You have to scan down at the link:
http://market-ticker.org/archives/2010/01/11.html (the Fed's James Bullard) added, “If the asset prices contain reliable information about future inflation and output, then the Fed might respond to the bubble using monetary policy, but the focus would not be on responding to the bubble per se. Another alternative would be to use regulatory, supervisory and lender of last resort powers for financial stability, but financial institutions would need to be capable of withstanding large shocks to asset prices, as well as other shocks.”
Got it? Financial institutions are incapable of surviving asset price deflation. But wait - if asset price increases aren't inflation, then asset price deceases can't be counted as deflation, right?
Isn't that double-standard nasty?
Bullard has inadvertently pulled back the curtain and exposed the reason that we will suffer another crash in the markets, this one worse than the last.
Why worse?
Since the Fed Policy of "easy money, blow asset bubbles" became the mantra (post 1987) each crash that occurred has been worse than the last and has involved greater and greater portions of the economy. This is an inherent mathematical reality when one tries to paper over the insolvencies exposed by an asset price crash through blowing a bigger bubble - to be "successful" you must place more of the economy at risk!