This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Jeffrey Lacker Says The Fed Will Not Erode The Real Value Of Sovereign Debt Through Inflation
Richmond Fed's Jeff Lacker, in Q&A at the Regional Forum Morgantown, W.Va., disclosed that the Fed was not engaging in any "secret purchases" that he is aware of. Don't worry Jeff - we know you are not. We can't say the same for Mr. Bernanke, which is why the Fed's lawyer is always lurking like a werewolf over his right shoulder at all those congressional hearings to advise him on how far he can stretch the truth when it comes to "lying" about Greek bailouts, gold shortages, futures purchases and the like. Also notably Lacker warned against using more of the "extended period" language, indicating he is gradually shifting to the hawkish Hoenig camp, which is in dire need of more patriotic, non-bribed, rational, homo sapiens. Most notably, Lacker's prepared remarks indicate that the Fed is not going to help Obama's insane spending binge by eroding the government's debt through inflation. We wonder if Bernanke is aware of this tragic development for the HoldCo LPs invested in ObamaCorp on Wall Street.
To wit:
The government's debt
cannot grow indefinitely at a rate much faster than the economy itself
grows, so ultimately, something has got to change — either taxes are
raised, spending is reduced, or the real value of the debt is eroded
through an increase in inflation, an outcome the Federal Reserve is
committed to preventing.
Well at least the "independent" Fed is now suggesting that the government, which is spending like a drunken whore, needs to rein in its ridiculous money burning practices, or, sorry upper 1% of society, start with the tax hikes.
Bottom line: Lacker thinks that iPad and i720 sales should overshadow the $3 trillion commercial + resi real estate roll.
I think the most likely outcome for the rest of 2010 is that the national economy will grow at a moderate rate — consumers spending will gradually pick up pace and businesses will continue to expand outlays for equipment and software, and these key components of demand should overcome any drag from commercial construction or state and local government spending.
And even though Lacker realizes that the debacle of the last credit bubble is largely the Fed's fault with one liners like this, "I think we need to be a little more vigilant than we were in the last expansion" (yeah, a little), he followis it up: "We will need to be
careful about when and how to withdraw the considerable monetary policy stimulus now in place.” Jeff, just ask Ben - the answer is (as Ben check the most recent memo from Blankfein) - never.
Remarks by Jeffrey Lacker,
President, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond
Thank you and welcome to the Federal
Reserve Bank of Richmond's Regional Forum. I suspect that most of you
have heard that the recession is over and I also suspect that few of
you feel like the recession is over. The unemployment rate is still
high nationally and still rising in West Virginia. Perhaps the best
analogy is to taking a hard foul on the way to the basket; the
recession (the way economists define it) is over when you hit the
floor. But you don't feel like it's over until you get back up on your
feet, and even then you may have some lingering bruises. Well, the
consensus is that we hit the floor last summer and have been in the
process of getting back on our feet ever since. That represents
recovery, but the pain is still with many of us to be sure, and we are
a long way from a full recovery. This evening I would like to share
with you my views on where our economy stands both at the national and
state level and where it seems to be headed, and then hear directly
from you about your concerns. Before I begin, I should note that I
speak only for myself and not for my colleagues on the Federal Open
Market Committee. 1
The
recession that appears to have ended last year ranks as one of the
deepest on record, and was led by the plunge in housing construction
that followed the boom. As the housing slump became more severe, it
started spilling over into the rest of the economy. I could cite a slew
of dismal statistics that would characterize the recession, but I'll
confine myself to one in particular — after peaking at the end of 2007,
the total number of people employed in the U.S. fell by over 8 million,
wiping out all of the net job gains during the previous recovery and
expansion. West Virginia's payrolls peaked in the third quarter of 2008
and have fallen by over 30,000 since, a drop of 4.2% percent.
To
put the current national economic conditions in perspective, let me
start where the recession really had its origins — the housing market,
where some stabilization has now become evident. Several indicators of
sales and construction activity hit low points early last year and have
risen modestly since then. Even one widely followed index of existing
home prices in the U.S. rose a seasonally adjusted 4.4 percent from May
to January. And housing investment in the fourth quarter of last year
made its first positive contribution to growth since the second quarter
of 2008. This is an encouraging sign that housing is no longer a drag
on the economy. But the significant over-building that occurred during
the housing boom is likely to severely limit the ability of this key
sector to provide the lift to the economic recovery that was typical in
the early stages of past recoveries.
