FacebookTwitter

HAI

Unless otherwise indicated, the material below has not been prepared by Van Eck Associates Corporation or HardAssetsInvestor.com.
Neither assumes any liability for any content on a third party website or material prepared by a third party.

Features and Interviews

   |
Poor Nothing special Worth watching Pretty cool Awesome!
Rate this article
Joseph Fichera: In A Precarious Moment
Written by HardAssetsInvestor   
March 10, 2010 12:00 am EST

 

Norman: Is that dangerous, though? Because we’re seeing, like we said earlier, this populist revolt which, right now, it’s orderly. But the emotions are high. They're running very, very high. And you talked earlier, in the last interview, about the Supreme Court decision, the amount of money, now, that could flow into the political process well beyond what we saw before, with the elimination of spending caps for corporations, etc. Won't this create this two-tier … you have the electorate, the ordinary folks desperate for change. And you have the elite, or the corporate or the large institutions that can effect change for what they're looking out for. Are we in a dangerous moment right now?

Fichera: The word, probably, would be precarious rather than dangerous, in terms of inflaming the situation. We are, clearly, in that moment. Replacing Bernanke at the Fed would not necessarily reduce the risk factor of that moment. I do agree with you that a second stimulus would probably help if Bernanke and other people would speak to that need.

It was the former Fed chairman, Greenspan, who, when he spoke on various things, killed the … or even one of the things that blew up our deficit, obviously, was the Bush tax cuts, where he didn’t have a problem with that, which obviously fueled some different parts of the problem that came about.

Look, the need for financial services reform … the Fed has tried to take some actions directly on their own on trying to bring in the bonus system and other types of things. It hasn’t had a lot of followership from the Congress. We’ve had a problem: the difference between a House bill vs. the Senate bill, in terms of reform. It now appears that we’re going to probably get hopefully more leadership from the House side vs. Senator Dodd ... but we don’t know. Tim Johnson is an untested person to be chairman of the Banking Committee.

So, we are in that precarious moment. I think that the political system is going to drive this. Hopefully, by the time this airs, we will get some greater certainty from the State of the Union and whether Bernanke is in place, and be able to see Volcker and his group providing more leadership, which I think we need.

Norman: All right. Precarious, not dangerous. You heard it here. So, that’s it for now. I want to thank Joseph Fichera, my guest. And this is Mike Norman, signing off. We’ll see you next time; take care. Bye-bye.

 

Be sure to check Part I of our interview with Joseph Fichera.

 



 

 
Subscribe to Our Weekly Newsletter 
First Comment

Comments (0)



Post a Comment

Comment
(Limit 2,000
characters) 
*
Name: *
E-mail: *
Home page:

(optional)

Type in the displayed characters
Email follow-up comments to my e-mail address
 


Terms of Use
The HardAssetsInvestor.com message board and comment features are designed to facilitate thoughtful discussion of the biggest issues impacting commodity investors. All comments should be respectful. Insults and profanity are not permitted. The editor reserves the right to remove comments at his/her discretion.

 

Related Articles »

Did you like this article? Then you may be interested in:

 

Commodities Data

September 10, 2010 02:55 AM EST

  Loading data ...
 

Weekly Commodities Poll

Do you think futures-based ETFs have a significant effect on commodities prices?

 

Related Articles »

Did you like this article? Then you may be interested in:

 

Seminal Papers »