You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.

Fred "Iceman" Mishkin Attempts To Generate A Logical Defense To Fed Secrecy, Fails Miserably

Tyler Durden's picture




When even the poster child for Fed hubris, the man who better than anyone embodies the complete policy disaster of the Fed, Fred "Iceman" [Ice is for Iceland] Mishkin, is unable to phrase one coherent sentence to none other than Steve Liesman as to why an audit of the Fed is equivalent to control of Wall Street's money printing syndicate by Congress, you know that the Fed is in panic mode. Let us recall the law of unintended consequences, which Mr. Mishkin talks so vociferously about, especially in light of the Iceland experiment, which as Zero Hedge readers recall, Fred himself saw as a beautiful example of a fiat experiment... until the entire country went bankrupt.

The Paul legislation according to Mishkin is an "ouright attack on the Fed's independence," which is basically a blatant lie. But why would one expect anything less than continued prevarication from the Fed.

As for Liesman's question of how would an audit threaten the Fed's indepence, it gets the following response: "Having an audit ... is going to be extremely, extremely problematic. You want transparancy, but it can go too far. The full monty here is not the way you want to go." Thank you for protecting us from our stupidity Fred. The people of Iceland thank you for your brilliance as well.

Here is the absolute stunner caught in Mishkin's verbal diarrhea: "Here is how dangerous it is at the current juncture...If the markets start to think that the Fed is not going to be able to resist the pressures from the Congress to keep interest rates low, when they need to raise them, that will raise inflation expectations. What that will do...is a decline in the dollar, and could be a very serious one."

So the Fed is threatening with an accelerated loss in dollar value? Um, how is that contrary to ongoing Fed policies? Has Professor Mishkin looked at the DXY chart lately? Can someone please introduce us to this man's dealer.

People like Mishkin having been anywhere within earshot of Fed policy making is why the Fed should be not only audited, but indeed, as Ron Paul has been fighting for over two decades, abolished altogether and the sooner the better.

 

 




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:17 | Link to Comment lsbumblebee
lsbumblebee's picture

You'd better believe it. Do not audit the Fed. ABOLISH the Fed!

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:34 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:18 | Link to Comment nhsadika
nhsadika's picture

CNBC is reusing that Buffet clip with Buffet talking about "mischief" that would occur if the Fed was not independent. LOL.  

Remember last year how they replayed over and over for months Buffet saying how close we were to the brink.  Propoganda.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:57 | Link to Comment Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

I'm all for fed independance. Stop paying taxes. They'll reach independance very shortly. Or confess all their dependencies. One or the other.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:50 | Link to Comment Pedro
Pedro's picture

Good point Heph.  I sure hate making it too "dangerous" for us to know anything.  BTW, did this guy play "iceman" on top gun?  His use of the word"dangerous" is making me wonder.  Hmmm

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 19:52 | Link to Comment Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

IceMan was played by Val Kilmer.

 

 

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:57 | Link to Comment Overpowered By Funk
Overpowered By Funk's picture

Both Buffet and Mishkin are full of shit. Sorry for the brevity, but there's not much else to say.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:48 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

Both Buffet and Mishkin are full of shit. Sorry for the brevity, but there's not much else to say.

Deserves repeating.  Well said.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 13:02 | Link to Comment Assetman
Assetman's picture

Agreed.  Brevity is welcome here, so long as it makes it point.

And this one does, in spades.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 13:32 | Link to Comment Assetman
Assetman's picture

And here's even more propaganda tripe from Andrew Ross Sorkin over at the NY Times (a Carlos Slim company):

Beware the Result of Bailout Outrage

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/24/business/economy/24sorkin.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&ref=business&adxnnlx=1259056988-a6pwK7rup0TJrMy5Vmxc5g

 

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 15:20 | Link to Comment ghostfaceinvestah
ghostfaceinvestah's picture

That little punk makes me sick.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:21 | Link to Comment Stuart
Stuart's picture

Mishkin: Do not look into the bag.  You do not want to look into the bag.  You will not like what you see in the bag.  When you realize what's in the bag, you will realize the dollar is toast.   Do not audit the Fed and force us to show what's in the bag.   Be warned.  Some secrets are best kept in the closet.

Joe Q Public:  Mishkin, STFU.  Truth wins out eventually.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:26 | Link to Comment BobPaulson
BobPaulson's picture

Hate to bring this up but this policy of "you can't handle the truth" is absolutely everywhere within government, top to bottom. Pig in a poke. 

