This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Fred "Iceman" Mishkin Attempts To Generate A Logical Defense To Fed Secrecy, Fails Miserably
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.
»
- 4941 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
You'd better believe it. Do not audit the Fed. ABOLISH the Fed!
I want to see the FED completely naked before shutting it down.
Let's just see how generous Ben, Alan, and their accomplices at Treasury, Goldman Sucks, and JP Morgan and the other primary dealers have been to themselves with our
money.
Don't let these mutherhunchers get away with it.
Then blow the FED up after some serious clawbacks.
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.
I'm all for fed independance. Stop paying taxes. They'll reach independance very shortly. Or confess all their dependencies. One or the other.
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
IceMan was played by Val Kilmer.
Both Buffet and Mishkin are full of shit. Sorry for the brevity, but there's not much else to say.
Both Buffet and Mishkin are full of shit. Sorry for the brevity, but there's not much else to say.
Deserves repeating. Well said.
Agreed. Brevity is welcome here, so long as it makes it point.
And this one does, in spades.
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
That little punk makes me sick.
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.
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.
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
maybe we should pass the time by playing a little solitaire
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K_xrgeQfOI&feature=related
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)
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.
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.
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.
Why would it be necessary to replace it with anything?
Seriously, if I take the bag off of your head and stop punching you in the face then what would I replace the
bag with?
what makes you think we need a fed to begin with??
I mean, its not like the Federal Reserve has been around since 1777....
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.
The problem isn't the system or any other system, it's MAN himself we are the problem because some where along the line some if not most of us falter. The founders created a good system but yet that wasn't enough, Why? We are so stupid and without a guide we our lost.
What we have now is nothing short of Systemic Deprivatity and I reference the partial lyrics of one inspired individual, Lauryn Hill's - Mystery of Inquity. Societies come and go the reason is explained well in that song so does War in the Mind.
What we are experiencing now as people lose their jobs, get sick, lose their homes, become unused human capital,is in a system where we are told to do one thing while the tellers do another. Hypocritical giants that are morally noncompliant and are orally armed to do bodily harm. Just see what would happen if you interviewed with the media. You would be orally attacked as to induce physical harm which we see time after time making people emotional. These people are nothing short of evil. Further more they are materially corrupt, spiritually amuck, and prosperously bankrupt. Yes prosperously bankrupt is an oxymoron but that is the case. O how sad it is for us to be so broke but for them to be prosperously bankrupt. Real wealth was never the attention for us. A derivative of real wealth is material wealth. Thee Inquity.
As far as the Federal Reserve is concerned watch the Cspan proceedings. The FRS's lawyers and actors sit there and lie. Evade and decieve the truth is obsolete.
Legal actors, Babylon's benefactors masquerading as the agency for their clients. Babylon? Babylon the great mystery mother of human history system of social socery. Real history has been destroyed but as far as we know Babylon was the birth of us. Not to say that we don't have records of earlier history but not with the weight in which Babylon has.
What we need is nothing short of a spiritual revolution where we hold people accountable to the divine authority that does not bend to our desires that does not hold different standards for different people. There is authority in truth not truth in authority. It is the truth that will correct us when we are wrong and when we all hold ourselves and neighbors accountable to these concepts that have been with us since we began. The founders believed in such a thing. There is no other answer. We need to rebel...the day if far to spent choose well.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
If I take the bag off of your head and stop hitting your face with a shovel then what would I replace the bag with?
punch him in the mouth
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.
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
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!
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."
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.
Noticed this morning the replay of Buffett saying to "leave the Fed alone" constantly.This overrated Dinosaur reminds me of THE LEGEND OF DOYLE BRUNSON..when the World Series of Poker has 8 participants.
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!!
Those were the most tongue tied, dithering answers I've heard on CNBC in a long time. He IS his namesake:
Prince Mishkin is the title character of Fyodor Dostoyevsky 's "The Idiot",
I didn't think that the intention was to audit the Fed's Monetary Policy (that doesn't even make sense, does it?). I thought the intention is to purely audit what's been done with the money and where it's gone - that's not the same as affecting monetary policy.
What planet are these people on?
DavidC
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
Fred just does not want you to see how much their stealing...its unbecoming to ivory tower types:especially when they get caught!
Goldman's secret moral pathology
15 symptoms of a Wall Street disease destroying democracy and capitalism
The "Goldman Conspiracy" is the perfect B-school case study of Wall Street's secret contagious pathology, with insiders like Lloyd Blankfein, Henry Paulson and others pocketing billions more of the firm's profits than shareholders, evidence the new "mutant capitalism" has replaced Adam Smith's 1776 version which historically endowed the soul of American democracy as well as our capitalistic system.
http://tinyurl.com/ykhqqld
Tell'em like it is Freddie!
Good thing "Empty Head" Liesman didn't ask what policies the FED would be having, that if exposed, would raise inflation expectations! Could it be inflationary policies?!
BB
the fed and its supporters fear an audit will result in the People focusing on the the problem vs the symptoms ...
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
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.
Totally agree!!!
and the mothersquid in Europe would not be pleased!
"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
That is the heart of it, an audit for corruption. Who regulates the regulator, and that is why the transactions must be transparent.
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?
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!
"dangerous", "threat", "attack", "depression", "inflation fears", "adverse effect on the dollar"
deflect, deflect, deflect
"We saved your lives!"
Is anyone still buying this BS?!?
Since we have such wonderful Nazi logic foisted upon us in our lives i.e. "if you have nothing to hide then you won't mind us searching the house, will you?" then it is only fair to have the Fed subject to its own little cavity check. Fred is dumb as a box of hair for arguing that it'd be bad for the Fed to open its kimono, but at the same time maintain that everything's OK. Inevitably it means that there has to be something wrong if they're objecting so strenuously. And if there are threats that the dollar will go down, then it must be balanced with the promise that the Fed will be made redundant if it's ability to 'maintain' can't be kept. Frankly, for the amount of interest the Fed members skim for the privilege of creating money for nothing, I'm not really feeling any 'benefit' per se. Stop the robbery.
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.
Great post. Thanks
.
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.
I listened to this Mishkin dipshit this morning on CNBC and he basically stammered that Audit the Fed is a problem because it is problematic. Then he said it was dangerous because it would create dangers. Then he said it was dangerous because it was problematic. I can't even call that tautological thinking. It's just, well, nothing. I thought Liesman did a good job of attempting to hammer at Mishkin.
Typical liberal professor. This guy is a clown.
Light up this dipshits email and phone telling the iceman what a dunce he is.
http://www0.gsb.columbia.edu/faculty/fmishkin/