It is Bernanke's opinion that the enormous financial value deflated out of the economy - stock bubble, real estate bubble, and real estate mortgage backed securities fraud - of the 2008 financial crisis may be replaced, or re-injected, by the Fed without ill effect. His contention is that the missing value - whether it disappeared by fraud, or financial "reassessment" - may be replaced through gradual cash injections - quantitative easing - and thus in doing so it will restore economic health and prosperity to the American economy as if by magic; and that it may be done so as to not radically affect the purchasing power of the dollar - that is, stoke the fires of inflation. His rational is: so long as the Fed continues to recharges the economy, it will eventually hit some Nirvana net asset value, and it makes little difference whether that value is in cash/stocks/real estate/or fraudulent securities, or any other liquid, or relatively liquid asset, once the Nirvana point is reached economic prosperity must necessarily ensue - he hopes.
It bears mentioning that all value is perceived value. Perhaps I should I explain with a question: is gold worth $1365 (today's NY close)? The obvious answer is certainly, but that's not the complete answer. The gold prices at the NY close represent the price for which a willing buyer, and willing seller may be easily found to buy/sell an ounce of gold. But that's not the total answer. If one contends that an ounce of gold is indeed worth $1365, it might be a worthy exercise to examine just exactly where the intrinsic value resides within that ounce of gold. To elaborate, let's take for a moment the circumstances of a drowning man; of what value is a bag of gold to him? To him the monetary value of the commodity - gold - is of no rational concern as he has another more pressing problem; the gold, for him, simply represents ballast, and ballast is something that a drowning man isn't all that interested in. You may say that the example is just absurd, and in the day to day context of life it is, but it illustrates - starkly - the part perception plays in the concept of the "value" of... of, really, almost everything. It is just that we're not used to thinking in those terms.
To provide another example: let us say that we walk into a room. In that room there are two pieces of paper lying on the floor - one is a twenty dollar bill, the other a piece of trash. What do we immediately do? We, invariably, walk across the room to the two pieces of paper. Which piece do we invariably stoop to pick up? Always it's the twenty. But why? "... well the obvious answer is, because it's money, and it has value...." But does it really? Holding that twenty or any denomination of currency, I would be hard pressed to point to the aspect of, or within, that twenty that objectively contains it's intrinsic "value." It certainly isn't the paper on which it is printed, and it certainly isn't the ink with which it is printed either. So what is it that causes me to physically be moved to action; if not by any basic resident value within the bill itself, then what? We are physically moved, simply and purely, by belief - partially our belief, but mostly by the belief of others. I am moved to action, regarding the twenty, because of you; because you believe and accept my twenties, I have become convinced of its value; that is, I now believe in the value of currency by the routine exchange of currency for the conduct and needs of daily life - that is I believe, in my heart, that you will take my twenties for other stuff. Virtually any commodity may be acquired with sufficient quantities of "money", with the exception of life itself, and even life is routinely "rented." In point of fact we are moved to action, not by any intrinsic quality found in the bills themselves, but more properly, by what someone else perceives the piece of paper with ink all over to be... in short, belief transforms something that isn't into something that is; that is, a virtually worthless piece of paper - paper that really isn't suitable even for something as basic as note taking, as it has several colors of ink all over it - into something that has driven man to outrageous acts of good, but mostly monstrous acts of evil. In summary, in isolation the twenty has limited "value." It has, essentially no nutritional value, so it can't be eaten; if burned, the heat generated is inconsequential for the generation of warmth; and by itself the bill is not sufficiently durable to act as clothing. So taken in isolation we may have picked up the wrong piece of paper, as the other piece might at least be suitable for note taking. Yet it is the money we seek, with almost no understanding that it is simply belief that gives it "value," and it is belief that maintains that "value" - and the same might be said of virtually every purchasable commodity in our world - everything.
So why do we care? Because, in so far as value is concerned, perception is everything. Why is gold at $1365, and not the $300 of 10 or so years ago? Certainly the gold hasn't changed, so what makes it worth the $1365 of today instead of the $300 of the past? What has changed is not the gold, but insidiously the perceived health of the dollar. The gold is the same gold as the $300 gold, it hasn't changed, what has changed is the gold's price - and that price is simply a measure of the "sickness" of the dollar. Bernanke is gambling that the replacement cash - quantitative easing - of the lost stock/real estate/fraud values of the last 5 years, will not affect the perceived purchasing health of the dollar - as measured in terms of inflation. The stated purpose in creating the Fed was to protect the health of the purchasing power of the dollar and in so doing, the American banking system. What in fact Bernanke hopes to achieve is: to offset with cash the depressing - deflationary - economic effect of the collapse of stock values; destruction of real estate backed security values via fraud - acts for which no one has been prosecuted - and irrational real estate appreciation expectations for the ten year period prior to 2008 ( two bubbles, and a bunch of crimes). And he hops to do it without recreating a "new" bubble. Additionally he hopes to mask the destruction of individual initiative over the last five years by the socialization of America, and he hopes to offset the enormous increase in healthcare costs being realized in Obamacare - cash that comes directly out of discretionary spending. All investment funds are expected to come from this shrinking discretionary income pool. Regarding individual initiative and capitalism - Obama's contention that capitalism has failed aside - individual initiative is always the first victim of socialism; in this case, it is an initiative that has driven American prosperity since before the American Revolution, an initiative that is in evidence everywhere, as evidenced by North America not still being wilderness, desert, or wasteland. If Bernanke is correct America will find prosperity, as if by magic, having neither created nor manufactured anything new of value except lots of new paper currency. If he is wrong then we may expect some derivative of:
http://www.goldonomic.com/When%20Money%20Dies.pdf