Trump Doesn't Seem to Care About the Power of Pomp

Trump simply doesn’t care about the pomp and perhaps even the full implications of the power of the Presidency of the United States of America. That’s the theory behind National Review’s Rich Lowry’s recent article, and I think he may be right. While the president’s hair is finally turning a more dignified shade of grey, it has little to do with the weight of the office and much more to do with an absence of … um … orange.

So, unlike every other president who has felt crushed by the decisions they have to make based on information that the public does not always see, Trump in Lowry's words;

"Far from getting crushed by the weight of the office, Trump doesn't seem to feel it at all. Never has any president been as outwardly unfazed by the majesty of the presidency, or made less accommodation to its trappings and norms.

President Trump still acts like he's Celebrity Trump fighting a vicious flame war with Rosie O'Donnell, except his targets now might be another head of state, or his own attorney general, or losing members of his own party.

The idea that he's a representative of the nation apparently makes very little impression on him. He never stops to think that any given gibe might be unworthy of the office, or maybe that he, blessed with more power and showered with more attention than anyone on the planet, has an obligation to be elevating and restrained, even if no one else is."

When America fought off the shackles of monarchy and adopted what had historically been a risky and often unsustainable form of government, a republic, one on of the keys of its success in the early and vulnerable days of the Articles of Confederation and then the Constitution itself, was Washington's approach to the office. I'll leave it to the phalanx of historians to detail how the General sheathed his sword and left a marvelous example of how the Chief Executive of America is to comport himself. And how most presidents have been painfully aware of his legacy, having studied it in some way or another in their long ascent to the office.

President Trump doesn't seem to care, because he obviously hasn't studied Washington beyond whatever exams he had to take at military school that dealt with America's history and civics. And because it doesn't worry him. He feels he understands what America needs without any of the training and political experience every other president has had. That's perhaps the most revolutionary thing about him. The thing that everyone thought would guarantee he'd lose, even to a lousy candidate like Hillary.

There have been brief exceptions: his inaugural speech, his first address to Congress, his what appears to have been honest admiration for and grief over George H.W. Bush's passing. But mostly he has behaved with similar norms to what brought him to the presidency.

And this is what his most ardent supporters admire about him. But they admire his own flaunting of the norms of office because they hope and expect that it will change how business is done in Washington and will shift jobs and growth to the center of the country and loosen restrictions of all kinds, administrative and cultural if you will, that are created in the power centers on the East and West Coasts of the country.

Lowry's piece is a lament of course. He wishes that Trump would just frickin' (my sincere apologies for using a euphemistic version of a non-specific intensifier) dial it back from 11 down to say ... 8? But he doesn't and he almost certainly won't.

So, what will the balance of judgement on this issue be? It depends if Trump's administration can deliver continued growth, to the extent that any administration can - beyond the interest rate policy of the Federal Reserve. And recession would likely make re-election in 2020 nearly impossible. Then there's the cultural condemnation by most of the media, the opposition, Trump's GOP doubters and critics who are reluctantly going along for the ride, as well as Silicon Valley, the Foreign Policy establishment, but less so Wall Street although they have criticized his on-again off-again trade war with China.

For now, we have a possible government shut down coming for Christmas. John Bennett in The HiIl describes the process as The Trump Show: The Shutdown, and he may be right. Whatever tactics Trump uses over the coming days will be more about his own ability as Trump to strike a deal. Not as much about the office of the President.

But look at the legislation and the judges that he has managed to put in place. This is a president who has achieved far more than anyone thought he would on the morning of November 9, 2016. Despite lustfully ignoring the norms that President Washington established over 200 years ago. How do you honestly judge such a presidency? It's still far too early to tell, even as Trump's administration is judged literally minute by minute, tweet by tweet.

Posted by Keeley at December 21, 2018 12:38 PM
Comments
Comment #435965

An unorthodox president was needed to shake up entrenched shadow government interests that were growing ever stronger.

If one promises to clean up the swamp, one must have “balls of steel” and the resolve of a Christian martyr.

The president has forced the political class to reveal themselves for what they are…greedy, spoiled, and power hungry; with little incentive to follow the desires of main stream Americans.

Voters are fond of saying; “There isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the Republicans and Democrats.”

They are correct. President Trump is attempting to change that political dynamic to one that expresses profound differences.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2018 3:29 PM
Comment #435968

Trump is trying to secure the borders, no one else has tried very hard, and no one else (running for office in 2016) would have tried, and IF Democraps get their way, we would have wide-open borders, because the Democrats have an ulterior motive to get more VOTES via more U.S. House representatives, via re-apportionment of representatives (and electoral votes), based on population, based on the decennial CENSUS, which does not verify U.S. citizenship. Democrats are also fighting against a check-box on the CENSUS, despite the check-box being totally inadequate to prove citizenship. Democrats disguise their desire for power (for THEIR party) as compassion for illegal immigrants, while despicably pitting U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes.

Mitch McConnell could use the nuclear option (I.e. to eliminate the 60-vote requirement), which Harry Reid did in NOV-2013, but McConnell probably won’t, because thousands of people killed every year by illegal immigrants, and tens of thousands of victims of other crimes by illegal immigrants per year, is not a good enough reason for Mitch McConnell, and the majority of Democrats, and many Republicans in the Senate and House.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS in the U.S. from 1985 to 2016:

  • YEAR: 2M===3M===4M===5M===6M===7M===8M===9M===10M===11M===12Million
  • 2016: ################################################ 11.3M
  • 2015: ############################################# 11.0M
  • 2014: ################################################ 11.3M
  • 2013: ################################################ 11.3M
  • 2012: ################################################* 11.4M
  • 2011: ################################################# 11.5M
  • 2010: #################################################* 11.6M
  • 2009: ############################################ 10.8M
  • 2008: #################################################* 11.6M
  • 2007: ################################################## 11.8M
  • 2006: ################################################# 11.5M
  • 2005: ########################################### 10.5M
  • 2004: ###################################### 9.3M
  • 2003: ######################################## 9.7M
  • 2002: ####################################### 9.4M
  • 2001: ############################ 7.8M
  • 2000: ################################ 8.5M
  • 1999: ##########################
  • 1998: #####################
  • 1997: ##################
  • 1996: ############## 5.0M
  • 1995: ############
  • 1994: ##########
  • 1993: ########
  • 1992: ###### 3.4M
  • 1991: ####
  • 1990: ###
  • 1989: ##
  • 1988: #
  • 1987: #
  • 1986: # 2.1M (1986 Amnesty)
  • 1985: #
GAO-Report-11-187 states that there were 25,064 homicides by illegal immigrants incarcerated in U.S. prisons and jails in 5 states (AZ,CA,FL,NY,TX) in the 7 years between 2003 and 2009, and the homicides occurred between AUG-1955 and APR-2010 (54.7 years).
However, 90% of crimes occurred after 1990 (after the shamnesty of 1986 (i.e. 2010 - 1990 = 20 years).
Therefore, (90% of 25,064 homicides) / 20 years = 1,128 homicides per year (3.09 homicides per day) by illegal immigrants, which is 6.54% of the total of 17,250 homicides in year 2016, and 1,128 homicides / 12 million is 0.000094 homicides per illegal immigrant, which is 1.8 times greater than the homicide rate by U.S. citizens (i.e. 17,250 homicides / 328 Million = 0.0000524 homicides per U.S. citizen; and 0.000094 / 0000524 = 1.8 times more homicides by illegal immigrants, than by U.S. citizens). And that is only for 5 states, and it does not include data from the last 8+ years (see graph above; os the crime rates by illegal immigrants from 2010 to 2018 is likely to be much worse).

