This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Former Governor Warsh Slams Fed's "Reverse Robin Hood" Policies

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Isn't it odd that when 'officials' are no longer part of the status-quo-sustainers, how the truthiness flows... As former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh explained this morning, "on the fairness point - if you have access to credit, if you've got a big balance sheet, the Fed has made you richer," concluding rather too honestly for some people's liking, "I would say [Fed policy] has been in some sense Reverse Robin Hood." The bottom line, he chides, "this is a way to make the well to do more well to do because that's all the Federal Reserve can do."

 


 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 06/26/2014 - 16:44 | 4899633 Dr Benway
Dr Benway's picture

He's a poet and he didn't know it

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 16:50 | 4899653 Top Gear
Top Gear's picture

Ayn Rand too hated Robin Hood.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 16:54 | 4899664 Pinto Currency
Pinto Currency's picture

 

 

All these facilitators must be frightened.

(He may be a good person but done real damage.)

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 16:57 | 4899674 Top Gear
Top Gear's picture

Was Ayn Rand a frightened facilitator?

"This is the horror which Robin Hood immortalized as an ideal of righteousness. It is said that he fought against the looting rulers and returned the loot to those who had been robbed, but that is not the meaning of the legend which has survived. He is remembered, not as a champion of property, but as a champion of need, not as a defender of the robbed, but as a provider of the poor...Until men learn that of all human symbols, Robin Hood is the most immoral and the most contemptible, there will be no justice on earth and no way for mankind to survive."

~Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:01 | 4899686 Pinto Currency
Pinto Currency's picture

 

Thinking more along the lines of Warsh, Fed, Treasury, politicians...

 

Warsh should just say that the Fed is a vehicle of fraud to steal peoples wealth.

Reverse Robin Hood isn't even a beginning.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:02 | 4899695 flacon
flacon's picture

Warsh and all these "intellectuals" at the Fed knew and know exactly what they were/are doing - and it was and is nefarious and they know it. 

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:04 | 4899704 pods
pods's picture

Don't forget the Bilderburg group, of which old Kev is on the "steering committee."

pods

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:13 | 4899743 flacon
flacon's picture

Don't you just loathe the flippant and untrue use of the word: "RECOVERY"?!

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:14 | 4899747 gh0atrider
gh0atrider's picture

What are people's views on h0arding nickels?  Is it good to have, say $500 - $1000 FV in nickels?  Is it a good idea for little things that you don't want to purchase with silver?  Or is it a big waste of time?

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:25 | 4899783 pods
pods's picture

Nickels are always a good investment. If the melt drops below face you can always put them in a sock and bludgeon someone's face.

pods

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:29 | 4899800 gh0atrider
gh0atrider's picture

If your face melts off will it still be recognizable and have any value though?

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 18:25 | 4900017 The Limerick King
The Limerick King's picture

 

 

An evil has taken our land

And built many castles of sand

The Fed's making good

A reverse Robin Hood

As their owners have carefully planned

Fri, 06/27/2014 - 07:10 | 4901436 TruthHunter
TruthHunter's picture

"If your face melts off will it still be recognizable?"

 

Depends... What's in the other guy's sock?

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 18:28 | 4900031 just-my-opinion
just-my-opinion's picture

So it was nickels they used in full metal jacket

Who knew socks could hurt so much

 

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 18:03 | 4899936 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

I've got a stash.  What could go wrong?  You never have to worry about them being worth less than you paid; they store pretty easily; melt value could exceed face value substantially at some point; and if the currency is ever revalued you could make out like a bandit.  Win/win.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:02 | 4899698 LetThemEatRand
LetThemEatRand's picture

It's funny, because I always think to myself -- who is the most immoral and contemptible of all human symbols, and Robin Hood is not even on the list.  I guess it's another one of those small details in which I disagree with my friend Ayn Greenspan.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:12 | 4899736 alien-IQ
alien-IQ's picture

It has always astounded me how so many so called "christians" are so enthralled with a woman who stated that people who are "weak" are not deserving or worthy of love.

she is without doubt one of the most mean spirited and loathsome people that has ever roamed the earth. the fact that so many in american politics cling to her every word should be more than a little worrisome.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:56 | 4899889 The Limerick King
The Limerick King's picture