Once the general perception pervades that simple truth is gone and the government doesn't follow its own rules, I have a hard time imagining how you regain a civil society. Before the Roman Empire collapsed, it had a lengthy period of denial of its problems and dictatorship.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:31 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Mind control at it's worse. No real reasons were given other than his assurances that utter chaos and destruction will be the result if it's done. Mind control requires endlessly repeating something until it comes alive in the mind as truth because it's familiar.

Psychological operations in stark relief for all to see.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_operations

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:48 | Link to Comment DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

maybe we should pass the time by playing a little solitaire

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K_xrgeQfOI&feature=related

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:23 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

Loss of jobs, loss of homes, loss of savings, loss of retirement funds, loss of buying power, loss of business, loss of standard of living, priced out of education, $20 billion in  taxpayer-generated bonuses for Goldman Sachs…  So this is Fed “recovery”?  Heaven help the people if it were a decline… Transparency, anyone?

 

Money As a Moral Issue | Ron Paul 2003  (excerpts)

…No one would welcome a counterfeiter to town, yet this same authority is blindly given to our central bank without any serious oversight by Congress… It’s fraud.

…A fiat monetary system allows power and influence to fall into the hands of those who control the creation of new money, and to those who get to use the money or credit early in its circulation.  The insidious and eventual cost falls on unidentified victims who are usually oblivious to the cause of their plight. This system of legalized plunder (though not constitutional) allows one group to benefit at the expense of another.  An actual transfer of wealth goes from the poor and the middle class to those in privileged financial positions.

…In many societies the middle class has actually been wiped out by monetary inflation, which always accompanies fiat money.  The high cost of living and loss of jobs hit one segment of society, while in the early stages of inflation, the business class actually benefits from the easy credit.  An astute stock investor or home builder can make millions in the boom phase of the business cycle, while the poor and those dependent on fixed incomes can’t keep up with the rising cost of living.

Every dollar created dilutes the value of existing dollars in circulation.  Those individuals who worked hard, paid their taxes, and saved some money for a rainy day are hit the hardest, with their dollars being depreciated in value while earning interest that is kept artificially low by the Federal Reserve easy-credit policy.

Printing money, which is literally inflation, is nothing more than a sinister and evil form of hidden taxation.  It’s unfair and deceptive, and accordingly strongly opposed by the authors of the Constitution.  That is why there is no authority for Congress, the Federal Reserve, or the executive branch to operate the current system of money we have today. (emphasis added)

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:23 | Link to Comment Steak
Steak's picture

Its funny cause these are all powerhungry assholes, but they lack the (very low bar) charisma and political acumen to really make it in politics.  Their only real skill is getting blue bloods in leadership positions to defer to their judgement by acting smug and playing the whole "we're the experts" game that only really works on baby boomers and geriatrics.

So we see when the troops are martialed to defend the Fed how utterly hopeless these folks are when they have to defend a point of view without the benefit of useless (re: our lost decade) academic babble. 

And even the limited arguments they present are schizophrenic.  Either an audit of the Fed is going to lead to interest rates being prematurely raised...or kept low for too long.  They can't get their story straight.  And nowhere in the mix is anything resembling a cogent point about why THEY are the best arbiters of interest rates.  I got a handful of asset bubbles, a lost decade, and lotsa friends on unemployment saying that they suck donkey balls at setting interest rates.

And for cripes sake, like TD points out, if you can't win Liesman...well I think thats why we have phrases like Epic Fail.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:24 | Link to Comment lizzy36
lizzy36's picture

Seriously, if you abolish the Fed, what do you replace it with?

I would love to see the brains @ ZH start a discussion on a viable alternative to the Fed.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:30 | Link to Comment BobPaulson
BobPaulson's picture

Tally sticks? No, seriously, something like that - it lasted a hell of a long time in England, perhaps longer than any other system so far. How about currency creation only when the government gives itself money to buy or build something? Just a thought.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:31 | Link to Comment lsbumblebee
lsbumblebee's picture

Why would it be necessary to replace it with anything?

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 16:42 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:38 | Link to Comment T-888
T-888's picture

what makes you think we need a fed to begin with??

I mean, its not like the Federal Reserve has been around since 1777....