Therefore, claims that illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes appears to be false.
And claims that there are no net losses due to illegal immigrants also appears to be false (estimated net losses are $296 Billion).
Trump seems to be one of the very few that understands the monetary cost and human cost of illegal immigration.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 21, 2018 4:21 PM
Comment #435969

Worst December for the stock market since 1931.
Worst week in 10 years.
How is that “new economy” working out?

If the government shuts down it will give the economy a shove in the direction of recession. This totally unnecessary recession will be the result of tariffs, the tax cut driving over-stimulating the economy, resulting in increased interest rates, and uncertainty in US leadership.

Acting AG Whitaker submitted an informal inquiry to DOJ ethics about whether he should recuse himself from the Mueller investigation. They recommended recusal. Whitaker refused, citing the advice of advisors. Who are these advisors? No one knows! When asked, Whitaker refused to name any. This guy is blatantly corrupt. He was served a subpoena for his integral role in a scam. Meanwhile, he made $1.2 million per year as the only employee of a tax-exempt company paid for by… well, no one knows. He comes from outside the DOJ chain of command. His only qualification is appearing on tv to denounce the SCO.

Mattis resigned over Trump’s announcement of an abrupt and unilateral withdrawal from Syria, and partial withdrawal from Afghanistan. Putin applauded.

Trump is temperamentally and intellectually unfit for office. He is a student of no one and nothing. Right in front of our eyes, the wheels are literally coming off the US government.

Posted by: phx8 at December 21, 2018 4:45 PM
Comment #435970

There are two parties in America, the government and the people. The people are divided. Trump represents the people and is attempting to divide the government. He knows it is the people who govern this country as the founders intended, not a chosen few who place themselves above it’s citizenry.

The Federal Reserve is showing how they are at odds with the American people. The MSM is claiming a recession is eminent, but the Federal Reserve is continuing to raise interest rates. That course of action contradicts logic as well as what was done during the last administration. The Federal Reserves claims they are reining in an out-of-control economy, but the claim a recession is on the horizon casts doubt on that motive. I believe the continuation of rate increases will eventually cause the recession many on the left predict and are hoping for.

The Federal Reserve Board should be fired and replaced with people who are committed to a thriving economy and not committed to destroying Trump. In fact, the Federal Reserve should go the way of the Second Bank of the United States

Jackson, the epitome of the frontiersman, resented the bank’s lack of funding for expansion into the unsettled Western territories. Jackson also objected to the bank’s unusual political and economic power and to the lack of congressional oversight over its business dealings.

To Jackson, the bank symbolized how a privileged class of businessmen oppressed the will of the common people of America.

When a private, anonymous corporation can destroy the economy of an entire nation and perhaps the world, it is too dangerous to exist. It should be put down for the same reason a vicious dog is put down, to protect society.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 4:46 PM
Comment #435971

“…resulting in increased interest rates…”

What a shame that our Pal phx8 doesn’t understand the workings of the FED.

And, he certainly doesn’t understand how China and other countries have been taking advantage of us over many decades. One supposes that he doesn’t care.

I applaud the Fed for the interest rate increases they have instituted.

“Interest Rate in the United States averaged 5.69 percent from 1971 until 2018, reaching an all time high of 20 percent in March of 1980 and a record low of 0.25 percent in December of 2008.”

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/interest-rate

Does anyone believe we should have continued with historically low interest rates just to further the greed on Wall Street and to make the president look good?

We have a great economy despite rising interest rates.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2018 5:01 PM
Comment #435972

I encourage everyone to study this chart. Pay particular attention to the Fed rates during the Obama administration. A chimpanzee can recognize what happened and why interest rates need to rise now.

https://www.macrotrends.net/2015/fed-funds-rate-historical-chart

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2018 5:16 PM
Comment #435973

WW,
If the Fed leaves interest rates low it will create a debt bubble.

RF,
The Fed can and should increase interest rates. By historical standards they are still very low.

I have no problem playing economic hardball with the Chinese, but tariffs are not the way to do it. If we could implement tariffs without retaliation, that would work great; unfortunately, it never works that way. Furthermore, there is nothing that requires the Chinese to limit their response to retaliatory tariffs. They could do some really ugly things to do mess us up, especially with our bond markets.

Most of the pessimism about the economy comes from the stock market decline, concern over tariffs, and lack of confidence in the president. It is easy to overlook a hugely beneficial development- the drop in oil prices. It is HUGE. The drop will relieve commodity driven inflation, and lower costs for virtually everyone outside of commodity dependent regions like Texas and the Upper Midwest. It will drive growth and slow inflation.

Tariffs can be ended in the blink of an eye, and the markets would boom. Will it happen?

The horrendous performance by Trump is his own fault. He is a TERRIBLE negotiator. He turned down a bi-partisan offer last year by Schumer, Durbin, and Graham- $5 billion for the Wall in exchange for DACA. Trump agreed. But at the final meeting Stephen Miller and Kelly showed up and convinced Trump to renege on the deal. The result? No Wall. Not only that, NO ONE trusts Trump to negotiate in good faith. In the latest example, the Senate reached a bipartisan compromise on a CR to keep the government open, and Trump said he would sign. After watching FOX and listening to Limbaugh, Trump once again reneged. Maybe they will work it all out, but in the meantime, the current mess is a self-inflicted wound.

This is what it looks like when an administration is run by crooks and traitors.

Posted by: phx8 at December 21, 2018 5:31 PM
Comment #435974

At least we can agree on interest rates phx8. That’s a start. Over the decades many presidents have attempted to deal with unfair trade and theft of intellectual property. It has only gotten worse.

President Trump is NOT a “can-kicker” as were his predecessors on these issues. I support his efforts to correct unfair trade practices. Yes, China can do some nasty things. And, they would pay a price.

Please tell us pxh8 if you support border security. OH, WAIT, I forgot, you are an open-borders guy.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2018 5:40 PM
Comment #435975

Can someone please explain to this primate how an eminent recession and increased rate hikes due to a thriving economy can exist at the same time?

Is a recession eminent? Do we have a thriving economy? Can someone explain the contradictions we’re hearing?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 5:44 PM
Comment #435977

Where was this debt bubble when interest rates were below 1% for 8 years?
Lowering the interest rate to less than 1% was supposed to stimulate the economy yet that didn’t happen. There was no indication rates would rise if Hillbilly was elected. Yet now that Trump turned the economy around, now we need rate hikes?

Even the Great Depression lasted only 10 years. Most recessions have a duration of less than 1 year.
https://www.thebalance.com/the-history-of-recessions-in-the-united-states-3306011

This monkey just doesn’t see the justification for a sudden increase in rates without an end in sight. I haven’t heard of where the increases are to end up at. Will they continue until the country is in recession? Will that recession come months before the 2020 election?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 5:56 PM
Comment #435978

Weary, allowing interest rates to rise to historical norms is not recessionary. We seek normality.

Keeping interest rates far below their natural level is dangerous. Adjusting interest rates is one way to fight a declining economy. If interest rates are already low, or near zero, the Fed can’t do much to stimulate the economy.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2018 6:06 PM
Comment #435979

If that is true, why has Trump been able to get 4% growth? The fed isn’t the only reason for economic growth. In fact, history shows the fed really can’t control economic activity, the purpose they were chartered for. If they could the Great Depression wouldn’t have happened. We wouldn’t have had the S&L crisis. To put it in terms a chimp could understand, I’d say the Federal Reserve is a scam.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 6:19 PM
Comment #435980

WW,
“Where was this debt bubble when interest rates were below 1% for 8 years?”

The national debt could be viewed as part of a debt bubble.

“Lowering the interest rate to less than 1% was supposed to stimulate the economy yet that didn’t happen.”

