Posted on 05/22/2025 8:58:58 PM PDT by RandFan
quasi-private??? President Trump should fire the other half of Powell, the non-private part. LOL.
It that is the case then why is the Fed chair appointed by the president?
For example, under the gold standard, Fisk and Gould's gold squeeze led to the Panic of 1869, which was remedied only by a release of gold reserves for sale by the US Treasury Department. Similarly, in the Panic of 1907, J.P. Morgan and his circle provided the liquidity and credit that resolved the crisis.
Both episodes revealed that the US financial system was vulnerable to manipulation and shady conduct that could lead to or be facilitated in a financial crisis. The gold standard did not prevent that.
The Federal Reserve System was created in order to give a more formal structure and system of oversight to the lender of last resort function. That is not to say that the Fed is always right or does not have abuses, only that a gold standard or silver standard or bitcoin standard is not the answer.
That is very simplistic. The Federal Reserve is not really what you would call a lender per se. The so called “liquidity” is unrestrained money printing.
Those panics were the result of the fractional banking scam concept. What a gold standard does is enable stability to a degree the “Federal” Reserve cannot. You conveniently gloss over the fact that our dollar has lost something like 96% of it’s buying power since they were created. The Fed created the great depression, 2008 and a half a dozen other panics.
It needs to go away as Jackson correctly saw, and America needs constitutional money.
I’m glad that the FR Chair is a different situation. This ruling today makes the difference in long-term Inflation being approx 3% instead of 4%+ because this approach will check future Presidents, in addition to Trump, on forcing the Fed to turn on the printing presses and drop rates to zero.
There is a long and interesting history of Presidents trying to pressure the Fed in various ways.
The whole setup was strange from the outset.
Among other oddities it allows the largest banks to regulate themselves—not a great idea.
yeah
Fractional reserve banking has been around for a long time and is a normal part of how banks usually operate. That includes during the gold standard.
Systems of one hundred per cent cash reserve banking are not immune to panics and recessions. These are almost always due to bad and excessive lending and can cause losses to shareholder capital that collapse lenders.
Blaming the Fed for the lower value of the dollar is wrong. The problem is federal overspending, which is due to Congress and the Presidents whom we elect. More fundamentally, the voters are at fault because the biggest drivers of federal overspending are politically popular programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
As Treasury debt is sold in massive tranches to (mostly) finance those programs, that debt becomes a cash equivalent in that it is a financial asset that can be easily sold or borrowed against. In effect, Treasury debt is part of the money supply, broadly defined. Even under a gold standard, that money expanding effect would continue.
I don’t know about the other panics, but 2008 seemed to have been caused by serious irresponsible behavior by a number of banks. Have you seen the movie “The Big Short”? CEOs and other bank heads were paying themselves ridiculous amounts of money, and this came to a head in 2007. For example the top three officers of Goldman Sachs were paid at least $65million. In spring 2008, their stockholders rebelled and 43% voted for a stockholders advisory on executive compensation. While this was not a “win”, it was a definite “scare”, and the CEO immediately reduced his pay to a “modest” $25million. Another CEO was paying himself over $100million and I believe that bank is gone. A bank was negotiating with companies in England for help, but they were refused, also for unacceptable optics. Other big name banks also faced big problems and change. Other organizations like GE, AIG, Fanny Mae, etc. were also being financially irresponsible and suffered, causing everyday people to suffer. I am sorry my 86 year old brain is not remembering the names of all the culprits, nor do my old eyes have the capacity to do extensive searches for that information. Perhaps others know more about this issue. I know it also had something to do with a change in bank rules in how they and others were allowed to handle money. Anyone know how to explain that one?
I was a small holder of GE stock, and I believe they got into trouble with their very large percentage of business handling loans for products. At any rate after the big trouble in 2008, I was surprised to see that 11 top GE executives were still all earning more than $10million each, which certainly outraged me.
I believe one reason so many of our countries are based overseas is that with cheap foreign labor, top executives can severely overpay themselves, and still keep stockholders happy. No wonder they are NOT jumping for joy to meet President Trump’s urging to bring manufacturing back home. In the 1960s top executives were paid around 40 times what their low level workers received. Let’s get back to a reasonable level of compensation something like that.
One solution would be for IRS to allow only $1million in pay to be deducted from business taxes for companies. Any pay above that would be the stockholders business to decide. This should also apply to overseas branches of US companies as well. Companies would thus be paying more in corporate business taxes, and our national debt would be shrinking. We the taxpayers would no longer be subsidizing billionaires. This would also apply to other organizations like big Universities which are currently paying Deans more than $1million.
This is the basis for my picking $1million as the maximum untaxed business pay deductions. [People earning whatever salaries would still have to pay their usual income taxes.] I picked the aspirational pay of $15 an hour as low level employee pay. Then multiplied that by 40 hour weeks times 52 total weeks worked, times the 40 times figure paid top execs in the fondly remembered 1960s. That comes to around $1million. I don’t remember a lot of complaining then that top execs were suffering from underpayment. With businesses no longer able to deduct astronomical salaries from their corporate taxes at home and abroad, overseas companies would then be able to prove their patriotism by moving operations back to the US. The only thing they would loose then would be the very cheap household upkeep for servant pay in those countries, and some griping by their wives.
One more thought. Remember all the bitching we heard when the big automakers came to DC, hat in hand begging financial help, on their big, fancy corporate jets. Appearances DO matter.
4 years of installing a puppet by election cheating failed
now they will try 4 years of destroying the US economy by keeping interest rates silly
if destruction of the economy fails they will hire terrorists to nuke major cities simultaneously (I wish I was joking) .
They aren't attacking just Trump , this is an assault on middle class US "citizens" by oligarchs who despise personal property ownership and personal wealth by the common folk.
Yeah — I wonder of they could keep a straight face when they said it!
If we lined up all of JFK’s and Trump’s policies I bet we would not even see any difference, shows how far the Democratic party has gone
Constitution?
What Constitution?!
I doan need no stinkin’ Constitution!
Is it time to take down the flag and turn out the lights?
The way I see it, barring civil war, we’ve pretty much lost the country. Judges run everything - the other two branches might as well call it quits and go home. Just another failed nation in tossed into the dustbin of history.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.