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:42 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

Below is one of the best replies to your question (and we have our own history to draw from also) that I’ve witnessed to date, from Anonymous
on Sun, 11/22/2009 - 17:49
#138883

Banks provide a public utility, dispensing credit into an economy. Since this is rather a straightforward business proposition, government should assume this function.

Trading and speculating as investment banks used to do (and GS still does) should be prohibited. Strict underwriting standards should reduce risk, while timely and effective regulation would curb abuse. Leverage would be strictly limited to be within historically "safe" standards and exceedingly strict accounting standards would prohibit off-balance sheet or "innovative" end-runs.

Money would be issued by the GOVERNMENT and not LENT into existence for the benefit of private individuals. The mandate of low unemployment and price stability would be maintained by strict attention to regulating money supply only to match the underlying goods and services and increase in same.

Malefactors and professional misconduct which caused injury to the system would result in the suspension or dismissal for life of perpetrators. Civil and criminal actions when warranted would be expeditiously prosecuted.

Financial crimes of scale would be added to the list of high crimes and misdemeanors to be viewed as treasonous fraud.

Property rights and rule of law should be held inviolate.

Usury or the charging of interest in excess of the natural rate of growth would be occasionally wrung from the system by default, bankruptcy, or economic downturn. Innovative political and fiscal means to avoid that would constitute financial treason.

Balance budgets would be black letter law and mandate that 2-4% surpluses be maintained always in excess of expenditure. Provision for spending this rainy-day fund would be under the harshest of economic climates i.e. depression.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 13:31 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 14:09 | Link to Comment WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

I was going to compliment what Steak said but I think my response is better off here.

Enforcement of existing law is the problem:

"Property rights and rule of law should be held inviolate."

Our government is so bloated with psychopaths that we are beyond any point of return. I am not using the word 'psychopath' lightly:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-psychopath-means

---

"Banks provide a public utility, dispensing credit into an economy. Since this is rather a straightforward business proposition, government should assume this function."

No person, or group of persons, of elected office, should ever, ever, ever determine what a free market is and then 'apply' it to the consenting, governed masses. Ever! The free market is the lack of restriction in business affairs. I should be able to exchange any item of value and receive any item of value without any regulation as long as it does not violate any 'malum in se' law, in other words, murder, theft, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_in_se

In a society without restriction and manipulation you will have individuals lending to each other directly instead of banks that create the money out of thin air. Banks do this without any sweat, and then require your labor (paying interest with your sweat) to repay it. Now that's slavery! A bank should never be able to lend what it doesn't already have - deposits made by individuals. A successful bank will determine credit worthiness and pay depositors a high enough interest rate to make it worthwhile to not have immediate access to their deposited funds while their money is lent to others. If a banks makes risky loans they go out of business and a better manager will acquire, and put to more efficient use, the assets of the failed company.

There should be no such thing as a bank run! When you deposit money in banks now you aren't worried about getting your money. But if everyone wants their money at the same time they have to call up the FDIC which is another part of this swollen puss-ball called the government. If individuals want to speculate with their money it should be at their own risk! Not at the peril of their fellow citizen. The corrupt banks are not allowed to fail. There should be no such thing as too big to fail!

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
  - George Washington

---

1) Banking should be boring; for nitters - making profits from providing 'utility' to customers.

2) The founding fathers had it right (mostly, they should have explained a little more): "To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;"

That is, Congress is empowered to set a weight and purity for coins to enhance efficiency - a standard. "Free coinage' is the government establishing a mint and 'standardizing' a citizens gold or silver into a widely accepted weight and purity (for a small fee). The reputation of the coin becomes the reputation of the government. 

"free coinage"  (noun)
the unrestricted coinage of bullion or of a specified metal, as silver, into money for any person bringing it to the mint, either with or without charge for minting. (Origin: 1885–90, Americanism)

The word 'coin', in the context of a limited power given to elected officials, should not be construed to mean anything other than precious metal! In other words, not paper! Whenever a government engages in printing money that is not backed by (immediately redeemable at any time by the holder of the note) something of value (preferably precious metals), instead of practicing 'free coinage' for its citizens, you will have booms, busts, enrichment of the elite, and impoverishment of the non-elite. Impoverishment, as in, stealing your sweat, your labor, your wealth. The most tried and true form of banker control is getting the public to accept (if not vehemently support!) a war in which they can finance both sides and force the loser to pay all of it back - with interest!