Consumer spending posted
solid gains over the second half of last year and is widely expected to
have increased in the first quarter of this year. Even new vehicle
sales, which were a major factor in the decline in consumer spending
during the recession, have increased from a low of 9.1 million units in
February of last year to 11.8 million units in March of this year. This
was the industry's best performance without the aid of government
incentive programs since the recession ended. Let me be clear here —
consumers are by no means exuberant. The rise in the saving rate — to
over 3 percent from 1 percent as the recession began in early 2008 –
likely reflects a combination of apprehension about income prospects
and a desire to pay down debt and to rebuild wealth depleted by the
broad erosion in financial asset and home prices from their previous
peaks. But the recent recovery in equity prices and the stabilization
in home values are no doubt contributing to the upturn in consumer
spending.
Business spending on new equipment and software, which
fell by over 20 percent during the recession, also has reversed course
in the second half of last year. A firming of business spending on
capital goods may seem incongruous in light of the low levels of
measured capacity utilization in many industries, but excess capacity
does not preclude the emergence of profitable opportunities to deploy
new equipment and software to reduce costs or improve processes and
services. For example, information equipment and software — a
significant source of hi-tech growth over the last two decades — by
itself contributed nearly a full percentage point to the 5.6 percent
growth in real GDP in the fourth quarter of last year. Even business
investment in transportation equipment added over a quarter of a
percentage point to GDP that quarter.
Despite all these favorable
demand-side developments, the relative vigor of GDP in the fourth
quarter actually surprised many analysts. Of course, part of that vigor
reflected a substantial swing toward inventory accumulation that
provided a significant boost to GDP growth. But even
excluding inventories from the calculation — an adjustment that results
in the statistic known as final sales — GDP managed a respectable 1.7
percent gain over the previous quarter. Final sales will warrant
special attention in the months ahead as we assess how rapidly the
recovery strengthens.
I have been focusing thus far on the areas
of the economy where improvement is evident. There are other areas in
which we still face major economic challenges, however. In commercial
real estate, construction is falling, vacancy rates are rising and
falling property prices are eroding owners' equity positions. No one
expects a quick reversal in either of these negative trends, and as a
result, business investment in structures ? in contrast to the
equipment and software category — is likely to be a sizable drag on
U.S. growth in the near term.
In the struggle between the
positive and negative forces on economic growth, the labor market
ultimately will play a pivotal role. More jobs mean more income, more
consumer confidence, and more consumer spending, which will prompt
businesses to continue hiring and investing and help governments raise
revenues. If you agree with me on that point, then I think you will
agree that our latest employment release was the most encouraging sign
we have seen to date regarding the current recovery. In March, we added
162,000 jobs on net, with goods-producing industries adding over 40,000
jobs. Some of those gains represented the hiring of Census workers and
some were reversing weather-related losses in February. Even apart from
those special factors, however, the month of March made a major
contribution to the first positive quarter for the labor market since
the fourth quarter of 2007. That was just before we took that hard foul
and the recession began. While even the more optimistic forecasters do
not expect rapid growth in employment this year, the labor market does
seem to be lifting itself off the floor now.
Let me make one
final point on the unique challenges that we are facing in this
recovery ? namely the state of small business in America. The recession
brought unprecedented job losses to businesses with less than 50
employees. This group represents about 90 percent of all business
establishments nationwide and employs 40 percent of all workers, and is
even more important in West Virginia, where these small businesses
account for more than half of all workers. Tight credit often gets the
blame for holding back small business expansion these days, but
according to a recent survey by the National Federation of Independent
Business, weak sales are by far the number one problem facing small
businesses. And it is important to recognize that many businesses of
all kinds will naturally face tougher credit terms in a soft economy,
because their revenue prospects are likely to be more uncertain.
Moreover, the proper benchmark is the ability of the banking system as
a whole to supply an appropriate quantity of credit, since
any one given bank may be shrinking their balance sheet while others
are expanding. I am not aware of any evidence that the banking industry
as a whole is inappropriately impeding the availability of credit — and
that seems to be confirmed by recent small business surveys.
Putting
the whole picture together, I think the most likely outcome for the
rest of 2010 is that the national economy will grow at a moderate rate
— consumers spending will gradually pick up pace and businesses will
continue to expand outlays for equipment and software, and these key
components of demand should overcome any drag from commercial
construction or state and local government spending.
For West
Virginia, the recession arrived later than for the rest of the nation,
with job losses only beginning in late 2008 and continuing in recent
months. Unemployment also rose later in The Mountain State, jumping
from a low 3.8 percent in October of 2008 to more than double that rate
in just a few months, continuing its sharp rise to a rate of 9.5
percent today. The strength in energy markets in early 2008 helped
delay the onset of the downturn here. In addition, the West Virginia
housing market did not experience the outsized gains of some other
states, and therefore home prices and residential construction have not
declined quite as sharply. While existing home sales in West Virginia
have risen consistently in recent months, residential construction
remains sluggish. With the late entry into recession, West Virginia
seems to be following a somewhat slower path to recovery, yet West
Virginia University's Bureau of Business and Economic Research has
forecast modest job growth for the second half of this year, consistent
with the national jobs outlook.
Of course, there are always risks
to any outlook. In the current environment, the labor market could
recover more slowly than many expect, which would restrain consumer
spending and dampen growth. But household incomes and household
confidence could also rebound more vigorously than many expect, in
which case consumer spending could pick up more briskly. It is also
worth mentioning a risk that seems particularly prominent in this
recovery; firms facing major uncertainties surrounding federal policies
on trade, the environment, financial services, and until recently,
health care. For a business considering a commitment to new capital
spending or new hiring, it can be difficult to estimate after-tax
yields for an endeavor in an environment that is so rich with proposals
for higher taxes and new regulations. This risk could be particularly
relevant to West Virginia's coal mining industry, where uncertainty has
become especially elevated over the past year. No matter how one stands
on the environmental issues involved, the changing regulatory landscape
could well have a depressing effect on investment outlays.
Turning
now to the outlook for inflation and monetary policy, by all accounts —
from government data to reports we get from our own surveys — inflation
remains benign, averaging about one and a half percent since early last
year. The risk of a pronounced decline in inflation has diminished
substantially in my view. But we will need to be careful as the
expansion strengthens to keep inflation and inflation expectations in
check because experience has shown that an upward drift in inflation
expectations can be very costly to unwind.
To keep inflation contained, we will need to be careful about when and how
to withdraw the considerable monetary policy stimulus now in place.
This requires care during any recovery, but this time the Fed will have
two monetary policy instruments at its disposal, not just one. The Fed
traditionally has targeted the overnight federal funds rate, which
required appropriately adjusting the supply of monetary liabilities
(currency and bank reserves). Varying the fed funds rate affects a
broad range of other market interest rates, and thereby influences
growth and inflation. Since October 2008, as the bankers in the room
are aware, we have had the authority to pay explicit interest on the
reserve balances banks hold. This gives us the ability to vary
independently the amount of our monetary liabilities and a critical
overnight interest rate. So when the time comes to withdraw monetary
stimulus, the FOMC will be able to raise the interest rate on reserves
or drain reserve balances, or both.
The Fed has been working on
two mechanisms by which we could drain bank reserves — reverse
repurchase agreements and a term deposit facility. Both would amount to
issuing Federal Reserve Bank debt to absorb reserves. While these may
be useful as contingency measures, my preference would be to rely
primarily on sales of the agency debt and agency-guaranteed
mortgage-backed securities that we have purchased over the course of
the last year. Such an approach would move us more rapidly to a
"Treasuries-only" portfolio, and thus more rapidly reduce the extent to
which our asset holdings are distorting the allocation of credit. There
is no reason why MBS sales at a steady, moderate, pre-announced pace
(as with our purchase program) needs to be disruptive to the markets
for those securities. In fact, by adding to the floating private sector
supply, it should improve market liquidity, which reportedly has been
hampered by our large-scale purchases.
Looking beyond the
near-term challenges for monetary policy, however, our economy does
face several significant challenges over the longer term. I will
discuss two. One of these is the path of future federal budget deficits
implied by current and planned fiscal policies. The government's debt
cannot grow indefinitely at a rate much faster than the economy itself
grows, so ultimately, something has got to change — either taxes are
raised, spending is reduced, or the real value of the debt is eroded
through an increase in inflation, an outcome the Federal Reserve is
committed to preventing. Failure to establish credible plans for
bringing the fiscal position back into balance is likely to dampen
economic growth, since growing government debt relative to GDP would
ultimately compete with private borrowing by businesses and households.
Our
financial system — particularly how it will perform in future financial
crises — will also pose considerable longer term challenges. I have
argued elsewhere that the most important step to containing financial
instability is to establish clear and credible limits to the federal
financial safety net, which has grown considerably as a result of the
crisis. Richmond Fed economists estimate that, given the precedents set
in 2008, nearly 59 percent of the liabilities of the financial sector
enjoy explicit or implicit government support, up considerably from
about 45 percent as of 1999.2
I believe that this crisis, and the attendant expansion of the
financial safety net, was the result of there being no clear limits on
the government's legal authority to protect the creditors of failing
financial firms.
While the bills that have been passed in the
Senate Banking Committee and on the House floor express the desire to
see losses imposed on failing firms' creditors, they provide the
government with wide-ranging discretion to designate financial firms as
"systemically important" and use public funds in their resolution. But
the resulting ambiguity about rescue policy is likely to just
perpetuate the forces that brought us "too big to fail" to begin with.
Improved regulations will contain the risks that brought us the last
crisis, but new risk-taking arrangements inevitably will arise that
by-pass existing regulatory restraints. If authorities allow creditor
losses at one failing firm, then creditors are likely to pull away from
other similar firms, fearing that authorities will forgo supporting
them as well. Authorities will feel compelled to resolve uncertainty
about implicit safety net support by expanding implied commitments.
Subsequent regulations will rein in the new arrangements, the danger of
which will by then be fully appreciated. But this just sets the stage
for another cycle of by-pass, crisis, rescue and regulation.
A
discretionary safety net, with no set boundaries, only feeds this cycle
by giving market participants reason to believe that new, complex
arrangements ultimately will be protected. It requires an ever-growing
reach of financial regulation, and undermines the market discipline
that helps align financial risk-taking with broader societal interests.
It also diverts innovative resources and energies into less-productive
channels, like regulatory by-pass, and away from more fundamental
improvements to our standard of living. Striking and preserving the
right balance between the safety net, regulation, and market
discipline, is vital to ensuring that financial markets make positive
contributions to the resiliency and growth of our economy over the long
run.
»
- 6658 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
yeah...and I'm committed to not cumming in my woman. I SWEAR.
... after all we have a strong Dollar policy.
So is the phrase "We won't print our way out of the debt" going to join such classics as "I swear I'll only put the tip in" or "No, you're special. I love you"?
In the interest of seeing the entire picture, don't you think we should get the woman's perspective?
"Yes Honey, yours is the biggest I've ever had" or maybe "I've never come like I do with you" or the classic "No, I don't think about my ex-husband when I'm with you". Or the instant ego killer "It's not the size that counts".
If I step in it,
And it smells like bullcrap,
And it looks like bullcrap,
And I'm stranding behind a bull that's crapping,
Then it's bullcrap.
Keep trying boys. History ain't on your side......
cough cough bullsh$t
Phucking moron! This thing is so jacked with 122+ trillion in debt and off balance liabilities that we now have a GAAP deficit of 9 trillion.
It is by definition a Sovereign Ship Wreck.
In other words, the Fed will slam on the brakes before Joe Sixpack can get a job or a raise. LMFAO!!!
tax rates will be raised, but tax revenue will fall.
spending will come down - but not nearly enough.
the value of the debt will not be eroded by inflation, but obviated by currency collapse.
it is way too late for tough talk
+100
You don't speak the truth, you tell the troops what they want to hear so they can continue to delude themselves.
"Daddy, tell me a lie so that I may pretend it's the truth."
BS!!!
They been there done that before..they'll exactly do that again if only they can.
Point is that, so far...deflation looms ink jets notwhtstanding.
Nope, no monetization of US debt, just turns out that there's 10 - 20x the demand for US treasuries that was assumed a few years ago. Hell, maybe we need to issue 10x as many as we're issuing now. Maybe the right thing to do is just issue debt until the bid-to-cover ratio starts to drop - not because we need the money mind you, just to fill that great untapped demand for US debt. Burden of consumption and all, don't you know.