It is one of my greatest disappointments that seemingly moral and good-natured people cannot see through the evil that is Ayn Rand and her philosophy. They only see the more virtuous elements of her writing, which she basically stole from the protestant work ethic, but they turn a blind eye to her deeply immoral and destructive position regarding charity. It just goes to show how the Oligarchs have used the power of their wealth to corrupt every political and economic position in their favour. Libertarians should divorce themselves from this deeply troubled woman. We do not have a financial crisis...we have a morality crisis...and Randian philosophy of laissez-faire economic and regulatory systems instituted by her acolyte Greenspan, helped pave the way to the disastrous sub-prime fiasco.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 18:31 | 4900042 Clint Liquor
Clint Liquor's picture

You are confusing 'charity' with 'socialism'. Charity is moral because it is voluntary. Socialism is evil because it is involuntary. This is distinction Ayn Rand made over and over and is always ignored by socialists.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 20:42 | 4900472 The Limerick King
The Limerick King's picture

 

 

You are incorrect or misguided. Ayn Rand taught that charity is evil and destructive, and that those in need of charity were taking resources away from productive individuals and harming society. Evil.

Sun, 06/29/2014 - 21:09 | 4904940 Otto Zitte
Otto Zitte's picture

Charity has to be given voluntarily, or its not charity. Thieves operating under color of law (IRS, UN, FRB, military aggression) to steal private property isn't charity.

Ayn Rand observed that no rational person has any claim on anyone else's life, that anyone who asserts this is at least a thief, usually also a liar including lying to themselves in order to to justify their transgressions. She postulated that people who do not have a code of ethics that includes respect for the property of others have no respect for themselves and are dangerous, so it stands to reason that any rational person should be vigilant and not hesitate to defend themselves against the thought crimes that correspond to physical violence. She astutely identified the State, organized religion and academia as the biggest proselytizers of predatory systems of manipulation. Ayn Rand did not "teach" that charity is evil. She observed that instead of helping the people it intends, charity creates permanent dependents on an epidemic scale. Look around you and tell me she was wrong. Is it evil to state one's truth, if that truth refutes your world view, and cannot be rationally disproved?

Ayn Rand did not preach that you have to see it her way. She pointed out that the choices we make have consequences, that slack has consequences, and that during her lifetime Americans were making the same mistakes Europeans did that led to the fascist and communist disasters that destroyed their cultures. Given hindsight, do you deny this was accurate?

I invite you to read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. If you have read it, read it again. With a highlighter, and as it is a long tome, also read the most published writings of the first 6 presidents of the United States: Google it. Many of the climactic lines by Ayn Rand's heroes in that exposition are significant quotes, conclusions or paraphrases of those real men. And others. I suppose it was her inside joke, to cite the Americans she admired most. This may be the rock on which that work rests. We'll never know, she didn't use it to defend her views. Similarly the villains characterize Einstein, Roosevelt, Truman, Hoover, and numerous other cronies of her time. That book has contextual syntax that almost no one has cleared.

I DO

I am in agreement with Ayn Rand. I agree with but do not follow her, or anyone else. I have done a lot of charity, sponsoring people whose work and ambition I support. Do you see a conflict? I don't. I'm creating the world I want to live in. 

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:20 | 4899764 Wait What
Wait What's picture

TopGear, morality has no place in matters of possession. can't compete? then Robin Hood is going to take your shit and leave you crying in your beer.

Robin Hood is proto-capitalism personified. if you can't protect your property, you don't deserve to have it.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:31 | 4899803 Top Gear
Top Gear's picture

I don't bother protecting my property. Come try to trespass or camp out on it. I'll just call the State, and an officer of the State, probably a Sheriff's Deputy, will protect my property. And, if you continue in your ways, you'll be in the pokey. Or dead. It's why I pay property taxes.

Real property is based on State Aggression and the Right to Take. I call it the Aggression Axiom:

Holding real property—Monopoly use of a parcel of Land—requires State aggression. 200 years ago, the State forced Indians off my land with guns into privation, then redistributed the earth's wealth via an entitlement program, Land Title. We privileged owners pay support via property tax to the State for its aggression. If anybody treads on my private real property, I call? a State officer to perform the exact same armed aggression done to Indians 200 years ago. State Might Makes Real Property Right!