Of course it happened. We have experienced one of the longest economic recoveries in American history. The problem is that Trump and the GOP declared GDP growth of 2-3% was not good enough, and that we needed 4% or more. They decided to stimulate an already healthy economy with tax cuts. The economy was already at full employment and corporations were already enjoying record earnings, and there was no additional demand, so most of the money from the tax cuts went into the stock market. It was the logical thing to do.

It was always the intention of the FED to continue slowly increasing interest rates. Over-stimulating the economy with tax cuts only increased the rate of increase by the FED, and brought the day of recessionary reckoning to hand.

The slow and steady growth of the Obama administration might have been sustainable for years. The tax cuts pushed us into a boom/bust cycle.

And by the way, I actually agree with Trump that we should withdraw from Syria & Afghanistan. But there needs to be a plan. There needs to be coordination, not just blurting it out and sticking it to our allies.

Posted by: phx8 at December 21, 2018 6:23 PM
Comment #435981

“The fed isn’t the only reason for economic growth.”

You are correct Weary. President Trump did many things to get our economy humming; things that Obama refused to do. During the Obama administration, the Fed reduced rates to nearly zero. The economy didn’t hum with activity did it? No.

Economic activity, jobs, wages and gross national product are good right now. There is no need for artificially low Fed fund rates.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2018 6:28 PM
Comment #435982

“… why has Trump been able to get 4% growth?”

He did it for one quarter. Obama did it for four or five quarters over an eight year period.

The Great Depression was made MUCH worse by mistakes on the part of the Fed and the government. They raised interest rates at the wrong time instead of lowering them.

The S&L crisis was caused, not by interest rates, as deregulation. The S&L’s were given government backing, but regulations controlling investments were lifted. It was an invitation to the S&L’s to gamble, with any losses socialized by the government. The results were predictably disastrous.

Posted by: phx8 at December 21, 2018 6:30 PM
Comment #435983
Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.
Mayer Amschel Rothschild Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 6:31 PM
Comment #435984

Obama never had 4% growth in any quarter.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 6:33 PM
Comment #435985

Debt bubble?
Money is created AS debt, at a ratio of 9-to-1.
Yes, debt could get worse, but it is already beyond nightmare proportions, with almost $21.89 Trillion federal national debt, and $71.8 Trillion of total U.S. debt.

IF a recession is eminent, then why should Fed rates be raised?

Since money is created as debt (at a ratio of 9-to-1), this upside-down debt pyramid will eventually collapse. Incessant inflation is used to shrink the debt, and incentivize investment, but you will know when the debt pyramid is approaching collapse, because inflation will start to rise sharply (like many other nations who thought they could simply print more money to solve the problem).

And does anyone seriously think the federal government will ever have the discipline to balance the annual budget, much less start shrinking the national debt?

It could take several more decades, but eventually, there will be painful consequences for the $21.89 Trillion federal national debt, and $71.8 Trillion of U.S. debt.
Especially when unfunded liabilities are currently over $116 Trillion (78% of total current value U.S. assets).

Also, wealth distribution in the U.S. has grown steadily worse since the 1970s, and has never been worse since the Great Depression.
Today:

  • the wealthiest 1% owns 43% of all weatlh in the U.S.A. (see below).
  • the wealthiest 10% owns 76% of all weatlh in the U.S.A.
  • the wealthiest 20% owns 85% of all weatlh in the U.S.A.
  • 80% of U.S. citizens owns only 7% of all wealth in the U.S.A.
These numbers have been getting gradually worse for over 30 years.
  • 52.5% |==#===========================
  • 50.0% |=#=#==========================
  • 47.5% |=#=#==========================
  • 45.0% |=#=#==========================
  • 42.5% |=#==#=======================#= (43%)
  • 40.0% |=#===#=================#=#====
  • 37.5% |#====#===============#========
  • 35.0% |======#=============#=========
  • 32.5% |======#=============#=========
  • 30.0% |=======#==#=#======#==========
  • 27.5% |========#======#===#==========
  • 25.0% |================#==#==========
  • 22.5% |================#=#===========
  • 20.0% |=================#============
  • 17.5% |==============================
  • 15.0% +==============================
  • =======1==1==1==1==1==1==1==1==2==2==2
  • =======9==9==9==9==9==9==9==9==0==0==0
  • =======2==3==4==5==6==7==8==9==0==1==2
  • =======0==0==0==0==0==0==0==0==0==0==0 YEAR
  • Source: inequality.org/facts/wealth-inequality/
Therefore, based on government ineptitude, track record, and numerous factors, it is difficult to be terribly optimistic about the future?
This is one problem that will probably solve itself in a painful way.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 21, 2018 6:34 PM
Comment #435986

“IF a recession is eminent, then why should Fed rates be raised?”

A recession is not eminent d.a.n. Why would anyone believe that? Wall Street is NOT our economy. Wall Street craves cheap money. That doesn’t make it a good thing for the country or a majority of people.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2018 6:39 PM
Comment #435987

Going back to 2011, the GDP grew more than 4% several times:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/188185/percent-chance-from-preceding-period-in-real-gdp-in-the-us/

Posted by: phx8 at December 21, 2018 6:41 PM
Comment #435988

Obama also had part time employment gains, not full time employment gains.

And why did it take 8 years to crawl out of a hole? That was not growth, it was recovery. It was the slowest recovery in history. Many recessions last less than a year.

The real question is why we put unquestionable faith in an institution that allows these “mistakes” to happen? How do we know they are not making another “mistake” now?

I can see a gradual increase over many years, but I don’t understand why the many increases have to come about in such close proximity to each other at such a vulnerable time.

Are they mistakes, phx8, or are they planned?

We’ve just been through a recession that resulted in foreclosure on millions of households and the banks that foreclosed on those households received 700 billion dollars in government bailouts. Can you explain why the bailouts were necessary when the foreclosures transpired? Can you explain why the foreclosures were necessary when the bailouts made the banks whole? That whole episode reminds me of the S&L crisis where thousands of farmers lost their land due to “mistakes”. It looks like an operation that is takes place ever few decades and the ones who gain are the banks in every case.

Something doesn’t make sense and I think I’m justified in asking questions and doubting the operations of the Federal Reserve.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 6:51 PM
Comment #435989

My bad. Annual growth was never 4%.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 6:56 PM
Comment #435990

Weary, if not for the Fed, politicians would be in charge. Do you like that better?

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2018 6:57 PM
Comment #435992

At least we can know who our politicians are! At least we can vote politicians out of power if they cheat us! Name the stockholders of the Federal Reserve, Royal Flush.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 7:18 PM
Comment #435993

Weary, give this a read. It will help to understand the Fed.

“Who are the members of the Federal Reserve Board, and how are they selected?”

https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12591.htm

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2018 7:27 PM
Comment #435994
As the 20th century advanced, the financier elite became heavily involved in getting rich off world war and the manufacture of the new weapons of mass destruction that modern technology made possible. Warfare and weaponry, combined with control of credit manufactured through the leveraging of industrial production, were to be the primary means of putting nations and their populations into debt. A materialistic slave society was being created, which books like 1984 warned against. Humanity was lured into compliance through the fantasy world brought about by the mass media by means of advertising, cinema, and television. Another enticement was the growing availability of mass-produced consumer goods.
How It Was Done
While World War I and the Russian Revolution still lay a few years in the future, the international financiers quietly took control of the U.S. economic system in 1913 through the Federal Reserve Act and the 16th Amendment to the Constitution which provided for the federal income tax. The purpose of this tax was to use citizens’ earnings to pay the interest on the “funded” national debt. As with the debt owed by the British people to the Bank of England, this would be one so large the principle could never be paid off.

