President Trump Reveals What We All Suspected About the 2020 Election in Primetime...
Peggy Flanagan Wants to Make Kids Whole. She Can Start With Kids Harmed...
Mashed Out: Katie Porter Says She's Done With Politics Following Failed Gubernatorial Camp...
Possible Maine Senate Candidate Troy Jackson Just Called to 'Get Rid' of People...
There Is a Case of the DNC Hiding Its Financials and the Press...
Rep. Summer Lee Admits She Wants More Black Doctors, Even If They're Unqualified
Democrats May Love Socialism, but They Can't Get Enough Luxury on the Campaign...
Why We Need the SAVE America Act
Trump Declassifies Election Documents: Here's What We Know So Far
Two Seattle-Area Men Sentenced for Trafficking Drugs Near Homeless Encampments
Former TD Bank Employee Sentenced to 46 Months for $474 Million Money Laundering...
'Complete Fraud': NRCC Blasts NY Dem Josh Riley Over NRDC Donations
Massachusetts Man Sentenced for Collecting Dead Beneficiary's Social Security Checks for Y...
Former Federal Reserve Adviser Sentenced to 38 Months for Lying About Ties to...
Brandon Gill Introduces Legislation Requiring Naturalized Citizens Speak English
OPINION

OK; Now About QE 3 1/2

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
OK; Now About QE 3 1/2

Ben Bernanke, in his latest public appearance, says it’s OK that grandma and grandpa are not earning any interest on their savings account. 

For years, non-risk takers were able to support pensions and Social Security with interest earned on savings.  Right now, of course, that’s no longer possible. 

Advertisement

In essence, Ben said “What’s the big deal, most folks are actually better off.” 

Say what? 

I reread Bernanke’s Indiana economic speech in order to try and understand his convoluted Keynesian logic.         

I then reread it a few more times, and finally, I was able to grasp why grandma and grandpa are better off.  So, please, allow me to enlighten you. 

If grannie and gramps had a $100,000 CD and were earning 5%, then at the end of the year they would be credited with $5,000. 

If you assume no spending during the year that would mean that their net worth would have increased by $5,000.  OK?  So far, so good. 

Now, let’s assume that under Bernanke they could only earn 0.5% on the $100,000.  That means they would only earn $500, increasing their net worth by the same amount, a mere $500. 

Not so good. 

Under Ben, however, there is much more to the picture. 

Through their purchases of mortgage-backed securities, the Federal Reserve has forced mortgage interest rates lower, thus making a home purchase more appetizing, and as the theory goes, it creates more buyers. 

Thus, with more buyers, it should drive the value of houses even higher and that’s apparently what’s happened over the past few months. 

So, let’s revisit grandma and grandpa’s example.  More than likely if, in fact, grandma and grandpa did own a house and were not living in an apartment or an assisted care facility, Ben is sure that their property has appreciated by at least $10,000. 

Advertisement

OK, let’s do the math. 

Again, with interest rates at 0.5%, the amount earned on a $100,000 CD = $500.  Nevertheless, we must now include the appreciation amount of $10,000. 

Thereby, $500 plus the $10,000 appreciation = $10,500.  So, under Ben, it’s $10,500 vs. $500.  And obviously, according to Bernanke’s math, it’s much, much better.

 Who wouldn’t want to be ahead by $10,500 vs. $500? 

That’s awesome! 

On the other hand, I have a major problem with this way of thinking. 

Will it now mean that prior to going to the grocery store for a loaf of bread; grandma and grandpa must first call their banker for a home equity loan? 

And what if they don’t own a house? 

Oh well, maybe Ben can address that issue in QE 3½.         

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement