(09-11-2018 11:21 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:14 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:01 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 10:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 09:58 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  Ban the Fed!

The Federal Reserve should not exist.

Disagree. Without the Fed, the monetary policy goes straight to the hands of the Treasury - overseen by an elected official. One thing I would NEVER want to see is for Trump to have control over the money supply. Based on how he talks, he would be the type of guy to seek full employment at all costs. IMHO, that would be a replay of the Richard Nixon/Arthur Burns scenario that significantly affected inflation in the 70s.

When you look at the last 8 years, it looks like the Fed is already politically motivated.

That's not by the Fed's choosing.

I think you guys are blind.

How so? What specifically?

(09-11-2018 10:47 AM)Claw Wrote:  They kept rates low for Obama for 8 years straight.

Well that was because he could never get the economy out of neutral.

(09-11-2018 11:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 10:47 AM)Claw Wrote:  They kept rates low for Obama for 8 years straight.

Well that was because he could never get the economy out of neutral.

10 trillion dollars to keep it in neutral. shovel ready jobs, cash for clunkers.

(09-11-2018 11:21 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:14 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:01 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 10:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 09:58 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  Ban the Fed!

The Federal Reserve should not exist.

Disagree. Without the Fed, the monetary policy goes straight to the hands of the Treasury - overseen by an elected official. One thing I would NEVER want to see is for Trump to have control over the money supply. Based on how he talks, he would be the type of guy to seek full employment at all costs. IMHO, that would be a replay of the Richard Nixon/Arthur Burns scenario that significantly affected inflation in the 70s.

When you look at the last 8 years, it looks like the Fed is already politically motivated.

That's not by the Fed's choosing.

I think you guys are blind.

Not blind at all. The LAST thing anyone should want is Congress in charge of monetary policy. The very thought of that sends shivers down my spine.

(09-11-2018 11:35 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 10:47 AM)Claw Wrote:  They kept rates low for Obama for 8 years straight.

Well that was because he could never get the economy out of neutral.

10 trillion dollars to keep it in neutral. shovel ready jobs, cash for clunkers.

I remember speculation the Fed would move for the entire year before the election, but they didn't. Trump goes in, and up it goes.

(09-11-2018 11:40 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:21 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:14 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:01 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 10:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Disagree. Without the Fed, the monetary policy goes straight to the hands of the Treasury - overseen by an elected official. One thing I would NEVER want to see is for Trump to have control over the money supply. Based on how he talks, he would be the type of guy to seek full employment at all costs. IMHO, that would be a replay of the Richard Nixon/Arthur Burns scenario that significantly affected inflation in the 70s.

When you look at the last 8 years, it looks like the Fed is already politically motivated.

That's not by the Fed's choosing.

I think you guys are blind.

Not blind at all. The LAST thing anyone should want is Congress in charge of monetary policy. The very thought of that sends shivers down my spine.

Indeed. If you think the Fed is political, couldn’t imagine giving the power back to politicians.

(09-11-2018 11:41 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:35 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 10:47 AM)Claw Wrote:  They kept rates low for Obama for 8 years straight.

Well that was because he could never get the economy out of neutral.

10 trillion dollars to keep it in neutral. shovel ready jobs, cash for clunkers.

I remember speculation the Fed would move for the entire year before the election, but they didn't. Trump goes in, and up it goes.

Rates had to rise. Economy is doing better, etc. The low rates were justified during the financial crises. During the crises, the economy was like a drug addict, and the stimulus was the drug. Just like a drug addict, the economy will only get back to normal once the drug is removed from the system. The Fed is currently in the process of removing the drug (monetary policy) by raising interest rates. They are doing the smart thing and raising the rates slowly.

(09-11-2018 11:44 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:40 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:21 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:14 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:01 AM)Claw Wrote:  When you look at the last 8 years, it looks like the Fed is already politically motivated.

That's not by the Fed's choosing.

I think you guys are blind.

Not blind at all. The LAST thing anyone should want is Congress in charge of monetary policy. The very thought of that sends shivers down my spine.

Indeed. If you think the Fed is political, couldn’t imagine giving the power back to politicians.

I'll admit that it would be MORE political. You are right. But I don't think it is completely apolitical now. I'm not sure anything can be in today's environment.

(09-11-2018 11:45 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:44 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:40 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:21 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:14 AM)VA49er Wrote:  That's not by the Fed's choosing.

I think you guys are blind.

Not blind at all. The LAST thing anyone should want is Congress in charge of monetary policy. The very thought of that sends shivers down my spine.

Indeed. If you think the Fed is political, couldn’t imagine giving the power back to politicians.

I'll admit that it would be MORE political. You are right. But I don't think it is completely apolitical now. I'm not sure anything can be in today's environment.

The Fed is basically quasi political in that, as of now, it is free from Congressional interference when it comes to administering monetary policy. However, the Chairman is appointed by the POTUS and reports to Congress. The Fed is also subject to annual U.S. Government Accountability Office audits and its financial books are also audited annually. I believe the latest Annual Report was compiled by KPMG.

(09-11-2018 11:45 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:44 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:40 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:21 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:14 AM)VA49er Wrote:  That's not by the Fed's choosing.

I think you guys are blind.

Not blind at all. The LAST thing anyone should want is Congress in charge of monetary policy. The very thought of that sends shivers down my spine.

Indeed. If you think the Fed is political, couldn’t imagine giving the power back to politicians.

I'll admit that it would be MORE political. You are right. But I don't think it is completely apolitical now. I'm not sure anything can be in today's environment.

