Comments on: To Control Bubbles, the Fed Must First Control Itself

By: Logan Bowers

Logan Bowers — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 06:48:26 +0000

Can you make a cogent argument to support: “Until we go back to something better, and get the government out of the money business — some sort of commodity standard.”? I’m intrigued by the idea of a “harder” monetary base, though I’ve yet to hear someone who isn’t clearly crazy attempt to make a rational case. I’m generally dismissive of the gold standard kooks as 19th century panics (and crushing deflation) is pretty convincing evidence that a gold standard is no more and potentially much less stable than fiat currency. A commodity basket approach…maybe works?

By: Herb Berkowitz

Herb Berkowitz — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:48:37 +0000

How naive can you possibly be? The first two mandates are just cover for the Fed’s true mandate — save the banks when they (inevitably) need saving. The whole Fed regional bank structure is a farce intended to create a false of impression of some interest in regional America. The fed is interested in only one region and it runs from the East River to the Hudson River acress Wall Street.

By: Tom Dempsey

Tom Dempsey — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 07:00:36 +0000

There is a reason Greenspan once said he would not prevent bubbles even if he knew how. In the 1980’s, when the government was faced with bankruptcy from the costs of Social Security and Medicare, the government failed to act and Greenspan instead falsified the CPI to reduce the expense of the Cost of Living adjustments to those benefits.

This also created a hidden inflation and a hidden stimulus to the economy. It also removed the Fed’s tools for regulating the economy. It can’t raise interest rates to fight the inflation it claims is very low. There are similar problems with it’s monetary tools.

The only thing regulating this overstimulated economy is bursting asset bubbles letting off some pressure.

The Fed is not interested in any real measure of inflation because that would send the U.S. into bankruptcy because of Social Security and Medicare. We’re stuck with either bubbles or bankruptcy.

The financial sector (including business executives who earn based on stock price and financing deals instead of production) are making fortunes by understanding there is a forced inflation. No wonder the financial setor has grown so much in recent years.

By: Kent Welton

Kent Welton — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 17:29:52 +0000

The fed “independence” scam… independent of whom? the people, of course, contrary to intention of founders. and constituiontal congressional monetary “purse” powers.
Murray Rothbard (History of Banking) in his very last book – The Case Against The Fed – had it right
when he stated:
“If government becomes ‘independent of politics’ it can only mean that that sphere of government becomes an absolute self-perpetuating oligarchy.”

Ruthless, self-serving, monetary Oligarchy is what we have. Time to take back the “Fed”

Kent Welton,
PublicCentralBank.com

By: Independent Accountant

Independent Accountant — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 13:52:09 +0000

I was a member of a Los Angeles financial group that debated the Fed’s including asset prices in its “inflation” measures. In about 1999, we came to a consensus, it should; the Fed was creating too much money. The bubble showed up in Tech stocks as opposed to consumables, therefore the Fed claims it didn’t see it. We said it didn’t mean the Fed wasn’t creating too much money, that which asset prices increased was irrelevant to Fed policy. Further, that the failure to include asset prices in the “price level” was a political decision.