https://rense.com/general81/extr.htm

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 7:57 PM
Comment #435995

I’m not talking about the board. I’m talking about the stock holders.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 7:58 PM
Comment #435996
Despite the creation of an appearance of conflict between the West and the Soviet Union through the Cold War, the financiers continued to work both sides of the fence through their London-based operatives. In the U.S. they created the modern national security state with both the National Security Agency and the CIA firmly under their control. Then, after President John F. Kennedy moved to forestall the neocolonialist Vietnam conflict and replace the Federal Reserve with a U.S. system of silver-backed Treasury currency, he was shot dead in Dallas ‘s Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.

https://rense.com/general81/extr.htm

The drastic increase of the price of gasoline at the pump acted as a de facto tax on the U.S. economy. But the plan worked. The “petrodollar” and “dollar hegemony” were born, with the dollar becoming the world’s reserve currency. Dollars could flood the world only because in 1971 the Nixon administration had abandoned the dollar’s gold peg as a basis for international currency exchange. Now currencies floated freely in world markets with speculation and inflation rampant. The economies of the world were no longer based on production, but on financial manipulation. It was also the start of the era of monetarism, where the Federal Reserve thought it could regulate the economy by the raising and lowering of interest rates.
Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 8:01 PM
Comment #436049

The Federal Reserve was created in 1913 (by executive order by Woodrow Wilson, who later regretted doing so).
In many cases, the Federal Reserve has caused, and/or worsened economic conditions (e.g. The Great Depression).
Also, as a result (as of SEP-2018):

  • A 2015 dollar is now worth only 94 cents.
  • A 2010 dollar is now worth only 87 cents.
  • A 2000 dollar is now worth only 70 cents.\__30% loss of value
  • A 1990 dollar is now worth only 54 cents./
  • A 1980 dollar is now worth only 34 cents.\__113% loss of value
  • A 1970 dollar is now worth only 16 cents./
  • A 1960 dollar is now worth only 12 cents.
  • A 1950 dollar is now worth only 10 cents.\__40% loss of value
  • A 1940 dollar is now worth only 06 cents./
  • A 1933 dollar is now worth only 05 cents.\__25% loss of value
  • A 1913 dollar is now worth only 04 cents./
When the Federal Reserve gained control the volume of money, it became our absolute masters, and the Federal Reserve had to get the Gold away from our grandparents. This was accomplished in 1933 with the threats of fines and imprisonments by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and with the help of his aide, Harry Hopkins, who said:
  • “Elect, elect, elect, tax, tax, tax, spend, spend, spend, for the people are too damned stupid to understand”.
Few (if any) will dare speak above a whisper in condemnation of the Federal Reserve:
  • “Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” — Woodrow Wilson, President of the U.S. 1913-1921;
  • In a letter to Edward M. House (President Woodrow Wilson’s closest aide), dated November 23, 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt said: “The real truth of the matter is, and you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson.” — Woodrow Wilson;
  • “I sincerely believe … that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale.” — Thomas Jefferson;
  • “Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none has been more effective than that which deludes them with paper money.” — Daniel Webster;
  • “All the perplexities, confusion and distresses in America arise not from defects in the constitution or confederation, nor from want of honor or virtue, as much from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation.” — John Adams;
  • “There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.” — Lord John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946), renowned British economist;
  • Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr., in 1913 said: “When the President signs this bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized….the worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill.”
The U.S. National Debt (federal government debt) is $21.9 Trillion, and unfunded liabilities are over $116 Trillion (78% of total U.S. net worth).
Americans owe about $13 Trillion to the Federal Reserve.
Debt owed by the U.S. Federal Government to the Federal Reserve skyrocketed from about $0.5 Trillion in 2008 to over $2.8 Trillion in 2018.
About $8 Trillion of the U.S. National Debt was money borrowed from Social Security, and is still owed to Social Security.
In 2008, Social Security was pay-as-you-go, but since 2008, borrowing is required to fund Social Security.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 22, 2018 3:07 PM
Comment #436050

Before the Fed, there were over 30,000 different currencies being tendered around the US. There were times when banks did not have enough currency to honor withdrawals requested by customers. There were wild swings in the economy.

The Fed is charged with creating conditions that result in maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates. American business depends on a stable monetary system.

Some say that these responsibilities could be handled by The US Treasury or directly by congress. I don’t like this choice as there is too great a danger for politicians to manipulate the system for their benefit. The gold standard was simply to inflexible to handle our fast growing economy and could be manipulated by other countries holding vast quantities of gold.

My vote is to stay with the Federal Reserve System and to reform how it addresses banks considered “too big to fail” and other issues or…

Convince congress to only spend money it has on hand. There would be no need for the US to borrow money using government bonds.

Does anyone, anyone at all believe we can balance our budget?

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 22, 2018 4:33 PM
Comment #436051

We should all keep in mind that it is congress that spends money. It is the Fed that provides the dollars for that spending. Which comes first, the spending, or the dollars to spend?

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 22, 2018 4:57 PM
Comment #436052
There are two parties in America, the government and the people.

Weary such a misguided view of our political system. The two parties are the billionaires and the people they buy to make the laws of this country. The people aren’t a party they are too divided to be a party. The government isn’t a party. Those tasked with implementing programs and enforcing the laws aren’t a party they are hired hands that get a job done.

The people are divided. Trump represents the people and is attempting to divide the government.

How can one person be so misguided? Trump represents the interests of Putin and Trump. Not the people of this country and definitely not the interests of this country. Trump has diverted the attention of most of us with his clown show.

He knows it is the people who govern this country as the founders intended, not a chosen few who place themselves above it’s citizenry.


Is this from the Onion Weary? The people of this country vote for those who govern this country. They vote based upon who the competing billionaires decides will be running for the office. A chosen few, especially since Trump was sworn into office, determine what laws get passed and what laws don’t. We have a system of competing billionaires that determine the laws of this country. Trump is a puppet of Putin and some Russian oligarchs. He shows this by undermining the US on the world stage. His clown act benefits Putin.


Posted by: j2t2 at December 22, 2018 5:36 PM
Comment #436053

Putins bi**h ,not the voice of the people of the United States.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 22, 2018 5:53 PM
Comment #436054

Debt is used for spending, not the dollar. If the dollar comes first, then taxes must raise those dollars before they can be spent. The government could never tax enough to cover our current spending. If they did heads would be on pikes.

Fractional Reserve banking allows a fictitious dollar to fund the spending.

It is always possible to balance our budget. It’s not a matter of not having enough money. It’s a matter of having too much spending. If you ask if politicians have the will power to balance the budget, then the answer would be, “No”.

Of course, if the 16th and 17th amendment were to be repealed, and the structure of the federal government returned to the pre-Progressive structure it would be very easy to balance the budget. The states would be the determining factor in federal spending, not the people. The states would pay for the federal programs the states deemed necessary by way of constitutional amendments.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 22, 2018 5:55 PM
Comment #436055

j2t2, can you break down what the information in your link means?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 22, 2018 6:00 PM
Comment #436056

I ask because I don’t think you know what it means. I think you see the word Trump and the word Russian and immediately get triggered.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 22, 2018 6:03 PM
Comment #436057

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/01/us/politics/deripaska-ohr-steele-fbi.html

Mr. Deripaska has denied the allegations, and his allies contend that the sanctions are punishment for refusing to play ball with the Americans.
Yet just as it was becoming clear that Mr. Deripaska would provide little help to the Americans, Mr. Steele was talking to Mr. Ohr about an entirely new issue: the dossier.
Posted by: Weary Willie at December 22, 2018 6:17 PM
Comment #436059

Steele was part of the counter-intelligence effort to turn Deripaska. Reportedly Deripaska refused to turn. Trump paid off the billionaire oligarch the other day by removing sanctions on aluminum.

Posted by: phx8 at December 22, 2018 7:38 PM
Comment #436060

Or, Trump knew Deripaska was being set up like many others and simply set the record straight. We can both look at it the way we want because, guess what, there’s no evidence Trump was involved!