Free coinage rocks! End the Fed and let the common man decide what is best for himself! Freedom works as long as you keep the psychopaths at bay.

 

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 15:09 | Link to Comment faustian bargain
faustian bargain's picture

right on.

Chapter 12 in Ron Paul's End The Fed describes the Constitutional issues surrounding central banks and paper money. The creation of both is intimately intertwined with the unlimited growth of government the US has seen throughout its history.

Wed, 11/25/2009 - 01:01 | Link to Comment Steak
Steak's picture

Fantastic composition, and great defense of full reserve banking...one point of irony tho...the "free coinage" folk of the late 1800's were the inflationists of their day.  So much silver coming out the west (and no industry to soak up supply) that it was the subprime MBS of its day.  Govt even came in with purchase programs meant to support the price.  Good times, nehow i dig your style waterwings.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 14:05 | Link to Comment heatbarrier
heatbarrier's picture

As long as banks have the unstable structure that has caused financial crises for 800 years you need an entity like the central bank. The central bank structure was a way to introduce the support of the State to an unstable banking system, it perpetuated an unstable banking structure. My first point is: if the State assumes this role then put the central bank under State control, I would say within Treasury with strong oversight by Congress. Having the central bank under banks control leads to, by now obvious, conflicts of interest.

More fundamental to this issue is why you need a central bank, there are more stable alternative banking structures, like full reserve banking, which is getting a great deal of attention again. Under this structure the central bank is not critical, it becomes more like a backstop liquidity provider.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-reserve_banking

Tobin, Friedman, many important economist have recommended full reserve banking.  One way to think about them is a structure similar to money market funds but integrated into the payment system.  

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:04 | Link to Comment Steak
Steak's picture

Like pointed out above I feel that full-reserve banking is the way to go.  Yes, credit will be tighter, but the returns to savers will be infinitely better than the system we have now.  If one holds $1 for every $1 lent out then this whole systemic collapse issue is much more of a moo point.

Interest rates can be most easily understood as the price of money.  The Fed is the ultimate price fixer.  If defaults are all over the place and folks want to demand a higher return on their money, a price fixing Fed inhibits that market from clearing.  Ultimately savers get too small a return for taking on too much risk.  And we get asset bubbles.

If there is no central bank setting the price of money, then the rates are instead determined by the market of buyers and sellers of credit.  Why does a shitty municipality/company get subsidized borrowing because the Fed dictates the risk free rate should be lower?  We have grown up with nanny Fed that we have forgotten that and how an economy can function in its absence. 

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 15:01 | Link to Comment WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

Free coinage. Gold standard. Gold is the antithesis of fiat money.

Gold standard = freedom

Gold standard = modest profits for honest services

Gold standard = psychopaths can't manipulate the People

Gold standard = liars get the boot

Gold standard = wealthy, happy civilization

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 16:48 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:26 | Link to Comment JamesBrrando
JamesBrrando's picture

punch him in the mouth

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:34 | Link to Comment DonnieD
DonnieD's picture

I watched this live this morning. This was a huge fail on Mishkin's part to defend the Fed.

Buffett is part of the DC-Wall Street corruption ring. He's piggybacking off of taxpayer money to make billions. Then defends the corrupt and incompetent fed because he doesn't want his money spout turned off. It's amazing the media holds this guy up as a genius do-gooder. It's epic bullshit.

 

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:00 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Just about every morning CNBC has a Fed apologist on to "explain" why taking a much closer look under the Fed bedsheets would be bad. Of course, they never do explain. Instead it's the same talking points. Doom, gloom, death, destruction, economic chaos etc etc.

On Monday, to his credit, Liesman asked that mornings apologist three times exactly what was wrong with auditing the Fed. The last time he apologized for asking a third time but still received the same non answer. That mornings "guest host" then tried one final time and again got nothing.

Liesman looked disappointed that no information was forthcoming from the guest but that didn't stop his producers from putting Liesman in front of the camera 30 minutes later to "report" that the guest explained precisely why it's bad to audit the Fed. Even Liesman is beginning to look uncomfortable promoting the big lie.

Mind control 101 brought to you by CNBC and the Fed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_operations

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 13:20 | Link to Comment Assetman
Assetman's picture

I'm pretty sure the all out media blitz was the plan after "Audit the Fed" amendment was passed and the CBC had Barney Frank delay passage.

