http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/26/AR2005102602255.html"Without these policy blunders by the Federal Reserve, there is little reason to believe that the 1929 crash would have been followed by more than a moderate dip in U.S. economic activity," Bernanke wrote.
In late 2000, looking ahead to the possibility of a sharp fall in then-lofty stock prices, Bernanke concluded, "history proves . . . that a smart central bank can protect the economy and the financial sector from the nastier side effects of a stock market collapse."
And in words that might come to mind if housing tanks, he said the economic effects of falling asset prices "depend less on the severity of the crash itself than on the response of economic policymakers, particularly central bankers."
Really now, Ben? How's that working out for you? Or are you ready to admit that the Federal Reserve isn't a very "smart central bank"? How're those nasty side effects coming? Did you keep the economy from contracting massively? How's that deflation coming? Unemployment?
LMMFAO.