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 22, 2018 10:52 PM
Comment #436061

phx8, there are little green men on Mars. I’ll say it a hundred times so you must believe me!

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 22, 2018 10:57 PM
Comment #436071

“Does anyone, anyone at all believe we can balance our budget?”

Yes. Absolutely.

The debt went from nothing up to @ $5 trillion under Reagan & Bush #41 due to tax cuts and increased military spending. In 1994 the Democrats passed an Omnibus bill that raised taxes. The result was an economic boom and a healthy economy. By the end of the Clinton administration, just a few years later, the annual budget was running a surplus, and the national debt stabilized at @ $5 trillion.

The Clinton administration ordered a study asking this: should the US reduce the national debt to zero? The study concluded that it should not be reduced below $3 trillion in order to ensure the smooth functioning of the Treasury markets.

Bush #43 cut taxes twice and increased military spending. We saw two recessions in just eight years, and the annual federal deficit exploded, going from a surplus to a $1.4 trillion annual deficit, while the national debt doubled.

It took literally trillions for the Obama administration to dig us out of that hole. After six years, the annual federal deficit was reduced from $1.4 trillion to @ $400 billion. Enter Paul Ryan and the GOP and another round of tax cuts, increased military spending, and- gee, who woulda thunk it!- an impending recession.

History teaches a clear lesson. The deficit and the debt can be reduced or even eliminated. It requires tax increases, cuts to military spending, and close regulation of the financial industry. It requires the failed policies of conservatism be replaced by the party that is capable of actually governing, namely, the Democrats.

Posted by: phx8 at December 23, 2018 4:01 PM
Comment #436072

Democratics can’t govern because their issues are always the same. The 2 phx8 mentioned are the standard go to line of raise taxes and cut military. They can’t govern because they refuse to include addressing excess spending and graft, fraud, and corruption, and duplication. They protect a huge voting block called the government employee by refusing to deal with these pressing issues.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 23, 2018 5:41 PM
Comment #436073

My complaints with the Federal Reserve are:

  • (01) excessive inflation since 1955; excessive inflation devalues the currency, and creates instability; the Federal Reserve should aim for lower inflation rates; However, higher interest rates means more money for the Federal Reserve (an obvious conflict of interest);
  • (02) while the President of the U.S. appoints the Federal Reserve chairperson, and the Board of Governors is comprised of 7 members who are appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, the Federal Reserve is mostly privately owned. The stockholders in the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks are the privately owned banks that fall under the Federal Reserve System. These include all national banks (chartered by the federal government) and those state-chartered banks that wish to join and meet certain requirements. About 38 percent of the nation’s more than 8,000 banks are members of the system, and thus own the Federal Reserve banks.
  • (03) the accuracy of the inflation calculations (the calculations have been fudged twice in 1983 and 1998), essentially decreasing inflation each time by about half;
  • (04) the Federal Reserve is a debt machine, and money is created as debt at too high of a 9-to-1 ratio; most people are not aware of this;
  • (05) the greatest period of economic growth in the U.S. was between 1869 and 1913 (with exception of panic of 1873), before the Federal Reserve existed;
  • (06) the Federal Reserve creates bubbles and busts;
  • (07) the Federal Reserve favors the “Too Big To Fail” banks;
  • (08) the Federal Reserve gives secret bail-outs to their friends (i.e. mostly banks, including foreign banks, and other large borrowers);
  • (09) the Federal Reserve is paying banks to NOT lend money, by paying interest on excess reserves of U.S. banks parked at the Federal Reserve; since year 2008, this has grown from ZERO to $1.8 Trillion parked at the Federal Reserve;
  • (10) the Federal Reserve has a horrible record of failures. See the chart below. The Federal Reserve often admits to causing the Great Depression;
  • (11) the Federal Reserve is (mostly) unaccountable to the American people; as a result, the Federal Reserve is constantly experimenting with interest rates, excessive money creation (leading to higher inflation), and with such a horrbile track record, there is no proof that they know what they are doing;
  • (12) lastly, the Federal Reserve could do a much better job, and there is plenty of room for improvement; however, conflicts of interest, greed, and creation of debt-to-reserves at 9-to-1 ratio creates an pyramid scheme with the U.S. deep-in-debt to the Federal Reserve (Americans owe about $13 Trillion to the Federal Reserve, and debt owed by the U.S. Federal Government to the Federal Reserve skyrocketed from about $0.5 Trillion in 2008 to over $2.8 Trillion in 2018).
  • INFLATION(1914 to 2018):
    +22.5%|=====================================================
    +20.0%|==#==================================================
    +17.5%|=##=============#====================================
    +15.0%|=###============#====================================
    +12.5%|=###============#================#===================
    +10.0%|=###==========#=##============#==#===================
    +07.5%|=###==========#=##============#=##===================
    +05.0%|=###==========#=####=======##=####===##==============
    +02.5%|=####======#==######=##########################=###=#
    +00.0%|#####=====##=########################################
    ====Y|1 11 11 1 111 1 1 11 1 111 11 11 1 111 1 111 111 1 1 111 111 1 1122 2 2 22 2 22 2
    ====E|9 99 99 9 999 9 9 99 9 999 99 99 9 999 9 999 999 9 9 999 999 9 9900 0 0 00 0 00 0
    ====A|1 11 22 2 223 3 3 33 4 444 45 55 5 566 6 667 777 7 8 888 899 9 9900 0 0 01 1 11 1
    ====R|4 68 02 4 680 2 4 68 0 246 80 24 6 802 4 680 246 8 0 246 802 4 6802 4 6 80 2 46 8
    -00.0%|====######==#=====#=#================================
    -02.5%|====#=####==#=====#==================================
    -05.0%|====#===##===========================================
    -07.5%|====#===##===========================================
    -10.0%|====#====#===========================================
    -12.5%|====#================================================