It’s not perfect because of the human condition. But I’m glad you recognize that giving politicians the power would be worse.

(09-11-2018 11:55 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:45 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:44 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:40 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:21 AM)Claw Wrote:  I think you guys are blind.

Not blind at all. The LAST thing anyone should want is Congress in charge of monetary policy. The very thought of that sends shivers down my spine.

Indeed. If you think the Fed is political, couldn’t imagine giving the power back to politicians.

I'll admit that it would be MORE political. You are right. But I don't think it is completely apolitical now. I'm not sure anything can be in today's environment.

It’s not perfect because of the human condition. But I’m glad you recognize that giving politicians the power would be worse.

Yep, I can foresee a raising or lowering of rates prior to every election depending on the party in power's whim. It would be a disaster.

(09-11-2018 11:58 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:55 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:45 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:44 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:40 AM)VA49er Wrote:  Not blind at all. The LAST thing anyone should want is Congress in charge of monetary policy. The very thought of that sends shivers down my spine.

Indeed. If you think the Fed is political, couldn’t imagine giving the power back to politicians.

I'll admit that it would be MORE political. You are right. But I don't think it is completely apolitical now. I'm not sure anything can be in today's environment.

It’s not perfect because of the human condition. But I’m glad you recognize that giving politicians the power would be worse.

Yep, I can foresee a raising or lowering of rates prior to every election depending on the party in power's whim. It would be a disaster.

And yet that is exactly what was done for Obama.

(09-11-2018 01:39 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:58 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:55 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:45 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:44 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Indeed. If you think the Fed is political, couldn’t imagine giving the power back to politicians.

I'll admit that it would be MORE political. You are right. But I don't think it is completely apolitical now. I'm not sure anything can be in today's environment.

It’s not perfect because of the human condition. But I’m glad you recognize that giving politicians the power would be worse.

Yep, I can foresee a raising or lowering of rates prior to every election depending on the party in power's whim. It would be a disaster.

And yet that is exactly what was done for Obama.

No. Rates were lowered due to a damn near total financial system collapse to stimulate borrowing to revive the economy. It has worked and now that $$ isn't needed so the Fed is taking away that $$ via proxy by raising interest rates. Rates would have been lowered whether there was an election in process or not.

(09-11-2018 01:39 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:58 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:55 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:45 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:44 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Indeed. If you think the Fed is political, couldn’t imagine giving the power back to politicians.

I'll admit that it would be MORE political. You are right. But I don't think it is completely apolitical now. I'm not sure anything can be in today's environment.

It’s not perfect because of the human condition. But I’m glad you recognize that giving politicians the power would be worse.

Yep, I can foresee a raising or lowering of rates prior to every election depending on the party in power's whim. It would be a disaster.

And yet that is exactly what was done for Obama.

Date Fed. Funds Rate Discount Rate Votes
June 13, 2018 1.75%–2.00% 2.50% 8–0
March 21, 2018 1.50%–1.75% 2.25% 8–0
December 13, 2017 1.25%–1.50% 2.00% 7–2
June 14, 2017 1.00%–1.25% 1.75% 8–1
March 15, 2017 0.75–1.00% 1.50% 9–1
December 14, 2016 0.50–0.75% 1.25% 10-0
TRUMP ELECTED -----------------------------------------
December 16, 2015 0.25–0.50% 1.00% 10-0
June 22, 2011 0.00–0.25% 0.75% 10–0
December 16, 2008 0.00–0.25% 0.50% 10–0
OBAMA ELECTED ----------------------------------------------
October 29, 2008 1.00% 1.25%
October 8, 2008 1.50% 1.75%

(09-11-2018 01:48 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 01:39 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:58 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:55 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-11-2018 11:45 AM)Claw Wrote:  I'll admit that it would be MORE political. You are right. But I don't think it is completely apolitical now. I'm not sure anything can be in today's environment.

It’s not perfect because of the human condition. But I’m glad you recognize that giving politicians the power would be worse.

Yep, I can foresee a raising or lowering of rates prior to every election depending on the party in power's whim. It would be a disaster.

And yet that is exactly what was done for Obama.

Date Fed. Funds Rate Discount Rate Votes
June 13, 2018 1.75%–2.00% 2.50% 8–0
March 21, 2018 1.50%–1.75% 2.25% 8–0
December 13, 2017 1.25%–1.50% 2.00% 7–2
June 14, 2017 1.00%–1.25% 1.75% 8–1
March 15, 2017 0.75–1.00% 1.50% 9–1
December 14, 2016 0.50–0.75% 1.25% 10-0
TRUMP ELECTED -----------------------------------------
December 16, 2015 0.25–0.50% 1.00% 10-0
June 22, 2011 0.00–0.25% 0.75% 10–0
December 16, 2008 0.00–0.25% 0.50% 10–0
OBAMA ELECTED ----------------------------------------------
October 29, 2008 1.00% 1.25%
October 8, 2008 1.50% 1.75%

Below should make it pretty obvious on why the Fed kept rates so low during the Obama years. The Fed's primary goal is to fight inflation. It no longer had the goal to seek full employment like it did under Nixon's administration and earlier. Inflation rates govern the Fed funds rate, and the single worst thing that could happen is for the inflation numbers to go negative for any extended period of time. Since we've had inflation rates under 2.0% for much of the time, that is why QE, QE2 was initiated with rock bottom interest rates. Deflation would = a Depression.

https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/in...ion-rates/

If a recession hits tomorrow one thing is certain, the Demos will be out fapping themselves till they bleed.