And so far, the strategy is backfiring at CNBC.  First, they allow Ron Paul to have his 15 minutes of talk to get it out of the way.  Then the barrage for "Fed Independence" started in earnest.

I gather that Steve Liesman is more perplexed than anyone these days.  The Mishkin interview was designed to be a easy layup-- and ended up being a Major Fail.  Perhaps the prescence of David Rosenberg had an unsettling effect on poor Frederic, but the mere fact that he couldn't answer a "platform" question from Liesman is very surprising.

Perhaps at some point in time, it will also dawn on "oh my gosh the dollar is devaluing" pudit Larry Kudlow that the money printing and opequeness at the Fed is a real problem. 

I expect for Liesman to keep on towing the company line, up to the point Comcast hauls his ass away in a lineman cherry picker truck.

These are my opinions only.  No animals were tortured, maimed or killed during this essay.  Nor was anything said is to be inferred as being tortured, maimed, or killed of said animal subjects.

Long live the French!  

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:42 | Link to Comment trav777
trav777's picture

Mishkin mustn't have read the Constitution, which gave plenary monetary authority to Congress.

Those who ask "but...but...what do we replace the Fed with???"

JFC, guys, we didn't have a Fed for the first 150 years of our nation's history.  We became the richest nation on the planet without a Fed and without an income tax.

What the Fed is doing is giving a tell on what they're going to do if we actually force them to let We the People know what they're up to.  They're going to throw a tantrum.  They're going to blow shit up and say "look, see, we warned you this would happen if you called us to account."

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:44 | Link to Comment sawyer
sawyer's picture

Caruzo comment about a certain dictator in a certain S. american country is so retarded...Does she know who nominates the Head of the Fed? Fed is already politicized as Mr. Geithner do "what is right" and we will have a place for you in the next administration.

 

 

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:45 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:52 | Link to Comment Hondo
Hondo's picture

How anyone could let their kid be taught economics by this bozo is beyond me.  He hasn't a clue....it's all a game to keep what they think are the Neanderthals for seeing anything.  They always claim that we wouldn't know what we're looking at and how to gather the true meaning from the information and therefore would go wild and panic.  There is so much stupidity in his comments I think he cheated to get his BS let alone his Phd.

 

He is a complete idiot!!!  I mean a real idiot!!

 

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 11:52 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:05 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:05 | Link to Comment Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

I keep wondering if maybe in fact there IS something on the Fed's books that is so damning that it would promptly cause systemic collapse.  Like records of creating 1000's of tungsten "gold" bars, or an additional large amount of previously undisclosed debt to someone like China, etc.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:20 | Link to Comment Pedro
Pedro's picture

I cannot stand for these rich intellectual elites telling us that the we are too dumb to handle the truth.  I'll bet you a million dollars (or 1 billion Bernanke dollars) that we dummies can move forward economically faster if we had honesty and equal rules without the rich bankers peddling our tax dollars, buying our elected officials, and using inside information from the fed and/or the govt by the privelaged few that is supposed to be illegal in the first place.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:26 | Link to Comment waterdog
waterdog's picture

One can kind of get the feeling that there is a really big fish caught in the gill net, an illegal fish to be trapped, and the marine patrol is on board waiting for the fisherman to pull the net into the boat. But the fisherman is trying to convince the patrol officer that it is not an out of season fish but, that the net is just caught on the bottom.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:28 | Link to Comment Rainman
Rainman's picture

Mishkin digs out the same old tired argument for FED opaqueness : DEPRESSION AVERTED !!

Meanwhile, we ZH-ers see : DEPRESSION DELAYED !!

Since Treasury and FED are all-in on the speedy recovery medicine they've injected into the economy, it is just a matter of 12 months or less before the World finds out who is right.

Doesn't matter whether the FED is audited or not in the meantime.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:45 | Link to Comment Cow
Cow's picture

putz

 (pts)

n.
1. Slang A fool; an idiot. 2. Vulgar Slang A penis. intr.v. putzed, putz·ing, putz·es Slang
To behave in an idle manner; putter. To be Fred Mishkin
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 12:45 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 13:06 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 13:24 | Link to Comment B_Movie
B_Movie's picture

the fed and its supporters fear an audit will result in the People focusing on the the problem vs the symptoms ...

