- Aug 8, 2016
- 25,936
- 24,874
- 2,445
We have a currency crisis. That's the problem.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
ever see a conservative who loses a debate and has to run away?Well, Edward's on ignore. I hate doing that, I really do.
If we had a currency crisis you would not be so afraid to present evidence of it. 1+1=2We have a currency crisis. That's the problem.
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?
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?
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.
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.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?
Congress has the authority to create money and set its value.so what would replace the Fed?
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 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?
Congress has the authority to create money and set its value.so what would replace the Fed?
They can create money and spend it into existence without debt or interest.
the real question is how do you control prices to maximize economic growth. Tell us how??Interest rates should not be controlled they should be set by the market.
The government can hire people who can figure that out.Congress has the authority to create money and set its value.so what would replace the Fed?
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 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 real question is how do you control prices to maximize economic growth. Tell us how??Interest rates should not be controlled they should be set by the market.
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 real question is how do you control prices to maximize economic growth. Tell us how??Interest rates should not be controlled they should be set by the market.
so you support Fed system pretty much as is?????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 can hire people who can figure that out.Congress has the authority to create money and set its value.so what would replace the Fed?
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?