The Federal Reserve's Shady Past

The Fed had already reduced the monetary thrust that it provides to the economy eight times since Dec. 15, 2015, by raising its federal funds interest rate from 0.25 percent to 2.25 percent.

sure but 2.25% interest is too low by historical standards. It destroys the incentive to save and invest, and distorts the economy in many other ways which ultimately harms the economy. Do you understand?

sure but 2.25% interest is too low by historical standards. It destroys the incentive to save and invest,

Plenty of people would be more than happy to earn 2.25% on overnight money.
 
Each time, the Fed claimed that it needed to guard our economic airliner from inflationary "overheating" -- as if its job is to prevent too many people from working and to make sure that paychecks aren't rising too quickly."
Fire the Fed

its job is to prevent inflation. A monetary history of the USA would suggest that rates should rise now to prevent a massive inflation later which is exactly why they are raising rates. Do you understand?

A monetary history of the USA would suggest that rates should rise now to prevent a massive inflation later which is exactly why they are raising rates.

There is no sign of impending "massive inflation".
 
Each time, the Fed claimed that it needed to guard our economic airliner from inflationary "overheating" -- as if its job is to prevent too many people from working and to make sure that paychecks aren't rising too quickly."
Fire the Fed

its job is to prevent inflation. A monetary history of the USA would suggest that rates should rise now to prevent a massive inflation later which is exactly why they are raising rates. Do you understand?

A monetary history of the USA would suggest that rates should rise now to prevent a massive inflation later which is exactly why they are raising rates.

There is no sign of impending "massive inflation".

The sign of it is in the historical data which shows a big lag between the policy and effect which is why they are acting now, but have already said if it doesn't begin to materialize they can slow down or even reverse.
 
Each time, the Fed claimed that it needed to guard our economic airliner from inflationary "overheating" -- as if its job is to prevent too many people from working and to make sure that paychecks aren't rising too quickly."
Fire the Fed

its job is to prevent inflation. A monetary history of the USA would suggest that rates should rise now to prevent a massive inflation later which is exactly why they are raising rates. Do you understand?

A monetary history of the USA would suggest that rates should rise now to prevent a massive inflation later which is exactly why they are raising rates.

There is no sign of impending "massive inflation".

The sign of it is in the historical data which shows a big lag between the policy and effect which is why they are acting now, but have already said if it doesn't begin to materialize they can slow down or even reverse.

The sign of it is in the historical data which shows a big lag between the policy and effect

There was no "massive inflation" before they started hiking and shrinking the balance sheet.
There isn't any hint of it now, why should they hike more?
 
Each time, the Fed claimed that it needed to guard our economic airliner from inflationary "overheating" -- as if its job is to prevent too many people from working and to make sure that paychecks aren't rising too quickly."
Fire the Fed

its job is to prevent inflation. A monetary history of the USA would suggest that rates should rise now to prevent a massive inflation later which is exactly why they are raising rates. Do you understand?

A monetary history of the USA would suggest that rates should rise now to prevent a massive inflation later which is exactly why they are raising rates.

There is no sign of impending "massive inflation".

The sign of it is in the historical data which shows a big lag between the policy and effect which is why they are acting now, but have already said if it doesn't begin to materialize they can slow down or even reverse.

The sign of it is in the historical data which shows a big lag between the policy and effect

There was no "massive inflation" before they started hiking and shrinking the balance sheet.
There isn't any hint of it now, why should they hike more?
a monetary history of US shows there was often a long lag before inflation starts that the Fed fails to anticipate which then cycles us through periods and boom and bust which is why people like Friedman and Taylor (Taylor Rule) prefer a rule or computer adjusting money supply rather than emotional men.
 
Each time, the Fed claimed that it needed to guard our economic airliner from inflationary "overheating" -- as if its job is to prevent too many people from working and to make sure that paychecks aren't rising too quickly."
Fire the Fed

its job is to prevent inflation. A monetary history of the USA would suggest that rates should rise now to prevent a massive inflation later which is exactly why they are raising rates. Do you understand?

A monetary history of the USA would suggest that rates should rise now to prevent a massive inflation later which is exactly why they are raising rates.

There is no sign of impending "massive inflation".

The sign of it is in the historical data which shows a big lag between the policy and effect which is why they are acting now, but have already said if it doesn't begin to materialize they can slow down or even reverse.

The sign of it is in the historical data which shows a big lag between the policy and effect

There was no "massive inflation" before they started hiking and shrinking the balance sheet.
There isn't any hint of it now, why should they hike more?
a monetary history of US shows there was often a long lag before inflation starts that the Fed fails to anticipate which then cycles us through periods and boom and bust which is why people like Friedman and Taylor (Taylor Rule) prefer a rule or computer adjusting money supply rather than emotional men.

a monetary history of US shows there was often a long lag before inflation starts that the Fed fails to anticipate

How long a lag?
Lag from what?
Link?
 
The Fed had already reduced the monetary thrust that it provides to the economy eight times since Dec. 15, 2015, by raising its federal funds interest rate from 0.25 percent to 2.25 percent.

sure but 2.25% interest is too low by historical standards. It destroys the incentive to save and invest, and distorts the economy in many other ways which ultimately harms the economy. Do you understand?
Interest rates should not be controlled they should be set by the market.
 
The Fed had already reduced the monetary thrust that it provides to the economy eight times since Dec. 15, 2015, by raising its federal funds interest rate from 0.25 percent to 2.25 percent.

sure but 2.25% interest is too low by historical standards. It destroys the incentive to save and invest, and distorts the economy in many other ways which ultimately harms the economy. Do you understand?
Interest rates should not be controlled they should be set by the market.

The market sets all but the overnight rate.
 
Interest rates should not be controlled they should be set by the market.
the real question is how do you control prices to maximize economic growth. Tell us how??
The government is the only source of money. It creates money and spends it into existence. Without spending there would be no money in our economy. Too little spending restricts the economy. Too much spending causes inflation. Then the excess money must be taxed back out.
 
Interest rates should not be controlled they should be set by the market.
the real question is how do you control prices to maximize economic growth. Tell us how??
The government is the only source of money. It creates money and spends it into existence. Without spending there would be no money in our economy. Too little spending restricts the economy. Too much spending causes inflation. Then the excess money must be taxed back out.

The government is the only source of money. It creates money and spends it into existence.

You think if the government went away, there would be no money?
 
The government is the only source of money. It creates money and spends it into existence. Without spending there would be no money in our economy. Too little spending restricts the economy. Too much spending causes inflation. Then the excess money must be taxed back out.
so you support Fed system pretty much as is?????
 
so what would replace the Fed?
Congress has the authority to create money and set its value.

They can create money and spend it into existence without debt or interest.

You want Congress, a political body, to replace Fed, an independent body, chaired by an academic type?

Why?
The government can hire people who can figure that out.

??? you want congress to hire people to tell them how much money to create????? after you do away with Fed??
 

Forum List

Back
Top