+1 Brilliant! ROFL
Hmmm, you know if that model holds up we could drive the entire yield curve below 0%. Imagine we would pay off the debt by issuing debt that the debtor takes a loss on.
Don't worry we'll borrow our way out of debt! Then move on and have 0 taxes and fund the welfare/warfare state entirely on offering negative yield debt. Hell would do wonders for the FIRE econome yo.
Talk is cheap.
Fed officials are lying sacks of dogcrap.
That way the banksters can swoop in and picking up anything of value.
First Deflation. Then Inflation.
Fuck the Fed - Neal Fox
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiTikduJ15Y
And [bernanke], never flitting, still is sitting, still is sitting
On the pallid bust of [greenspan] just above my chamber door;
And his eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming,
And the lamp-light o'er him streaming throws his shadow on the floor;
And my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor
Shall be lifted - nevermore!
Props. I love Poe.
I once did A Tell-Tale Heart prose piece, once upon a time.
More rhymes definitely need to be busted in the comments section.
Also, there's no reason why Zero Hedge shouldn't have it's own theme song by now.
"something has got to change — either taxes are raised, spending is reduced, or the real value of the debt is eroded through an increase in inflation".
How come getting rid of Obama, Bernanke, and Geithner are not one the three things that must change?
Maybe the guy is clear sighted and perfectly aware of the continuity in politics from one president to another. With also opens up the possibility of vocal criticism or free speech. As things are written in advance, letting people express their discontment or opposition is no biggie. Let people speak, things will be done no matter what.
Getting rid of Obama and his clique will not prevent the next administration team to continue on the same ground. Exactly as Obama walks into Bush's steps.
I suppose that is the reason why this guy focuses on the changes in policies, not the people in charge to carry out political programs. As political leaders change, policies remain the same.
I wouldn't rule out (down the road) higher/lower repayment to different bond holders based on political considerations. You know, like they've already done with Chrysler.
You never know it's true until it is officially denied. Consider Inflating away debt the Fed's gameplan.
Who's going to buy their MBS'? And at what price? Why do we have to listen to this guy?
Richard Fisher, President of the Dallas Fed, and a voting member, uttered some interesting tid bits on Fox Business with Cavuto when Cavuto wasn't interrupting him.
1. Sees no inflation risk as much "slack" in the system
2. No more quantitative easing
3. Seemed to hedge on the finality of intervention in the mortgage market
4. Is freaked out about Congressional spending, and either Congress will restrain itself or interest rates will go up (Fed won't raise rates, however, he sees a further steepening of the yield curve).
5. Wants to keep the Fed independent of the Exectutive/Legislative branches
6. Sees NO risk of a double-dip recession.
Personally, I think he should think about these matters some more. I think there is a risk interest rates spike, commodity inflation spikes, loan defaults continue ramping up, banks take another header, and we take another leg down.
I can hear the Chinese students laughing from here...
In these guys' defense - well not really because I hate them as well, assuming that this isn't the big last scheme for the last big robbing the American people, they absolutely NEED this system to continue to exist so they can exist. If they allow every American to see what a fraud fiat currency is, by inflating away government debt, they run the risk of their game ending. What good is the money paid back to them (since all money now is really debt) if they destroy its value? Some things to think about...
Granted, this assumes they have the intelligence to actually control the system.
Because they need TITLE to everything that has one, hence the Thomas Jefferson quote,
Fannie and freddy who?
I believe that they possess the hubris to attempt to control the system, but lack the intelligence to understand that it is natural law that truly governs "their" system.
For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.
Hosea 8:7
I met a banker from an antique land....
Ozymandias
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
`My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away".
-Percy Bysshe Shelly
Ahh you underestimate the ubiquity of the greater fool. They can rob us quite a bit more, especially if we get used to it. The game is far from over. Something miraculous will happen, just in time for the 2012 election. We'll shake up the white house and everything will get better, right?
"
WE really want to see you pull the rabbit out of the hat!!!!
But, dont worry, the BIS will prudently lay some "austerity" on them all, if not, then the fed is playing their "back hand".
"We can't say the same for Mr. Bernanke, which is why the Fed's lawyer is always lurking like a werewolf over his right shoulder."
