The Fed no longer publishes the M3, which as I understand, is the true money supply. Probably because they don't want anybody to know how much money is really out there. The CPI is a fake index the government uses to screw all those whose retirement checks are tied to it. The Fed might increase the money supply by 5% in a year, but the government comes up with a bunch of figures that say inflation is only 2%. It's just a way the Man screws the little guy. Why are you so quick to defend a secretive institution that doesn't allow their meetings to be recorded, steals from the poor to give to the rich, and bails out company's (at taxpayer's expense ) that made bad decisions? Is Bernankrupt giving you a bailout or something? http://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Articles/M3_money_supply.asp
I am not defending the Federal Reserve whatsoever . . . I have simply come to the conclusion ( from this thread ) that you are blinded by your "tunnel-vision" and are quite shallow in your understanding of economic theory and monetary policy and open market operations. You are like a 2 year old crying in the corner because your Mommy took your candybar away . . . You make very little sense and lack tremendous economic perspective.
I'm sorry, my purchasing power and hard word is being erdoded away because the Fed wants to let banks print money and I'm not supposed to complain about that? What's this country coming to? Should I work twice as hard so the Man can make more money? Just to clarify. I think we should have sound money that can't be printed out of thin air and you say that I "make very little sense"?
1. You can't have inflation unless there is an increase in the money supply. The Federal Reserve controls the money supply. How are they not responsible? ---------------------------------------------- Inflation via employment. The term NAIRU is an acronym for Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment.[1] It is a concept in economic theory significant in the interplay of macroeconomics and microeconomics. This "full employment" unemployment rate is sometimes termed the "inflation-threshold unemployment rate": Actual unemployment cannot fall below the NAIRU, and the inflation rate is likely to rise quickly (accelerate) in times of strong labor demands during periods of growth.[2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAIRU
Speaking like a true communist. Buffett can do whatever he wants and can say whatever he thinks. He is not a public figure that lives on taxpayer's salary.
Volcker is part of the council on Foreign Relations, so I'm not sure how great he is. He's a part of the governing body like everyone else Obama selected. Honestly, what else would you do with interest rates if inflation was 11%? And at the rate Obama is going he will be Bush III by February. It's funny Landis is protecting him so aggressively, why? You have nothing to gain and your credibility to lose. I'd hedge my bets if I were you. The situation on Iraq is even so that Iraq wants the US out of their country at this point, if Obama in the slightest way wanted the US out of Iraq, he wouldn't even have to rock the boat. Instead it now looks like the opposite will happen, that shows where Obama stands. Did anyone even mention Biden yet? The guy is the senior senator of the #1 state for incorporations, he's mr. business friendly. And as for Geithner, he is part of Wall Street, he was a Fed governor! And he had past connections to other influential men. Everything about him scream insider. Just wait until Rubin gets a position in Obama's cabinet, I'd love people to try to spin that one. 1 Party system. And one last thing, the Bush taxcuts do NOT contribute to the economy. Did any of you get the memo that almost all jobs created in the last 8 years were either health care or housing? The biggest taxcuts to the rich ever and I'm still waiting for the trickle down theory, it's bullshit. You want to stimulate the economy? You don't give taxcuts to Mr. Scrooge. You give taxcuts to the guy who spends every penny he earns, that is basic economics. I don't really get Landis's point that not reversing the Bush taxcuts is the best solution right now, whether he reverses or not has no impact on the economy!
Everyone is entitled to an opinion. But I think that you are missing a few things here, such as giving the appointment of Geithner far too much significance . . . If anything, he will be an "operational" guy with former Clinton Treasury Secretary, Larry Summers actually creating policy and strategy. As for Volker, he's been especially critical of Alan Greenspan. I believe that says a lot right there. Furthermore, with inflation at 13.5% ( not 11% ) it takes a lot of balls to raise the prime rate to +22% and send unemployment into double-digits! Do you not remember the strong political attacks and wide-spread protests against the Fed and Chairman Volcker back then? Remember the indebted farmers driving their tractors onto "C Street" in Washington and blockading the Eccles Building; the headquarters of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve? Man, I sure do. What he did took a lot of balls. Period.
Economics and Econometrics is a tough forum for dealing with the context of trading to make money. Of the five levels involved, the Presidential term only ocmome to grips with some of the interior levels and not the extremes at all. I had several stints at EOP and two of them rose to face but handled poorly the most far reaching effects in the global culture. The outer boundaries today are unique in history. Change isn't a mandate it is the major shaper regardless of any intentions anywhere. Long term economies follow one sequential pattern; I have consciously lived through the pattern more than once. Each time the cycle context was surrounded by huge outside meta cyles. These days we see "soap being sold". You all use soap and what is always sold to you has two characterstics: its "new" and "improved". By making announcements during RTH's day after day. the soap is placed just where it is most apparent: at the end of the shopping rows (as the day opens or as the day closes during RTH's). Long Term cycles are saucers at their peaks and troughs (peaks are inverted saucers). In between at fairly steady slopes (under acceleration then deceleration) the economies and ecomometric considerations ride on a carrier that is MORE than long term. Influences come and go generation by generation. I liked following these MORE than long term happenings and participating on the cutting edge for several. My current six favs (three rising and three sinking) form the carrier the long term trending saucers and intervening trends ride upon: end of the quant era (redraw your financial industry organization charts (money , power and inforamtion flow paths and links and nodes); declining quality of life (see Club of Rome 1958); and dwindling liquid energy supply and on the rise: electronic global communications appied the econometrics; new economic nations; the establishment of global religious war. Looking the other way, annually I note the year ahead in terms of the trending legs (in value and time coordinates) by noting, philosophically, the conjunction of MORE than long term, long term and intermdeiate term fractals. I actually do at as in a rolling average where 6 to 8 up coming legs are apparent. Now you can see the saucer I drew in late DEC, 2007. Selling soap is like an ant pushing against a road apple he is trying to propel up the steepening side of his ant hill. "Stop that shit" doesn't work. EOP committees have always been fun to watch. In the near past ideals were used now, going ahead crunching will be done for a while.
I don't believe that it took a lot of balls for him to do that. Your assumption is that he was in for public service and of improving the long term economic situation of America by having a very severe short term recession. It's true the markets since his departure has roared on for 20 years, but real wages have not. Another way to look at it is that he HAD to deal with inflation, and the more people he put out of work in the process, the more business benefited from the unstable employment situation a lot of workers found themselves in. That high unemployment helped a lot the profitability of companies in the coming years. Furthermore, what you completely omit is that the high interest rates America set completely crippled the developing world and led to great business opportunities for exploitation and world bank involvement etc. It set the tone for globalization. The unemployment rate was the last of Volcker's concerns. As for Summers... a picture is worth 1000 words.