"This man is talented. When Rham worked for me as your president, he was also a lobbyist for Goldman Sachs.
Posted on 07/25/2018 4:25:08 AM PDT by Mechanicos
- President Trump sharply criticized the Federal Reserve this week, saying interest rate increases are hurting the economy.
- Trump will have the opportunity to fashion the central bank in the image he would like as he has four vacancies to fill on the board of governors.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
That’s nice. Killed while washing. Could you please be more specific? ROTFLOL.
"This man is talented. When Rham worked for me as your president, he was also a lobbyist for Goldman Sachs.
Yes, but that dated from the days of FDR, when the government seized all private gold and revalued the dollar. It hadn't changed from FDR to Nixon.
And don't forget price controls on gasoline, made from imported oil.
An ill-advised attempt to hide the effects of OPEC's quadrupling the price of oil.
Excellent post that bears repeating.
Dear God,
does the corruption ever stop? That SOB bho really did rape this country from head to toe.
disgusting.
So, did Rahm lose part of a finger in a Mafia action or something? He just oozes mafia to me.
Before the election Trump said during a campaign speech/press conference that the Fed was keeping rates low to make Obama’s sorry economy look good. Trump also said that if he won the election the Fed would all of a sudden figure out how to raise rates willy nilly.
Many people laughed at Trump’s prediction. Trump won and the Fed has raised rates more since November 2016 than the Fed did during Obama’s 8 years and Bush’s 8 years...combined.
Far from the truth. Rates have gone up 5 time since Trump was inaugurated. Bush took office at the beginning of a recession. The fed lowered rates 12 times between 2001 and 2004 before raising them 17 times between 2004 and 2007 and then dropping them again between 2007 and 2015. Rates were raised twice when Obama was president.
Apparently Rham sliced it off himself......on a meat slicer in an Arby’s restaurant.
With all due respect, the banksters within the Fed, on K Street, and on Wall Street have been doing very well no matter what shape the economy was in for the past few decades. The game has been rigged in their favor.
Many of us correctly pointed out that the economy had been living on a sugar high throughout the Obama administration and that sugar high was most responsible for Wall Street performance. K Street was funded by government spending and record deficits.
Whomever won the election was going to have to face this and deal with it. It is not fair to Trump, but it is reality and what I care about most is the future of my children. Our monetary policy - to include record deficits and gov’t spending - has to be addressed and every year we kick the can (easiest thing for our politicians to do) it becomes worse.
Now for the good news - I think Trump understands this better than almost anyone and he has a terrific team assembled around him. By continuing his very successful policies towards the economy he can offset the sugar high crash that is most certainly coming. He also knows if he tightens the belt of government spending too much in the first term the burden of power will flip quickly along with policy.
He has exceeded my expectations in many ways and I am very thankful for him, but we still have some very fundamental problems to address. Of all the candidates we had, he was not only the one who could win, he was the only one who stood any chance of navigating this tricky situation in a meaningful way. He is off to a good start, but I will not blame him if he cannot do it because it is the trickiest of situations and many key players in the game are against him.
The easiest thing for any politician to do is demand more sugar - consequences be damned. Until the interest rates come up there will not be enough pain to force our government to drastically cut spending..... it’s just too easy to maintain the status quo of huge deficits.
I recall California tried something like that with electricity in the 2000s when energy prices skyrocked.
No one would sell them electricity at the low prices they demanded and they couldnt generate it themselves at those prices.
They ended up having to buy it at even higher prices at the last minute.
Naturally Dems blamed the power companies.
Eliminating the Federal Reserve would be so incredibly consequential, it would cause huge (temporary) economic dislocation and chaos, but would also be celebrated as our second National Independence Day.
Ending our debt-based, printed-fiat, centrally planned monetary system would end the progressive nanny state and Fed.gov as we know it. Progressives and socialist ideologies would disappear, as if a neutron bomb were dropped on them.
Have you recently checked property prices in most major cities? Health care? University fees? The cost of government? All this is supported by something - and that is massive debt, at very low interest rates, in our printed currency - courtesy of the Federal Reserve.
Is it just a coincidence that each of your examples of “inflated prices” refers to a market which suffers “massive” government meddling?
I doubt it...
If you believe that higher prices for America’s goods and services are PRIMARILY the result of America’s “massive debt”, then can you explain how INCREASING the price (i.e.: the interest rate) of that “massive debt” will NOT increase inflation?
In modern America, debt (private and public) is a “massive” factor in production.
Therefore, increasing interest rates must increase inflation.
Always and everywhere, the popping of a debt bubble will result in deflation. You are swimming upstream against a massive current of real-world experience.
Hmmm...
“Real World Experience”...
One ounce of gold cost $1,837.68 on 7/24/2011 and
One ounce of gold cost $1,222.00 on 7/24/2018.
What was the “real world” inflation rate for gold for that 7-year period? Feel free to use a calculator.
The inflation rate for 2011 was 3.0% and
The inflation rate for 2018 was 1.9%.
Do you think that that “real world” change represents an INCREASE?
I agree with you that America’s deficits and debt obligations are too big and should be reduced.
However, I do NOT agree that we should immediately “freak out” about those bloated deficits and debts. A FED-caused recession (like all “real world” recessions) will DECREASE tax revenues and will INCREASE “transfer payments”. The “real world” result: MORE deficits and MORE debt!
Rahm and Madigan will slaughter the opposition as usual. Our electorate is not yet awake.
The Original Mayor Daley or Jr.?
When you can’t even take a good cross-section of the panoply of actual interest rates in the market there is no such thing as a market interest rate.
I use the T-bill rate as a proxy.
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.