    1914: +01.00% Woodrow Wilson (WW1)
    1915: +01.98% Woodrow Wilson (WW1)
    1916: +12.62% Woodrow Wilson (WW1)
    1917: +18.10% Woodrow Wilson (WW1)
    1918: +20.44% Woodrow Wilson (WW1)
    1919: +14.55% Woodrow Wilson
    1920: +02.65% Woodrow Wilson
    1921: -10.82% Warren G. Harding
    1922: -02.31% Warren G. Harding
    1923: +02.37% Warren G. Harding, Calvin Coolidge
    1924: +00.00% Calvin Coolidge
    1925: +03.47% Calvin Coolidge
    1926: -01.12% Calvin Coolidge
    1927: -02.26% Calvin Coolidge
    1928: -01.16% Calvin Coolidge
    1929: +00.58% Herbert Hoover (Great Depression)
    1930: -06.40% Herbert Hoover (Great Depression)
    1931: -09.32% Herbert Hoover (Great Depression)
    1932: -10.27% Herbert Hoover (Great Depression)
    1933: +00.76% Franklin D. Roosevelt (Great Depression)
    1934: +01.52% Franklin D. Roosevelt (Great Depression)
    1935: +02.99% Franklin D. Roosevelt (Great Depression)
    1936: +01.45% Franklin D. Roosevelt (Great Depression)
    1937: +02.86% Franklin D. Roosevelt (Great Depression)
    1938: -02.78% Franklin D. Roosevelt (Great Depression)
    1939: +00.00% Franklin D. Roosevelt (Great Depression)
    1940: +00.71% Franklin D. Roosevelt
    1941: +09.93% Franklin D. Roosevelt (WW2)
    1942: +09.03% Franklin D. Roosevelt (WW2)
    1943: +02.96% Franklin D. Roosevelt (WW2)
    1944: +02.30% Franklin D. Roosevelt (WW2)
    1945: +02.25% Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman (WW2)
    1946: +18.13% Harry S. Truman
    1947: +08.84% Harry S. Truman
    1948: +02.99% Harry S. Truman
    1949: -02.07% Harry S. Truman
    1950: +05.93% Harry S. Truman
    1951: +06.00% Harry S. Truman
    1952: +00.75% Harry S. Truman
    1953: +00.75% Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1954: -00.74% Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1955: +00.37% Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1956: +02.99% Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1957: +02.90% Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1958: +01.76% Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1959: +01.73% Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1960: +01.36% Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1961: +00.67% John F. Kennedy
    1962: +01.33% John F. Kennedy
    1963: +01.64% John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Jonson
    1964: +00.97% Lyndon B. Jonson
    1965: +01.92% Lyndon B. Jonson
    1966: +03.46% Lyndon B. Jonson
    1967: +03.04% Lyndon B. Jonson
    1968: +04.72% Lyndon B. Jonson
    1969: +06.20% Richard Nixon
    1970: +05.57% Richard Nixon
    1971: +03.27% Richard Nixon
    1972: +03.41% Richard Nixon
    1973: +08.71% Richard Nixon
    1974: +12.34% Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford
    1975: +06.94% Gerald Ford
    1976: +04.86% Gerald Ford
    1977: +06.70% Jimmy Carter
    1978: +09.02% Jimmy Carter
    1979: +13.29% Jimmy Carter
    1980: +12.52% Jimmy Carter
    1981: +08.92% Ronald Reagan
    1982: +03.83% Ronald Reagan
    1983: +03.79% Ronald Reagan
    1984: +03.95% Ronald Reagan
    1985: +03.80% Ronald Reagan
    1986: +01.10% Ronald Reagan
    1987: +04.43% Ronald Reagan
    1988: +04.42% Ronald Reagan
    1989: +04.65% George.H.W. Bush
    1990: +06.11% George.H.W. Bush
    1991: +03.06% George.H.W. Bush
    1992: +02.90% George.H.W. Bush
    1993: +02.75% Bill Clinton
    1994: +02.67% Bill Clinton
    1995: +02.54% Bill Clinton
    1996: +03.32% Bill Clinton
    1997: +01.70% Bill Clinton
    1998: +01.61% Bill Clinton
    1999: +02.68% Bill Clinton
    2000: +03.39% Bill Clinton
    2001: +01.55% George W. Bush
    2002: +02.38% George W. Bush
    2003: +01.88% George W. Bush
    2004: +03.26% George W. Bush
    2005: +03.42% George W. Bush
    2006: +02.54% George W. Bush
    2007: +04.08% George W. Bush
    2008: +00.09% George W. Bush (recession)
    2009: +02.72% Barack Obama
    2010: +01.50% Barack Obama
    2011: +02.96% Barack Obama
    2012: +01.74% Barack Obama
    2013: +02.13% Barack Obama
    2014: +00.76% Barack Obama
    2015: +00.73% Barack Obama
    2016: +02.07% Barack Obama
    2017: +02.11% Donald Trump
    2018: +02.24% Donald Trump

    So, as a result (as of SEP-2018):

      A 2018 dollar has a loss of value of 43% since 2000, 85% since 1990, 733% since 1960).
    • A 2015 dollar is now worth only 94 cents.
    • A 2010 dollar is now worth only 87 cents.
    • A 2000 dollar is now worth only 70 cents.\__30% loss of value
    • A 1990 dollar is now worth only 54 cents./
    • A 1980 dollar is now worth only 34 cents.\__113% loss of value
    • A 1970 dollar is now worth only 16 cents./
    • A 1960 dollar is now worth only 12 cents.
    • A 1950 dollar is now worth only 10 cents.\__40% loss of value
    • A 1940 dollar is now worth only 06 cents./
    • A 1933 dollar is now worth only 05 cents.\__25% loss of value
    • A 1913 dollar is now worth only 04 cents./

    The only silver lining is that there are no other currencies that are more stable, or more widely used.

    As of 2017, the U.$. Dollar accounts for about 63% of world reserve currencies; the next most used currency is the EURO, which accounts for 20%, and then all the rest around the world account for the remaining 17% (combined); the U.S. Dollar has never fallen below 61% over the last 15 years; the Chinese Renminbi accounts for 1.23% .

    So, while the U.$. Dollar is like a hooker on crank cocaine, most other currencies are like a hooker with AIDs.

    Inflation is good for debt, and since the federal national debt is $21.9 Trillion, inflation is used to help shrink the debt, and there has been 63 years of positive inflation (from 1955 to 2018), and as high as 13.29% in 1979. So that is another ulterior motive for raising interest rates.

    Posted by: d.a.n at December 23, 2018 7:07 PM
    Comment #436077

    d.a.n.,
    Controlling inflation is perhaps the most important single goal of the Fed. Investors in government Treasuries typically invest very, very large amounts of money because they seek safety and certainty, and the US dollar is the currency of last resort. Those big government investors have a fiduciary responsibility, and neither they nor US investors are about to put money into bonds that will be intentionally deflated.

    There is nothing sinister about the Fed is doing right now. It has been doing this since the Recession. Rates dropped to virtually zero because we faced a catastrophic economic situation, DEFLATION. And we are all very, very fortunate that Obama and his team made the right decisions to pull the US out of that crater. It is hard to overstate just how good a job they did of saving the economy of the US and the world.

    WW,
    “Standard go-to issues”? Are you kidding? We’re discussing government debt. This is pretty basic stuff. There are revenues. There is spending. The one big change under Trump is a huge increase in military spending. The other huge change is the tax cuts, and tariffs. Trump’s administration set in motion the chain of events that will create a boom… and then a bust. They were unsatisfied with the slow, steady, sustainable growth of Obama. So they gave the 1% and the corporations a huge tax cut. I have no idea why they thought more military spending was a good idea. It over-stimulated the economy, especially the stock market. We saw the boom- a quarter of GDP over 4%. Now we are going to see the bust.

    Posted by: phx8 at December 23, 2018 10:30 PM
    Comment #436082

    phx8, I think you and I could eventually see eye to eye if you could look at my version of history.

    Do you scoff at the idea of trying to empathize with how I view my world?

    When thinking about how you might view your world, I think you believe I should have the same world view you do. I believe you think I am wrong in my world view, so why bother with trying. Am I right?

    I really do get the impression you think I’m wrong and need to be corrected.

    Do you think I’m mistaken, phx8? Do I need to be corrected?

    Clearly we have a difference of opinion about illegal immigration. You are in favor of allowing undocumented people to enter the country.

    I am in favor of following the protocols used at Ellis Island to vet incoming immigrants. If they didn’t pass the test, they didn’t get off the island. They were sent back to their home country. They were to verify they had a sponsor, or the wealth, to provide for themselves. They were to verify they were healthy. They were to be documented.

    Those procedures worked, phx8. Our current situation where immigration is concerned is the product of Democratic policies in practice for decades. Democratic policies are the instigators of the changes in immigration policy and they are being compared to the proven policies that were demonstrated to be effective. In my opinion, it is obvious those changes have been a failure, and at least the procedures need to be amended.

    I ask the question, “Why do you support policies that abandon the proven and effective policies that were effective for decades, and ignore the fact the flaws in your policies are the only points of contention?”. History demonstrates the policies, before the Democratic party’s revisions, worked to provide the manpower to build the greatest country in the history of the world. Why are you refusing to acknowledge the flaws in our current immigration policy?

    The same argument can be made with the budget. We have two different views of what the federal government’s obligations are. It is also been proven that the federal government isn’t needed for this country to prosper. I believe that people left alone with a problem tend to solve that problem sooner than a person left waiting for a solution to appear from an external source. Can you agree with that, phx8?

    Look at this from my point of view before you respond.

