both go up again that completely. it completely makes no sense. so at were the the political war on capital? well, this is what we debate, but nobody there is no economic that says that somehow automatic the boom of the twenties had to lead and the seeds for the thirties everyone agrees it was the policy mistakes 1930s that caused the great depression. i mean, it was you just argue about the. calvin, you're off the hook. that's great. very good. i guess we are ready. questions from the floor. somebody with a microphone. excuse me. yeah, skip. i can't see such stuff in it. hi, i'm juliana from demarest, new jersey. my question about how you would res

well, so i did not win the nobel prize for economics it's like ben bernanke just did so there's that although i believe interpretation of what actually happened during the depression which i talk about all the president's bankers is more accurate but no i think there is there's and i have spoken at the fed not recently and last time did i i was asked comment on um why wall street wasn't helping street and why was a long conversation. but my answer well, because you never made them. and that was kind of last time i was invited speak there. so so i'm with that i do think that there are central bankers that our concerned about what doing and what's going on but they don't tend to be the ones that are communicating. um, at the top of their yeah. of, of central bank. so you're supposed to be listening to you pretty soon you just hang in there. you're so clear. yeah. well again, i thank you guys so much for coming tonight. um and you know, for just all your excellent questions in this conversation, it means everything. and again, thank you book soup for being just such a tremendous facilit

was much more muted than whatñrçó t previously said, and jpmorgan pointing itfá it almost exactly bernanketo pausefì% after a veryxdp,■ extended hiki cycle. so, it'si] coded that "we'reçó they're trying to evaluate the this fed has said, we're not going to anticipate anything, we're going to look at the data of inflation as it comes in. now they have to, at least dot( some of that. also, the summary of economic predictions, the dot plot implying a 0.4% real gdp gain for the u.s. this year.[ìáhp &h% slightly lower from what they p1 if you believe anything abt■ how strong the first quarter has &háhp &hc% >> expecting afrybig slowdown. >> it meansçó you go in negativ for some period of time. that all builds in+■ this. okay, we have a fed pause okay, we have a fed pause perhaps earlier thai]p,■ we suu we were going to get it a few weeks ago,xde1 but attwhat cost? that's where we are. we're at the, at what costu■ pot in figuring out exactly how much banks are going to pull back. >> well, when it comes to figuring out just how much banks are going to pull u■back, when e are going to pul=c going

and tyler is right, it's central to bernanke's work that when it comes to bank lending, i guess one minusbanks pull back, say they raise the interest rates, the effect on the economy can be in a situation of credit tightening, can be greater than just what happens to the price it's the quantity that is difficult to measure, how much less borrowing there is and what that impact is on the economy. it's the reason why you have this split among certainly some former fed officials and not yet any current ones but they're more worried about the effect of this credit and it end up being bigger and greater than it might be just shown in the price or the interest rate of debt. >> i would say if you look senior loan officer surveys, they suggest that lending standards have tightened already by the end of january, pretty massively up to where we've been at peaks in previous recessions. there is a question about how much more they really can or will tighten and if you look at why the banks in the u.s. got into trouble, it's not really because of their loan books actually. it was because of. so there'

>> bernanke said i don't see bi1 problems in housing or something.k themselves pretty dramatically to the outlook to the fed when the fed raised interest rates. markets nowa5■ pricing inÑi a f rate cut of either june or july. take a look at you can see it pretty much goes straight s7■down. 4.73 by june, 4.57. so somewhere in that june, july period a fullxd ratexc7q■ok is in. at the endlp of the yea3.68. i want to show you the fed market gap here. this isxd something we've been tracking. what this shows is the difference between where the market is priced for the year th forecast to be at theq year end. soq 1.42 basis point differential. the fed thinks it'st( going to 4.13 and the balance sheet we got last night showing stress levels remain high in the banking system but not muche1 worse than they were a week agoi so remember=u now rose 300q billion last week andfá 100 let me show you how we got i] there.ç$@r(t&háhp &hc% the di#uxueu window lending declined to ó[■$110 billion but there was more take-up of ther> fed's new program up 41 to çó53. there's

he works hard before meetings to forge that consensus. 7% of all votes cast were votes under bernanke it does one more hike in may, then the fed is seen quickly reversing course. if not today differences among fed officials could emerge in the months ahead over how much this bank turmoil affects this economic market but also, guys, at the federal reserve. andrew? >> i want to get over to our senior commentator mike san >> take a look at the s&p going back to last may. go to a ten-month chart. it basically shows you how we've been in this range this long. since may and, by the way, that's when the fed funds rate was still 1% i think back in may, with only a couple of hikes into the whole campaign. we managed to kind of oscillate around this level for quite a while. we're above where we were when svb first buckled, right? a little bit anyways, a few points. but look out. since february 2nd, you're coming together at one of these fulcrum points. i guess the pause is in the fix income, which is extreme. in is the treasury volatility index. it's at such a level, just off its highs but abov

modestly off the record but i think i can talk about it with a guy named ben bernanke.t of hockey stick charges. we have the mother of all hockey sticks with this rise in interest rates. what are the ramifications, the outcomes, of a little fed courage to go pause, posco, pause? if they take the slope out of the rate of change of the rise of interest rates and just pause, pause, pause for three meetings, what happens? jean: the hockey stick story is more likely have not seen yet the impact of the most rapid rate hike cycle since 1980. that was bound to create cracks. i think that has profound locations that we are just starting to see. the story of the last couple weeks with the banking crisis is -- there was an interesting credit story with these institutions but the broader story is what we have been calling, for light of a better name, the economics of deposits. for the last few months, we have been seeing the race you can get on short-term instruments like money market instrument funds, etf's, shorter duration government bonds. it has emerged very significantly from

reading the events of last weekend and what the fed has done, my assessment as it goes back to the bernankeor the right job. they tried to fence the banking system to create this expense -- this space for themselves to keep hiking, slow down the economy and underlying demand. rates are a blunt tool that affects all industries at the same time, not just the banking sector, so i thought, in some ways, you could make the argument that what they did over the weekend was a way to create the space to hike. at the margin, it makes 50 basis points less likely. you cannot talk about a systemic risk exception and still go 50 but you could make a reasonable argument to go 25. the data remain quite strong. and we are not at a point yet that suggests significant economic damage as a result. homebuilding stocks have been doing well. lisa: has the chance of a hard or harder landing become more likely in the past week as we have seen tensions come to the fore? neil: we have because the biggest risk of a hard landing is if the fed follows the market's pricing of interest rates. the fixed income market has a