Come on, guy. Get your head out of the 1930s, please.
If one uses 'bernancke blames consumer' on Google search, one gets a bunch of hits. There are many of note, but BNET and QOTD are of interest here. The latter has a list of what might be causing caution.
But, two things come to my mind, after listening to President Obama's jobs speech. He made note of the veterans, after WWII, getting the GI Bill's support for college. If we looked at the sociological aspects, we'll see that WWII was a threshold event in many areas.
One of these was allowing access to the many to the possible futures that had, before then, been available mostly to the offspring of the privileged. Of course, this is an arguable point. But, putting that aside, for now, consider the following.
- Post WWII, we allowed the many, who could, to tackle, and to attain, an aspect of the American dream that has since diminished (next bullet). Except, I might add, for those best-and-brightest who have their experience at Harvard (note, please, this was the first University here -- we have to ask whether it has veered from its ideal path -- again, debatable, but I have a lot of time and interest in the subject). Then, those who excelled in the post-WWII times went on to, essentially, change the landscape of business, academia, and more. The post-WWII times were loaded with many progressive steps; yet, things went awry a lot, to boot. However, that which can be termed the American Dream continued its appeal; in fact, the number of people who could look to the Dream multiplied, too. As Obama said, people worked hard; one can argue that most worked their fingers to the bone (not the fat cats, though, despite claims of such and of their accepting risk -- hah, the game is to push risk off to others -- such as, let the military obligation be met by other than their selves).
- Then, things went awry several ways. Post the GI Bill, there were several ways that students could fund college. And, there were programs oriented toward educational attainment that were successful. But, guess what? These all devolved into some type of quasi-governmental thing that led to exploitation of students and to the fattening of the pockets of some cats (idiots, oh Lord, please help us get these a-holes into line). Yes, that was a recent affair (last decade or so), but it, combined with other factors, staunched the flow that some might have had toward realizing the dream.
This, and other things, are what you ought to be looking at, Big Ben. And, if you really want to know, I'm here.
Talk about throwing water on a dream. And, Big Ben's largess is just further abuse. You see, those who are the workers (a very large set of consumers - albeit, not of luxury items) have been under increasing pressure by the same fat cats that Big Ben, and Little Timmy, like to hang around with.
How can the consumer, who is weighed down by debt and by exploitation, even think of laying down a buck for other than necessities? A buck, by the way Big Ben, that you have been doing everything in your power to trash.
Nationalization of the banks would have been the right move, a couple of years ago. Too, we need respect for workers (manual and otherwise); how can this come to be? If you look at the early settlers, they worked. Except for some of the hoity-poity clergy who thought that they were God's gift to mankind (ah, is that Harvard's heritage?).
12/13/2012 -- Don't know how long this page will be there, Daily Ticker. But, when I looked, 69% had said 'no' (hurt rather than helped) as to whether Ben has helped.
03/23/2012 -- Ben is doing a series of four lectures on his, and the FED's, role.
12/05/2011 -- Now, he's giving money to Europe, on the backs of our savers.
10/19/2011 -- Big Ben lets B of A put its hands in our pockets: are they ready for Chapter 11?, Ben tells the FDIC where to go, but golden sacks was allowed to do it!