How much is $17 trillion? Visualized for reference.

[parsonsj]

Somebody overheard us:

http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/25/news....htm?hpt=hp_t3

Interesting stuff.

[parsonsj]

Originally Posted by Tony

We are talking about a private banking institution, who by law can create dollars out of thin air. All with NO oversight, rules or regulation.

That's not true. The Fed is run by a set of regional governors appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, with a clear mandate: manage inflation, and maintain full employment. There is a need to keep it from being directly managed by the government, because we don't want politicians managing our economy for political gain.

Creating dollars out of thin air has been the way of the US currency for a long long time, and it is a necessary tool for managing the economy. See Spain, Greece, and Italy as we've been discussing.

I don't see conspiracy and criminal conduct by the Fed, I see principled bankers doing their best in an unbelievably complex environment. Sometimes thing get missed and asset bubbles arise. Sometimes they get flattened in time (dot com), and sometimes they don't (housing).

I'm sure we aren't going to agree on this.

[Tony_SS]

Originally Posted by parsonsj

Somebody overheard us:

http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/25/news....htm?hpt=hp_t3

Interesting stuff.

This from the guy who lobbied to repeal Glass-Steagal. Yeah, it should be brought back, even after the damage has been done.

Originally Posted by parsonsj

That's not true. The Fed is run by a set of regional governors appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, with a clear mandate: manage inflation, and maintain full employment. There is a need to keep it from being directly managed by the government, because we don't want politicians managing our economy for political gain.

Creating dollars out of thin air has been the way of the US currency for a long long time, and it is a necessary tool for managing the economy. See Spain, Greece, and Italy as we've been discussing.

I don't see conspiracy and criminal conduct by the Fed, I see principled bankers doing their best in an unbelievably complex environment. Sometimes thing get missed and asset bubbles arise. Sometimes they get flattened in time (dot com), and sometimes they don't (housing).

I'm sure we aren't going to agree on this.

We agree on some things though.

As for the Fed chairmen, The president can only appoint from a pre-selected pool of people. Pre-selected by the heads of the Federal Reserve banks. The chairman is accountable only to the shareholders within the Fed system. An the regional directors are all chosen from within, outside of politics.

Let me ask this... What is more dangerous, a top down monetary policy controlled by a cartel or monopoly of private banking institutions, or a monetary policy that is transparent and accountable and reflects the will of the people?

John: I don't see conspiracy and criminal conduct by the Fed, I see principled bankers doing their best...

Well no one see's ANY conduct because the Fed isnt transparent or regulated in any shape or form! It's ironic that people want to regulate Wall St and banks, but not the Fed.... that is made up of banks. The Fed conducts policy completely outside of any oversight.

This is supposed to be our nation's currency, not the bank's currency, that is used for their gain, at our expense. John, I think you give these institutions far too much clout and trust. Even IF they are innocent, trust worthy principled little bankers, they still need to be transparent and held to certain laws to protect our economy.

But c'mon, you gotta get peeved when Goldman Sachs CEO Blankfien said "he's just a banker, doing God's work". My question is which God?

[Bucketlist2012]

Originally Posted by Tony_SS

This from the guy who lobbied to repeal Glass-Steagal. Yeah, it should be brought back, even after the damage has been done.




We agree on some things though.

As for the Fed chairmen, The president can only appoint from a pre-selected pool of people. Pre-selected by the heads of the Federal Reserve banks. The chairman is accountable only to the shareholders within the Fed system. An the regional directors are all chosen from within, outside of politics.

Let me ask this... What is more dangerous, a top down monetary policy controlled by a cartel or monopoly of private banking institutions, or a monetary policy that is transparent and accountable and reflects the will of the people?



Well no one see's ANY conduct because the Fed isnt transparent or regulated in any shape or form! It's ironic that people want to regulate Wall St and banks, but not the Fed.... that is made up of banks. The Fed conducts policy completely outside of any oversight.

This is supposed to be our nation's currency, not the bank's currency, that is used for their gain, at our expense. John, I think you give these institutions far too much clout and trust. Even IF they are innocent, trust worthy principled little bankers, they still need to be transparent and held to certain laws to protect our economy.

But c'mon, you gotta get peeved when Goldman Sachs CEO Blankfien said "he's just a banker, doing God's work". My question is which God?

Man, I agree with everything you wrote.

The House just passed a bill to audit the Feds, but as usually, Harry Reid will not bring it up for a vote, and he will put it on his desk with the other 33 Bills that he won't vote on..

[parsonsj]

We're coming up on 4 years since many economists claimed that fiscal stimulus and Federal Reserve quantitative easing were going to cause massive inflation and high Treasury bond yields.

So far they've uh, been a bit on the wrong side.

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/0...epartment.html

[GregWeld]

I disagree.....


#1 -- Tell me a bill that you pay today that isn't higher than it was last year.

#2 -- What's saving us from INFLATION is the Europe crisis.... companies don't have pricing power or stickiness

#3 -- What's really helping the inflation numbers is GASOLINE prices -- and they're down because GLOBAL demand is down... otherwise we'd be at $5 a gallon already.

[camcojb]

I don't know how anyone believes there is no inflation if they do their own shopping. I have a friend I support who I had to give a "raise" because of the increased food costs, and he can't make it on the same amount of money as he could a year or two ago. He knows all the prices of the food he buys, and it's climbed a lot, and/or the packaging has been reduced in size/weight and price stayed the same. It's undeniable.

[Bucketlist2012]

Originally Posted by parsonsj

We're coming up on 4 years since many economists claimed that fiscal stimulus and Federal Reserve quantitative easing were going to cause massive inflation and high Treasury bond yields.

So far they've uh, been a bit on the wrong side.

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/0...epartment.html

You are drunk on your kool aid..No Inflation ? Sure if your figures leave out Food and energy costs.

Dude you won't convert anyone with your "facts", they are biased numbers.

Again, the readers will decide from this thread what they think, and you are a lone wolf..No one believes what you believe.

Food costs are up, and the size of the products are down. So an increase of 30% in costs, and a reduction of the size of the product by 20% is Inflation, plain and simple.

[realcoray]

Originally Posted by Bucketlist2012

Again, the readers will decide from this thread what they think, and you are a lone wolf..No one believes what you believe.

Food costs are up, and the size of the products are down. So an increase of 30% in costs, and a reduction of the size of the product by 20% is Inflation, plain and simple.

I am pretty aligned with what JP believes (or at least his level headed approach), I just don't feel like arguing about it.

What I will say is that I heard something on NPR about a study that demonstrated the fairly obvious concept that people choose to access news/media that aligns with what they already believe.

Granted you could say I was listening to liberal government funded NPR because I believe X or Y, and just ignore whatever I have to say but the source shouldn't matter. Doesn't it just make sense that people would do that?

My point is only that it's good to listen to people with other opinions, and it's pretty weak to attack people that have different views because you just may be wrong.