P.S. The State has superior ownership of all land in its territory, hence "eminent domain." Yes, our social contract, the Constitution, has rules about it so that it isn't abused, but your libertarian fantasy about how you own land absolutely is a bunch of malarkey.

 

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:34 | 4899814 Top Gear
Top Gear's picture

P.P.S. The Right to Take is the root of all capitalism.

"[The Native Americans] didn't have any rights to the land...Any white person who brought the element of civilization had THE RIGHT TO TAKE over this continent." ~Ayn Rand, US Military Academy West Point 1974

I've got mine. And I gladly pay taxes to the government that secured land from the anarchist, non-State Indians, and keeps it secure from today's criminal and anarchist elements.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 18:31 | 4900040 joego1
joego1's picture

The state will protect you until they can't.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 21:09 | 4900533 Wait What
Wait What's picture

it's cute that you think "i'll just call the state" is going to stop the burglar, street thug, and car jacker pointing a gun in your face (or a hacker doing it digitally) and taking everything but the shirt off your back. that's exactly the point of the Robin Hood mythology. When the state can't be everywhere protecting its 'constituents', it becomes useless to you as an individual. the state didn't take the land, individuals took it, then collectivized their military power into that thing you're so fond of.

Robin Hood examplifies the right to take. unless you're ideologically incoherent, he should be your hero, not your villain. that he gives it away is of no consequence, we can do what we want with what is ours.

btw, your narrow interpretation of 'property' seems a little comical. last I checked, land being trampled upon is the least of most people's concern when thinking about what is theirs.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 18:25 | 4900007 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Owning property doesn't require the state.

It requires excluding or killing those who don't have a concept of other people's property.

Animals and subhumans don't, their behavior is restricted to 'my property' and 'our property'.

'Your property' is a very late arrival in our evolution.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:05 | 4899707 alien-IQ
alien-IQ's picture

Ayn Rand hated everything and everyone except people with lots and lots of money. She is the poster child of the contemporary american sycophant.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:11 | 4899730 Top Gear
Top Gear's picture

Did you graduate from a public school?

Sweep aside those parasites of subsidized classrooms, who live on the profits of the mind of others and proclaim that man needs no morality, no values, no code of behavior. ~Ayn Rand

And don't forget, only people with lots of money are moral.

"Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?"
http://capitalismmagazine.com/2002/08/franciscos-money-speech/

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:17 | 4899756 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

Substitue the word "Gold" for "money," and then do the same thing for "Debt."  Kinda clears things up when you call a spade a spade.

Ole Ben Bernanke must be one of the most productive individuals in history, eh?

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:45 | 4899847 Top Gear
Top Gear's picture

Gold = a measure of Debt. Also, the State creates markets via war.

Read some anthropology instead of your goldbug coloring books, such as:

"...even if Henry gave Joshua a gold coin instead of a piece of paper, the situation would be essentially the same. A gold coin is a promise to pay something else of equivalent value to a gold coin...."

"On the other hand, if one simply hands out coins to the soldiers and then demands that every family in the kingdom was obliged to pay one of those coins back to you, one would, in one blow, turn one’s entire national economy into a vast machine for the provisioning of soldiers, since now every family, in order to get their hands on the coins, must find some way to contribute to the general effort to provide soldiers with things they want. Markets are brought into existence as a side effect."

Debt: The First 5000 Years, by anthropologist David Graeber (2011)

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 19:14 | 4899913 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

Bullshit.  Gold is more than a placeholder for work or services.  Is barter a debt-based transaction?  Gold is much closer to barter than paper script can ever be because it always, at a minimum, the direct tangible product of the work to mine and process it unlike the paper IOU that can stand for any amount of future labor or produce.  If I trade cabbage for a horseshoe, it that a promise to pay, or have I actually paid? 