    Posted by: Weary Willie at December 24, 2018 1:00 AM
    Comment #436103
    phx8 wrote: d.a.n., Controlling inflation is perhaps the most important single goal of the Fed.
    Correct. And the Federal Reserve has done a horrible job of it.
    In fact, there is a strong argument that the Federal Reserve helped cause the Great Depression. Members of the Federal Reserve have admitted that they believe that the Federal Reserve helped caused the Great Depression.
    phx8 wrote: Investors in government Treasuries typically invest very, very large amounts of money because they seek safety and certainty, and the US dollar is the currency of last resort.
    The U.S. currency is the currency of choice (not the currency of “last resort”), because (as of 2017), the U.$. Dollar accounts for about 63% of world reserve currencies (source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_currency#Global_currency_reserves).
    However, that could change IF the federal debt is allowed to continue to grow by trillions per year. The mortgage bubble and crisis, culminating in 2008, almost brought down the debt-driven house-of-cards, and the chosen solution was to create several Trillion dollars out of thin air to prop up the banks (and companies like General Motors). Keeping the banks solvent may have been necessary, but bailing out General Motors and some other companies was a mistake (and U.S. tax payers lost over $10 Billion on GM; about twice the amount of $5.7 Billion that the Trump administration is now requesting for to help secure the borders). At any rate, that is a good example of the Federal Reserve helping to create far too much debt, discouraging savings, eroding retirement savings, driving people into risky markets, helping to create bubble-after-bubble, and destabilizing the economy. I don’t think it is always driven by nefarious motives; it is sometimes because the Federal Reserve does not know what it is doing.
    phx8 wrote: Those big government investors have a fiduciary responsibility, and neither they nor US investors are about to put money into bonds that will be intentionally deflated.
    No one said the Federal Reserve should cause deflation. The troulbe with the Federal Reserve is that it intentionally keeps inflation too high (because it helps shrink the $21.9 Trillion federal national debt), but that cheats people, and it erodes the value of the dollar, and forces people and entities to all run around like chickens with their heads cut-off, looking for a place to invest, in order to not lose to incessant inflation. It is very damaging to retirement funds, that quickly erode, due to high inflation. Also, inflation is probably understated (since they inflation calculation were fugded twice: in 1983, and again in 1998).
    phx8 wrote: There is nothing sinister about the Fed is doing right now.
    Yes there is. And 12 of the things it does wrong are listed above. The Federal Reserve has also been complicit (with the irresponsible spending of the U.S. federal government) in creating a $21.9 Trillion federal national debt, which may (some day) be the very thing that destroys the U.S. economy. Also, the $21.9 Trillion federal nation debt is costing U.S. tax payers over $1 Billion per day in interest. So, the $5.7 Billion being requested by the Trump administration is less than the cost of 6 days of interest on the $21.9 Trillion federal national debt. In my opinion, physical barriers are a very good idea in certain high-population areas where large caravans of thousands of people could, otherwise, easily storm across the border. The border wall/fence in San Diego has been proven to be very effective. However, that is only a portion of common-sense remedies also needed to curb illegal immigration (e.g. require eVerify; punish greedy illegal employers; eliminate birthright citizenship and other magnets; amend laws that are easily abused; call out Democrats who despicably pit U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes).
    phx8 wrote: It has been doing this since the Recession. Rates dropped to virtually zero because we faced a catastrophic economic situation, DEFLATION.
    Even by the federal government’s and Federal Reserve’s fugded inflation calculations, there has been NO deflation (year by year) since 1955. Low rates and reckless lending led to the mortgage bubble from 2000 to 2008.
    phx8 wrote: And we are all very, very fortunate that Obama and his team made the right decisions to pull the US out of that crater. It is hard to overstate just how good a job they did of saving the economy of the US and the world.
    I disagree, because (a) the bank-bail-out occurred before Obama took office, and (b) less reckless lending that led to the debt-driven mortgage-bubble is not rocket science. And (c) where was the Federal Reserve during the 8 years from year 2000 to 2008? The Federal Reserve was complicit in creating that huge debt bubble. And, (d) to make matters worse, Obama doubled the federal national debt from $10 Trillion to $20 Trillion by the end of 2016 (setting a new, all-time record in spending). Also, (e), Democrats went along with the increase in Military spending. The economy improved some from 2009 to 2016 in spite of Obama (excluding that fact that the national debt doubled to $20 Trillion).
    phx8 wrote: We’re discussing government debt. This is pretty basic stuff. There are revenues. There is spending. The one big change under Trump is a huge increase in military spending.
    It was necessary, IF the U.S. (including Democrats and Republicans who voted for it in Congress) wants to be at war for 93% of the time the nation has existed (225 of 242 years as of 2018), and the U.S. wants to maintain military bases in over 70 countries, and wants to maintain a military presence in 150 (of 195) countries (not including the Navy or Marine Corps at sea). The cost for that is tremendous. There are still 40,000 U.S. Troops and 179 U.S. bases in Germany alone. Ther are still 50,000 U.S. troops and 109 U.S. bases in Japan. How long can the U.S. afford all of that? Also, over-population and dwindling water and resources will likely lead to more wars. And today, it sounds like a lot of Democrats are against pulling the 2,000 troops out of Syria. The U.S. cannot afford to be the world police.
    phx8 wrote: The other huge change is the tax cuts, and tariffs. Trump’s administration set in motion the chain of events that will create a boom… and then a bust.
    Nonsense. The tax cuts are not the problem of anything. In fact, they help in many ways. many corporations and money returned to the U.S.
    The majority of tax cuts was the reduction of the corporate tax from 35% to 21%. That was common-sense, because it is now closer to the global average of 20%, and it stops driving corporations and jobs out of the U.S. The personal income taxes were only reduced 1%-to-4% (effective in 2019:
    • 2017 ____ 2019-to-2025___single____________married
    • 10% _____ 10%________ $0-$9,525 _________$0-$19,050
    • 15% _____ 12%________ $9,525-$38,700_____$19,050-$77,400
    • 25% _____ 22%________ $38,700-$82,500____$77,400-$165,000
    • 28% _____ 24%________ $82,500-$157,500___$165,000-$315,000
    • 33% _____ 32%________ $157,500-$200,000__$315,000-$400,000
    • 33%-35% _ 35%________ $200,000-$500,000__$400,000-$600,000
    • 39.6% ____ 37%________ $500,000+ _________$600,000+

    As for tariffs, those are temporary, and necessary; especially with China, who has been cheating and stealing for decades.
    China is feeling more pain, and they will either come around to fairer trade, or suffer much more serious economic consequences than the U.S.

    phx8 wrote: It over-stimulated the economy, especially the stock market. We saw the boom- a quarter of GDP over 4%. Now we are going to see the bust.
    That’s not a proven fact. Like Royal Flush wrote, the stock market is only a part of the economy.
    Also, has it occurred to you that Democrats winning control of the House has something to do with the down-turn in the stock market (since 06-NOV-2018)?
    The following is not a coincidence.
    • Dow Jones Industrial Average (since election on 06-NOV-2018):
    • $27,500 |===============================
    • $27,000 |=#=============================
    • $26,000 |#=#============================
    • $26,500 |===#===========================
    • $26,000 |====#==========================
    • $25,500 |=====#======#==================
    • $25,000 |=======#===#==#================
    • $24,500 |========#==#====#==============
    • $24,000 |==========#======#=============
    • $23,500 |==================#============
    • $23,000 |===================#===========
    • $22,500 |====================#==========
    • $22,000 |=====================#=========
    • $21,500 |===============================
    • $21,000 |===============================
    • |=====|000011111222223|0000111112222233|00001
    • |=====|246802468024680|2468024680246801|24680
    • |=====|NOV=========|DEC==========|JAN===
    Posted by: d.a.n at December 24, 2018 10:24 AM
    Comment #436104

    phx8 wrote that the federal budget can be balanced by increasing taxes and reducing spending (only on the military).

