[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Opinions/Editorials Title: Beware of Woolly-Minded Attacks on the Fed Welcome to 2015. On the Chinese calendar, it will soon be the Year of the Sheep. On the financial calendar, it looks like the Year of the Fed. Let’s hope the Fed doesn’t get sheared. As almost everyone knows, this year the Federal Reserve will start to “exit” from its hyper-expansionary monetary policies. But the Fed may also spend the year defending itself against a series of congressional attacks on its independence. The barrage started on Jan. 12, when a seemingly innocuous provision was tucked into a piece of must-pass legislation, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, with no hearings, no congressional debate and, for the most part, no notice. The law now requires that the seven-member Federal Reserve Board include “at least 1 member with demonstrated primary experience working in or supervising community banks having less than $10,000,000,000 in total assets.’’ Now, there is nothing wrong with having a community banker on the Fed board; and President Obama ’s announced nominee, Allan Landon, seems well qualified. The problem is assigning board seats to specific constituencies. What about big bankers? Labor leaders? Home builders? Professors? Democrats? Republicans? As Fed ChairJanet Yellen explained at a congressional hearing in July, this could lead to “earmarking each seat for a particular kind of expertise.” Yes, the new law could Balkanize and politicize the Fed. For example, what will happen when Democrats realize that virtually all community bankers are Republicans?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 35.
#3. To: A K A Stone, Devil Anse (#2)
#4. To: TooConservative, A K A Stone, Devil Anse (#3)
#6. To: TooConservative, A K A Stone, Devil Anse (#4)
#10. To: Gatlin, NWO stooge, Globalist Scum, Quantitative Weaseling (#6) A pox on the FED, God bless America. Since the creation of the private FED in 1913, the US dollar has lost 97% of it's value.
#13. To: hondo68, ignoramuses, economic dimwits, Ron Paul Tools (#10) A pox on the FED, God bless America. Since the creation of the private FED in 1913, the US dollar has lost 97% of it's value. Well “tutti trutti!” In 1913 the average individual income was $800. In 2013 it was $26,364. So the dollar lost 97% of its value while income increased 97% … Source. The Fed has now been vaccinated against your pox. God Bless America!
#29. To: Gatlin, -- a fool and his gold are soon parted (#13) In 1913 the average individual income was $800. In 2013 it was $26,364 In 1913, $800 would buy 40 ounces of gold @ $20 an oz. In 2013, $26,364 would buy approximately 20 ounces of gold @ $1300 an oz.
Inflation anyone?
#31. To: tpaine, -- all you glass half empty libertarians (#29) (Edited) In 1913 the average individual income was $800. In 2013 it was $26,364
In 1913, $800 would buy you a Ford car for $525 with $275 left over. In 2013, $26,364 would buy you 2 Ford Fiestas for $26,200 with $164 left over. Wage rises outpaced inflation anyone?
#33. To: Gatlin (#31) In 1913, $800 would buy you a Ford car for $525 with $275 left over. You're comparing the era of one-income families with the modern era of two-income families. Which is why such simplistic comparisons fail so badly over the course of recent centuries. They are inherently flawed with plenty of apples-to-oranges problems.
#34. To: TooConservative (#33) In 1913, $800 would buy you a Ford car for $525 with $275 left over. Don’t try and spin away the fact that Americans are 20 times better off today than Americans were 100 years ago.
The page here will accumulate a series of posts pontificating on how much better our lives are today than 100 years ago. Multiple reasons explain why there is no better time to be alive than today!
#35. To: Gatlin (#34) The page here will accumulate a series of posts pontificating on how much better our lives are today than 100 years ago. In some ways. Such as material comfort. But not in other ways. Such as moral character.
Replies to Comment # 35. The page here will accumulate a series of posts pontificating on how much better our lives are today than 100 years ago. Multiple reasons explain why there is no better time to be alive than today! Oh, I will definitely agree with that. And what we are seeing with the lack of moral character today is both shocking and depressing.
#40. To: A K A Stone, gatlin, Y'ALL (#35) Gatlin (#34) --- The page here will accumulate a series of posts pontificating on how much better our lives are today than 100 years ago. Multiple reasons explain why there is no better time to be alive than today! Yep, no one can dispute that most of us live better today in material comforts than even the upper classes in 1913. But the difference in individual freedoms is quite a lot. -- Knowing of course, the gatlin faction approves of that development.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 35. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|