 

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 21:04 | 4900548 SunRise
SunRise's picture

A gold coin is not a promise to pay anything else of equivalent value to a gold coin.  It's just a gold coin.  If I put a gold coin or a bushel of wheat into a warehouse and receive a warehouse certificate, then that warehouse certificate is a promise to safely, responsibly keep the gold or wheat until I return for it or trade the certificate to someone else who might then redeem the promised item represented by that promissary certificate.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:22 | 4899770 alien-IQ
alien-IQ's picture

How are you not ashamed to spew such vile shit under the guise of some superiority complex that you seem to have derived from a book that was standard reading...IN PUBLIC FUCKING SCHOOLS.

You seem to have let a person who you have never met nor will ever meet, craft your moral compass. That makes you, by her standards, "weak" and "undeserving or worthy of love".

I suppose you have great respect for members of the lucky sperm club that did not need "public" schools but was instead sheltered away in some ivy league tower of babble.

You are a fucking fool.

Sun, 06/29/2014 - 01:24 | 4906565 cape_royds
cape_royds's picture

"And don't forget, only people with lots of money are moral."

That sort of superficial Communist propaganda doesn't make the cut.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:27 | 4899794 Charles Nelson ...
Charles Nelson Reilly's picture

Jesus Christ... Can't we just judge Ayn Rand on her works? Everytime she is bashed around here it sounds like a bunch of whiny liberals. She wrote books that took years of thought and planning. Take away from it what you will. Except for LetThemEatRand... She is the whinest liberal on here.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:34 | 4899818 alien-IQ
alien-IQ's picture

Is your world view so fucking narrow that you can only view people in terms of liberal or conservative? Really man, are you that fucking stupid and brainwashed? Are you really that small-minded?

(by the way, there's no need to answer, those were purely rhetorical questions. I mention it only because you don't seem bright enough to figure that out on your lonesome.)

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 16:46 | 4899636 Spungo
Spungo's picture

He is talking noise!

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 16:47 | 4899642 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Sounds to me like a goddamn hippy who never worked a goddamn day in his life and hates everything Merica stands for, and the troops.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 16:49 | 4899645 alexcojones
alexcojones's picture

Top politicians are simply shown the Zapruder / JFK  tape-

And told to think about "The Children" -

Theirs.

The Undamaged Zapruder Film - YouTube

 

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 16:52 | 4899658 TN Jed
TN Jed's picture

"Odd" as in, "Fuck Hitler! Betty Boop, what a dish. Oh say can you see? Ooh say can you see."

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 16:56 | 4899671 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

Ah yes, the growth meme.

7+ billion, and growing, all competing for the resources and energy that make a higher standard of living possible.

Never-ending growth in a closed system with finite resources.

Good luck with that.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:06 | 4899712 Top Gear
Top Gear's picture

Oil is not a finite resource. Libertarian economics transubstantiates the physical realm into the economic realm. Following is an interview with Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman:

Ravaioli: But there are many other environmental problems…

Nobel Laureate Friedman: Of course. Take oil, for example. Everyone says it’s a limited resource: physically it may be, but economically we don’t know. Economically there is more oil today than there was a hundred years ago. When it was still under the ground and no one knew it was there, it wasn’t economically available. When resources are really limited prices go up, but the price of oil has gone down and down. Suppose oil became scarce: the price would go up, and people would start using other energy sources. In a proper price system the market can take care of the problem.

Ravaioli: But we know that it takes millions of years to create an oil well, and we can’t reproduce it. Relying on oil means living on our capital and not on the interest, which would be the sensible course. Don’t you agree?

Nobel Laureate Friedman: If we were living on the capital, the market price would go up. The price of truly limited resources will rise over time. The price of oil has not been rising, so we’re not living on the capital. When that is no longer true, the price system will give a signal and the price of oil will go up. As always happens with a truly limited resource.

Ravaioli: Of course the discovery of new oil wells has given the illusion of unlimited oil …

Nobel Laureate Friedman: Why an illusion?

Ravaioli: Because we know it’s a limited resource.

Nobel Laureate Friedman: Excuse me, it’s not limited from an economic point of view. You have to separate the economic from the physical point of view. Many of the mistakes people make come from this. Like the stupid projections of the Club of Rome: they used a purely physical approach, without taking prices into account. There are many different sources of energy, some of which are too expensive to be exploited now. But if oil becomes scarce they will be exploited. But the market, which is fortunately capable of registering and using widely scattered knowledge and information from people all over the world, will take account of those changes.

