those are not important factors, despite what Sarah Palin says. "Sarah Palin says the White House drilling moratorium shows President Barack Obamaâs âculpability in the high gas prices hurting Americans.â There would be tension in the Middle East regardless of what we've been doing there, and I would argue, the situation would be even worse. Drilling for US oil would not have an immediate impact on the prices we pay today. Those are bogus, over-simplified, Palin-quality criticisms
I wasn't quoting Palin. You need to do some deeper research and not rely on soundbites or counter-soundbites. If all bans on drilling on the U.S. were lifted overnight, I'd bet real money on a big drop in oil prices. As for your claim about inflation being contained to a few areas, that's not true either. Simply look at the "prices paid" components for the ISM and other surveys as one example. It's hitting food, clothes and a lot of other areas besides oil.
so what it the difference between Oil Speculators and those of you fools who are long the US Stock Market? Ohh wait, the manipulation by the Government in the US STOCK MARKET allows Speculators to go long the INDU and make money, but when it comes to oil...because it directly effects Sally and Johnny when they pump gas into the HUMMER THAT THEY CAN"T AFFORD, hurts them. Fucking fools. At least this article has some sanity to it. As one poster pointed out, they did not spell out the Weak Dollar cause. But wait, Guither came out and said the FEDS DO NOT SUPPORT A WEAKER DOLLAR! QE3 Meeting begging this week FYI. When a Socialist nation is forming, the Powers must take over all industry. But the can not do it without the backing of the people. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last year, 18.3 percent of American income came from government programs such as Social Security, Medicare, unemployment benefits and food stamps, while earned income accounted for only 50.1 percent, the lowest number recorded. The percentage of government income Americans received hovered around 12 percent during the 80s and 90s but rose during the last decade, the report says, due to an aging population, the economic downturn and an expansion of health care benefits. The biggest increase took place in the back half of the decade as the recession took hold. When looking at those percentages as actual income, the amount of money the average American received from the government doubled from 1990 to 2010, increasing from $3,686 to $7,427, adjusted for inflation. The report notes that Medicare spending is set to skyrocket once Baby Boomers start to retire in the coming years. Most were still working in 2010 Read more: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2...government-income-all-time-high#ixzz1KfRYyh1V
Yeah, I read that stat about government transfer payments earlier today. Just more wonderful evidence for the brain dead to cheerlead this "recovery". Those labor participation rates should also be wonderful news to the bootlickers. As stupid as the rhetoric is about gasoline/oil prices, in some ways it's the only damn thing that brings any sort of attention to these failed monetary policies. The new sort of vigilante's that take Ben and his cohorts at their word that they "want inflation". Too bad for them that when they open up that fire hose of abundant liquidity they can't channel all of that inflation into their "good" vs "bad" asset classes.
you're the only one here who thinks that fed policy isn't the primary reason. in fact, outside of here, you can group yourself with well known charlatans as krugman and most "goldman-ites". maybe you could explain this chart for me? or this one? in fact, pick any commodity you want and correlate it against the DXY and tell me what you see? go on, try it. or maybe you think this is all a coincidence? As for not seeing inflation "everywhere" as you claim, that's fine. maybe we can all eat Ipads like Dudley said? it'd be a joke if it weren't so tragic. as for a dual mandate, that's a bunch of horseshit as well. you cannot push for price stability AND unemployment in the environment we're in right now. i'd argue that the fed doesn't really have the tools to target unemployment at all - as it's like using a broadsword where a scalpel is needed. unemployment is better targeted with fiscal policy than monetary. monetary policy is for price stability. the dual mandate is an excuse to continue the printing of fresh dollars all in the goal of recapitalizing the big banks at the expense of the public saver. i mean, you're not going to try to argue that unemployment is actually improving because of what the BLS claims, are you? this despite over 2 trillion in QE? what a laugh.
According to MIT's Billion Prices Project, U.S. inflation is running at an annualized rate of about 8% over the last four months. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bi...s-mysteriously-2011-04-25?link=MW_latest_news
he's great at posting articles but has yet to make one coherent argument in favor of what the fed is doing. i attribute his lack of doing so to the fact that there probably isn't one coherent argument that exists in favor of the fed, unless one is employed by one of the primary dealers or the fed itself - something i have accused him of in the past.
His opinions are completely consistent with everything espoused by the mainstream media. Whenever I read his comments, it's like listening to another bought and paid for pundit on CNBC.