I don't know if America can ever recover. Anything they have done to the economy hasn't worked. The fed has created a bubble bigger than the sub-prime and dot-com bubble combined.
The fed has done so much damage
- Thread starter HawkeyeHitman
- Start date
Don't worry, we're just going to print some more federal reserve notes. We're gonna have to keep charging you proles interest on it, but it's for your own good.
I'm curious about this statement. Any specifics about what exactly the Fed is doing to damage the economy?
Printing money they don't have and manipulating interest rates.
But how exactly is this going to lead to a bubble bigger than the mortgage and dot com bubbles combined?
By statute the fed is required to moderate long term rates.
I guess I'm confused how stabilizing interest rates will lead to a collapse on par with the Great Depression?
That goes for you actually. There are many economists who predicted the 2008 fiasco that have been warning of this since that happened.
If everything is so fine and dandy Ciggy, as asked before, then why did 2008 happen? There was nothing different going on back then, then what there is now.
You do realize the Fed has been there to 'stabilize' interest rates since the beginning of it's inception correct? How many depressions and recessions have occurred since then?
If so many economists saw it coming, then why didn't a ton of people pull out of the market before the collapse? Let's get real. Nobody knew for certain that 2008 was going to happen. That's just using hindsight as 20/20 vision.
Every challenge of the statue has determined that shall means it's a requirement. It is called a mandate for a reason.
Because they were lied to by the Krugman types. Those that didn't follow Keynesian economics didn't suffer, because they didn't invest into that particular market. But they most definitely warned of it. Ron Paul himself warned of it directly to DC, and damn near got the year correct of when it would happen.
You don't know the real history of the Fed do you? I suggest you read up on it, and the failures that he Fed had when the recession and depressions happen.
A lot. But recessions are a fact of life. They will happen no matter what you do. The point of the Fed is to reduce their impact, which it has. It is indisputable that the Fed has made recessions less painful.
Here's a list of all recessions this country has ever had. The Fed was created in 1913. If you look at the economic loss of each recession, you can clearly see that the GDP loss after the introduction of the Fed is far better than the loss before the Fed. We literally went from losing 15-30% with each recession before the Fed to just 2-5% after. That's lightyears better.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States
You of all people are the last that should be making that statement.
Several people I knew, including myself pulled out of the market and lost 10% as opposed to the 40-50 most lost. I guess someone must have known something. Where did I get the info from?
I don't recall saying anything related to this rant, I'm talking about an act of congress.
For those wondering, Ron Paul(independent,Austrian advocate), Peter Schiff(independent, Austrian economics advocate), Med Jones(independent in his economic views), and even known Wall Street Hoodlum and former Presidential advisor Nouriel Roubini(Former Fed member) are examples of those that predicted it.
Dean Baker(Liberal leaning economist), now this guy is interesting. He didn't just predict it, but he openly opposed of the bailout as well. Not exactly unique on this list in regards to opposing that, but what makes him interesting, is that he suddenly piped down about his prediction. He was well admired and commentated on many mainstream news outlets, but after his prediction he fell off the wagon a bit. Especially when he criticized the bailout.
Dean Baker(Liberal leaning economist), now this guy is interesting. He didn't just predict it, but he openly opposed of the bailout as well. Not exactly unique on this list in regards to opposing that, but what makes him interesting, is that he suddenly piped down about his prediction. He was well admired and commentated on many mainstream news outlets, but after his prediction he fell off the wagon a bit. Especially when he criticized the bailout.
Good lord. It's ridiculous that you're trying to make the case that all these economists knew about impending doom, yet did nothing. 2008 was something that nobody could predict. That's why it came as such a shock when it happened. Even the people who had suspicions still didn't know with any certainty that it would actually come to fruition.
Congress only has so much say towards the Fed. That's been proved numerous times, particularly during Bernankes reign. Greenspan held a lot of power as well during his administration. If Congress actually practiced and pursued what it is you think they do, we'd be better off.
Check my last post and eat every bit of crow I have served you. Take your time to verify the sources as well.
Are you just pulling facts out of you ass here? You clearly have no idea what you're talking about in this thread.
Can you supply statements by these people that predicted exactly when and how the collapse would happen?
That's kind of the point of the Fed. To operate independently of Congress. And thank God Congress isn't the one making these decisions. They can't even agree on general budgets. Imagine if they had to agree on precise interest rates?
I wonder if you have a chart of how the banks gained during these periods and can show their growth as they happened, particularly immediately after the 'corrections' were made.
I also wonder if you can show how the Feds activity impacted these recessions before they happened.
Isn't that kind of silly when speaking about NATIONAL currency? You're all about big government when it is convenient to you it seems.
Should we be investing on the basis of there being a post-Obama renaissance?
Don't want to admit that before the Fed practically every recession had at least a 20% loss do you? You have to try shifting the conversation to something else. Like it or not, but the recessions after the Fed are an entire order in magnitude less painful than before.
The reason being is that investors purposely held out, as the banks continually tried to form a central banking system, as many who knew the problems with it opposed it. It wasn't just bad times in the market, it was a mafia style tactic used by the big banks. The European banks pushed for the Fed, and gathered the American ones together, which led to the Fed.
Central Banking, guaranteed, that government would continually borrow their money, that the American people would pay back. This branches into everything, particularly into the MIC.
Why would you want to risk the stability of our NATIONAL currency on something as volatile as Congress? If there's anything we can all agree on, it's that Congress is dysfunctional. Why would we want to make our currency dependent on that dysfunction?
BTW, I'm still waiting on exact statements by your economists that both predicted exactly when and exactly how 2008 would go down.
Not dependent necessarily, just making sure that the Fed is actually held accountable, instead of just being the butt of jokes when they fail.
Look it up. No need to wait. I will say that the only one that is questionable is Roubini(of course), because other economists did not believe that he actually made the predictions as HE said he did.
I did a quick Google search. I couldn't find anyone who predicted the exact start and cause of the recession.
By taking away their ability to go behind the scenes and punishing those that fail to comply. Example: Bernankes refusal to explain where he had sent Billions of dollars when testifying in DC. Some state that it went to Libya, just before we took down Gaddafi.