    Increase whose taxes phx8?

    Why only reduce spending on the military?

    Budgets are balanced when spending equals revenue. It’s the same old sad story. Democrats what more spending and more revenue. Obama spent $10 Trillion. Please tell us what we Americans received. We know what the favored class got.

    Posted by: Royal Flush at December 24, 2018 3:13 PM
    Comment #436105

    Among the asinine statements by our pal phx8, I find the following the most hilarious.

    “I have no idea why they thought more military spending was a good idea. It over-stimulated the economy, especially the stock market.”

    We all believe that phx8 is an intelligent person even though he is misguided. He now proclaims that only military spending is deleterious to the economy. Trillions of social spending by government is not harmful.

    May we ask phx8, how the economy differentiates between “good” government spending and “bad” government spending?

    In much the same fashion, our Pal has pronounced what he believes is “good” national debt and what is “bad” national debt.

    I will let you decide. Is phx8 brilliant; or is he simply blowing flatulence?

    Posted by: Royal Flush at December 24, 2018 3:34 PM
    Comment #436106

    WISHING EVERYONE A VERY MERRY, AND BLESSED, CHRISTMAS

    Posted by: Royal Flush at December 24, 2018 3:46 PM
    Comment #436107

    Thanks!

    Posted by: d.a.n at December 24, 2018 4:00 PM
    Comment #436108

    The U.S. should reduce or eliminate some of the military bases in over 70 countries, and reduce our military presence in 150 (of 195) countries (not including the Navy or Marine Corps at sea).
    There are still 40,000 U.S. Troops and 179 U.S. bases in Germany alone.
    There are still 50,000 U.S. troops and 109 U.S. bases in Japan. How long can the U.S. afford all of that?

    I am OK with pulling 2,000 troops out of Syria, because ISIS has been diminished significantly, and Syria should be able to handle it from here.
    Staying longer is endangering U.S. troops unnecessarily.
    The U.S. cannot afford to be the world police.

    Yes, it is absolutely ridiculous that phx8 praises Obama, after Obama almost doubled the federal national debt to $20.25 Trillion (an increase of 74% of $8.5 Trillion from $11.66 Trillion to $20.45).
    However, George W. Bush deserves a LOT of blame too, for debt, blood, lives, and treasure lost due to the pre-emptive war against Iraq, based on a supposed significant amount of Weapons of Mass Destruction that did not exist, for engaging in nation-building (something he promised to not do), and also for increasing the federal national debt by 101% (from $5.8 Trillion to $5.89 Trillion), due to the mortgage crisis, which happened on George W. Bush’s watch. George W. Bush was very much behind the push to incentivize people to buy homes, and careless lending.
    Therefore, in my opinion, that makes George W. Bush one of the worst presidents of all time, and he was a large reason for the demise of the Republican party, and the reason many Republicans abandoned the Republican party.

    Posted by: d.a.n at December 24, 2018 4:03 PM
    Comment #436110

    CORRECTION: George W. Bush deserves a LOT of blame … and also for increasing the federal national debt by 101% (from $5.8 Trillion to $11.66 Trillion), due to the mortgage crisis…

    Posted by: d.a.n at December 24, 2018 4:07 PM
    Comment #436115

    I’d like to know how the banks who received 700 billion bailout dollars could also foreclose and assume possession of the houses that created the debt. To me, that is double dipping and should have been allowed to happen.

    Posted by: Weary Willie at December 24, 2018 6:01 PM
    Comment #436116

    should NOT have been allowed to happen.

    Posted by: Weary Willie at December 24, 2018 6:02 PM
    Comment #436166


    It’s really a very nice article amazing in fact. For students help you just look at the Assignment help given by the assignment experts. Opting for our Assignment Help Online could be ideal for such students and they can get a complete assignment solution from us.

    Posted by: Assignment Help Online at December 26, 2018 6:08 AM
    Comment #436175
    Weary Willie wrote: I’d like to know how the banks who received 700 billion bailout dollars could also foreclose and assume possession of the houses that created the debt. To me, that is double dipping and should [not] have been allowed to happen.
    Yes, it is strange, that a bank can get money (at 1% or less) from the Federal Reserve (where 90% of the loan money is created out of thin air, 10% is from the borrowing bank’s reserves), loan it out at higher interest rates for a home-buyer, and then foreclose later, and become the new owner of the property.
    That sounds like a good deal for the bank, eh?
    Normally, yes (when market values are not decreasing).
    However, unfortunately, the market value of many homes were plummetting (for several years; i.e. for 5.5 years between JUN-2006 and JAN-2012), and did not recover to the JUN-2006 levels until JAN-2017.
    Therefore, the banks lost money, and were sitting on a huge inventory of homes that were also not being maintained.
    On the other hand, year 2012 was also a good time to buy a house (which I did on 30-NOV-2012).

    Most large banks repaid the bailout money, but hundreds of smaller banks (of over 700 banks) never repaid their debts to TARP (as of JAN-2015).

    • U.S. National Home Price Index:
    • 220 |==============================
    • 210 |=============================#
    • 200 |============================#=
    • 190 |==================#=========#=
    • 180 |=================#=#=======#==
    • 170 |================#===#=====#===
    • 160 |===============#=====#===#====
    • 150 |===============#======#=#=====
    • 140 |==============#========#======
    • 130 |=============#================
    • 120 |============#=================
    • 110 |===========#==================
    • 100 |==========#===================
    • 090 |=========#====================
    • 080 |==#=#=#=#=====================
    • 070 |=#============================
    • 060 |#=============================
    • Y==|1 111 111 111 111 222 222 222 222 222 222 2
    • E==|9 999 999 999 999 000 000 000 000 000 000 0
    • A==|8 889 999 999 999 000 000 000 011 111 111 1
    • R==|7 890 123 456 789 012 345 678 901 234 567 8
    Bailouts for General Motors, and subsequent losses for tax payers, is a prime example of rewarding failure.
    Auto Industry Bailout Scorecard (as of 27-NOV-2018):
    • Company_______Invested______Sold For______Profit/Loss_____Date Bailout Ended
    • GM____________$51.0 billion___$39.7 billion__ -$11.3 billion____Dec. 9, 2013
    • GMAC (Ally)_____$17.2 billion___$19.6 billion__ +$2.4 billion____Dec. 18, 2014
    • Chrysler________$12.5 billion___$11.2 billion__ -$1.3 billion_____May 2011
    • TOTAL__________$80.7 billion___$70.5 billion__ - $10.2 billion
    In the end, tax payers lost $10.2 Billion to GM.
    Is that fair to GM’s major competitors, such as Ford ?

    Posted by: d.a.n at December 26, 2018 10:24 AM
    Comment #436180

    A welcome event on Wall Street today. A gain of 4%. It must be Trump’s ineptitude and lack of intelligence.

    We saw an immediate difference after Trump was elected. We saw an immediate difference after Democratics gained control of the house. I’m not too sure the idea of change coming slowly holds true any longer. I think we are seeing immediate changes to current events in the markets.

    Posted by: Weary Willie at December 26, 2018 5:05 PM
    Comment #436457

    Students Assignment Help have the dedicated and expert team of professional writers who can provides the assignment help Dublin services perfectly. Our writing experts have whole knowledge of all academic assignments to assist students. Our expert writers are degree holder from the top universities.

    Posted by: Assignment help Dublin at January 5, 2019 7:55 AM
    Comment #436520

    Take proficient Myassignmenthelp from the ireland assignment experts at IrelandAssignmentHelp.com. We have knowledgeable and highly qualified writers that have great knowledge in subjects such as IT, law, arts, management, science, etc.

    Posted by: Myassignmenthelp at January 9, 2019 12:15 AM
    Post a comment