[ p. 33, ECONOMISTS AND THE ENVIRONMENT, Carla Ravaioli; Zed, 1995]

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:26 | 4899767 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

In a sense, old Milton is correct.  Oil will be infinite in economic terms because eventually it will be uneconomical to produce anymore.  

The fact that civilization as we know it will collapse during the process is just a side dish I suppose.

PS  I'll see your Friedman and raise you Sir Fred Hoyle:

"It has often been said that, if the human species fails to make a go of it here on the Earth, some other species will take over the running. In the sense of developing intelligence this is not correct. We have or soon will have, exhausted the necessary physical prerequisites so far as this planet is concerned. With coal gone, oil gone, high-grade metallic ores gone, no species however competent can make the long climb from primitive conditions to high-level technology. This is a one-shot affair. If we fail, this planetary system fails so far as intelligence is concerned."

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:28 | 4899795 Al Huxley
Al Huxley's picture

Details, details.  You can't be a successful economist if you let trivial concerns like reality impinge on the purity of your theoretical ideologies.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:30 | 4899801 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

I know, right?  Why let mere theories like thermodynamics and human constructs like math get in the way of the glorious psudoscience of eononomics.  

Somewhere Karl Popper weeps.

 

Sat, 06/28/2014 - 02:42 | 4904953 Otto Zitte
Otto Zitte's picture

I'll see your fossil fuels and raise you chlorophyll.

The only thing that was proved is that there has never before existed a high culture like ours (Atlantis/Aryan mythos), because all the fossil fuels and mineral wealth within 5 miles of the surface was available to our ancestors, and it isn't there now for "some other species" to consume.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 16:58 | 4899677 vote_libertaria...
vote_libertarian_party's picture

Notice he refers to 'really high interest rates'  then later refers to 'nobody is talking about long rates going to 6%'.

 

Isn't the 10yr avg over the past 40 years about 6%?

 

So avg is now sky high crazy rates.

 

And thats as supply continues to be thrown out with a water cannon.

 

(go ahead Fed, quit buying, everything is fiiiiiine) 

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:18 | 4899760 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

hillary is against the iraq war post facto too. those maggots always come out against shit they were totally for when they were in the organization.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:22 | 4899774 forrestdweller
forrestdweller's picture

people who claim to speak on behalf of the average people, but in fact are part of the 1% elite, disgust me. snakes with a split tongue.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:34 | 4899817 DOGGONE
DOGGONE's picture

How about: Tell the f___ing truth!

Intro
http://www.showrealhist.com/yTRIAL.html
The Public Be Suckered
http://patrick.net/forum/?p=1230886

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:40 | 4899828 I Write Code
I Write Code's picture

Springtime for Hitler.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:49 | 4899855 Tenshin Headache
Tenshin Headache's picture

"this is a way to make the well to do more well to do because that's all the Federal Reserve can do."

Well, then, perhaps the Federal Reserve shouldn't do anything at all!

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 18:24 | 4900015 joego1
joego1's picture

Maybe they should be tarred and feathered too.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 17:55 | 4899893 Duc888
Duc888's picture

 

 

Nooz flash, the Fed is in business to protect it's member banks at all costs.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 18:02 | 4899929 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Now THIS is a thread !!!!

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 18:11 | 4899966 just-my-opinion
just-my-opinion's picture

Oh shit....Did I say that out loud....I ment to say....all is good , No worries

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 18:53 | 4900112 yogibear
yogibear's picture

A little too late for this.

Thu, 06/26/2014 - 22:40 | 4900871 Aussiekiwi
Aussiekiwi's picture

I dislike those pricks in interviews who ask themselves their own questions and then answer them

Fri, 06/27/2014 - 03:27 | 4901285 joethegorilla
joethegorilla's picture

If you think this is reverse Robin hood, then take a look at our "free trade" policies putting 50 million Americans on welfare. We have taken our fiscal and technological supremacy and gouged out its eyes right in front of us all.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!