"[S]pending like a drunken whore."
Technically you can't win quote of the day, but we will pitch in to buy you a "Fuck yo couch Bernanke!" t-shirt, don't worry.
Tick Tock Tick Tock! One day it just stops working. Until then ignorance is truly bliss!
change his name to Lackey, please.
Do they really believe the stuff they talk about? I say let's take all the fed members to Vegas, I bet they would win all the time. LOL!
That my friends, is the epitome of a speech strictly for public consumption. The tone is consistantly unremarkable throughout the FED speak disciples oration. What did we learn amongst the overlapping contridictions? ZIP!
Summation (Translated into FED speak for your enjoyment):
We will not know what to do until we do it, and then while doing it, will know not what it does. It can't be undone, but in time, it will be worth doing, if only to do it another way. In this, the path is clear, if indeed we walk it.
----------
The line about competing debt is interesting. Because if we read between the lines, Mr. Lacker seems to think the market for sovereign debt, is like any other option for buying debt. His vision is one of the steady state economic ever expanding school of old, that the debt market is limitless. He sees nothing new in our present situation. This is a warning, they are not in control. Prepare yourself.
----------
The FED is not committed to tight money policy. How can you say this after the unprecidented purchase of defaulting real estate derivatives of $1.25T dollars.
----------
No mention of how the FED is addressing systemic risk on its own initiative. It is the BHC regulator, it does not need any new legislation to do its job.
----------
No mention on how the FED is going to address the goal of full employment.
----------
A simple chart would tell him that the FED has no choice in what it will do. The politicians will not act until crisis, and when it does, the FED will just finance government through monetization of our own debt. This is the only reason the FED exits, other than to line the pockets of the bankers.
Mark Beck
One thing about fiat currency is that "everybody is doing it." If one wants to look at a unit of currency as an ownership stake in a country, which country do you want to own? Most of them have their problems. Many of the financial elite would take the Chinese currency, but if you believe Jim Chanos half their "growth" is construction of empty apartment buildings whose empty units are being flipped by undercapitalized speculators (think condoflip.com).
In the old days a country like Greece would have financially imploded under debt and the market would have hit the reset button. Now the EU as a whole has to pick up the pieces.
The tricky part is that before and after the system implodes, there's inflation. While the system implodes, there's deflation. Like 2007-2009. $150 dollar oil became $35 dollar oil. Now back to $80 dollar oil. Most of the time its inflation and thats the preferred outcome by the power elite as that keeps the masses quiet, unless oil or rice get too high. But the elite have probably learned their lesson about that, and won't permit it.
As you can see, stock market inflation is permitted to reinflate and give confidence to the masses.
The confidence indices suggest that the reinflation scheme hasn't gained traction with the masses.
Uh, yeah. And if I keep drinking, continuously, I'll eventually drink myself sober. Right?
No seriously, honey. I'm not like the other guys; you can trust me!
Lacke(r)y says the fed won't inflate away the debt! Their track record has been one of utter success in that endeavor, since their inception, now hasn't it!!!???
Ask anyone who has held a savings account with any of these swindlers, about their purchasing power of their savings, after the bank gets through with it. Savings are a bank's liability. They intentionally, through the inflationary fractional reserve lending multiplier, erode away the value of the debt they owe to the saver, by inflating away its purchasing power. Interest rates on loans only add to the destruction. They get to use your money to satisfy their lifestyle needs and settle the account in devalued dollars. There is just too much to refute here, so I'll just conclude with (before I have a valve malfunction); Lacker, you are a lying sack of diarrhea.
End the Fed. End fiat based money.
New community member; 1st post. Heading out now to the Boston Tea Party with my son. Don't agree with all the tea party represents.
My sign says " Stop Fascism, End The Fed"
Later
Wish I could join you (I live just south of Boston) - enjoy!
Great sign, by the way.
Jeffrey old boy,I'm afraid talk like that will get you either removed from office or involve you having a rather nasty "accident",obviously the Fed won't print money to get out of the hole.That's why someone recently bought nearly $20 billion large ES after an obvious top in the market.Oh there is also the small matter of "previous",a dollar when the Fed was incorporated is now worth around 5-10 cents,so we believe you Jeff.Next.