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 13:26 | Link to Comment Mark Beck
Mark Beck's picture

The audit the FED bill is not about influencing monetary policy, it is to uncover corruption and abuse of constitutional powers granted by congress.

Basically, the audit compels the FED to disclose who got the money, on what terms, and is the loan backed by any real collateral.

What if the FED provides Billions of USD loans at zero interest rate, against no real collateral, to a central bank or private corporation who is not named. I could not only provide money to almost any entity I wanted, to the tune of Billions of tax payer dollars, but to a large extent I could also dictate US foreign policy through central bank influence.

But I must tell you, that we cannot really debate the merits of an audit because we simply do not have all the facts. We do not know, what we do not know. Its hard to make any real verifiable argument to Mishkin, that the FED is in violation when we are not provided with any facts. The point is, the american people and congress have the right to know.

Also remember the FED created the financial crisis, they are the systemic banking risk regulator. The FED's policies and inaction are the cause, not the cure.

Mark Beck

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 14:17 | Link to Comment Assetman
Assetman's picture

And I'll add this to Mark Beck excellent comments:

The FED's major concern isn't losing INDEPENDENCE.

The FED's major concern is losing TOTAL AUTONOMY.

The FED is fear-mongering the former, while "Audit the Fed" actually goes after the latter.

 

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 19:17 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 14:55 | Link to Comment ahab
ahab's picture

"Also remember the FED created the financial crisis, they are the systemic banking risk regulator. The FED's policies and inaction are the cause, not the cure."

here, here-  that's all we need to know to justify an audit-

why is it such an incredibly difficult task to do? Why aren't the Fed's books always available for review buy our elected representatives?

we don't need secret societies running the show-

they ARE the problem not the solution to our problems

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 15:39 | Link to Comment Apocalypse Now
Apocalypse Now's picture

That is the heart of it, an audit for corruption.  Who regulates the regulator, and that is why the transactions must be transparent.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 13:36 | Link to Comment D.O.D.
D.O.D.'s picture

Someone posted earlier that Sen. Jeff Merkly (D) Oregon, was not on board with the audit the Fed.  Per his office he has introduced legislation S1803. Federal Reserve Accountability Act. 

Anyone have specifics; is this more of Watt type legislation or is akin to RP's HR1207?

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 14:16 | Link to Comment Shameful
Shameful's picture

Now we have life imitating art, we are living Blazing Saddles!  The whole Fed argument is the sheriff threatening to shoot himself! 

So basically the Fed says they will kill the dollar if they are audited, which is in their power to do.  However if we don't audit the Fed they still kill the dollar...you'd think they would give us some choice and at least force the dollar to strength to try to get some support.  Right now all we have is the choice of ripping off the band-aid fast or slow.  Personally I choose fast, lets get this damn audit going!  I need to see a couple of Fed Chairman up on trial!

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 14:17 | Link to Comment D.O.D.
D.O.D.'s picture

"dangerous", "threat", "attack", "depression", "inflation fears", "adverse effect on the dollar"

deflect, deflect, deflect

"We saved your lives!"

Is anyone still buying this BS?!?

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 15:33 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 16:23 | Link to Comment iconoclast63
iconoclast63's picture

This is the same argument that took place in the 1830's. Nicholas Biddle, pres. of the 2nd Bank of the U.S., threatened economic collapse if govt. deposits were removed and it's charter not renewed. President Jackson did not relent and Biddle followed through on his threats. He called in loans and refused to issue new ones, collapsing the economy. Jackson then spread federal revenue to various state banks and went about keeping his campaign promises. He destroyed the bank and became the only president in U.S. history to pay off the national debt. Biddle was charged with fraud and bribery and died a ruined man.

The events we are witnessing today have many parallels to those events of the last century. We would be well served to revisit our history.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 17:13 | Link to Comment Cow
Cow's picture

Great post.  Thanks

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 20:35 | Link to Comment DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

.

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 17:18 | Link to Comment Winisk
Winisk's picture

I watched this nonsense this morning and I had the same instantaneous reaction.  These bullshit artists have lost their credibility and now they look like fools trying to defend a blatant failed policy. The veneer of authority is being stripped away.  What we see are blind idealists or pathological liars resorting to the "Don't question our intelligence fools.  We know what's best for you."  defense.  Their days are numbered. 

Tue, 11/24/2009 - 17:19 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 20:29 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 11/24/2009 - 20:32 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!