This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Fed's Troubling Clarity Of Confusion
Over the past few years no institution has had more consequences beholden to their words than the Federal Reserve. So much so one could reasonably argue in response to prevailing circumstances their communiques overshadowed most others; including presidents and other leaders.
The problem today is; in their effort to bring more clarity via press-ers, and more as to what might be transpiring behind the doors at the Eccles building, they’ve now communicated more confusion in the last two weeks nullifying all previous efforts. As of now they’ve not only hindered, they’ve made their communiques outright suspect for the foreseeable future. Quite literally – at the exact worst of times.
When the Fed. held back and decided to postpone raising rates by a measly 25 basis points it shocked many. The underlying (as well as whispered) issue that still dominates the reasoning is: What does the Fed. know which they aren’t telling?
One could argue this was in direct response to China’s ongoing stock debacle. Yet, the issue here was: and this is the Fed’s concern? For China itself is still standing pat on the premise they were in control and were dealing with its gyrations directly. While concurrently their GDP growth (as implied by the politburo) is still on track to be more than double the GDP of the U.S. Which begged the question: So what’s the big deal with raising rates here since it’s been the most publicized and anticipated by an amount so small (25 basis points) many see it be more of a symbolic gesture rather than anything else, if things are supposedly doing better here?
The Fed’s insertion of the words “international developments” added confusion not clarity. So now, one has to wonder what data point is now relevant for a Fed. decision? i.e., U.S. unemployment data? Or, does Brazil’s free-fall and rising inflation combined with a Petrobas™ calamity now preempt or overrule? Can (or will) other “international developments” now overshadow a U.S. economy concern? The answer to these types of questions are now totally up in the air; for the Fed. made that perfectly clear with its latest decision. Remember; the reason given for inaction over action was “international developments.” Not U.S. developments.
One can’t help but contemplate: Will access to the bond markets or bank loans for say a troubled company in Peoria, Detroit, the Dakotas et al or even a State itself be equal or given more weight if a future decision if buttressed with a concerning factor as say Brazil might be for access to Dollar swaps from the Fed.? If both are being hindered at the same time which one tips the scale? U.S. interest or development? Or, does the “international development” side take the favor? It’s now an open question based purely on the empirical evidence. Not speculation.
Again: Does a company in the U.S. with global reach draw the same, less, or more concern as to access the capital markets than say another nation does that may be in need of access to Dollar swaps or other necessaries provided via the Fed.? What “international development” will now trump a domestic one? Do interest rates (whether higher, lower, or remaining fast) borne to U.S. entities take a back seat to “international developments?” Once again, with the latest “clarity” statements emanating from the Fed. – these are open questions. For they just proved by their own votes “international” concerns trumped domestic. i.e., U.S. savers and more took a back seat to share holders in China.
These questions at first sound vague or even preposterous. However, I must implore it’s by the Fed’s own actions and reasons why per their latest decision – they are anything but “unimaginable.”
Imagine you’re a company trying to deciding on whether you should now make any large capital expenditures based on Fed. policy for interest rates. With what you just witnessed over the last two weeks – do you have more clarity as to “pen a deal?” Absolutely not. If anything, you’re going to sit back and wait, (and quite possibly just buy back more shares) which is exactly the opposite of what the Fed. is trying to push forward. i.e., cap-ex spending. This problem, again, has been exacerbated by their own hands. For they just pushed most considerations not only back into the neutral position, but quite possible park with the emergency brake securely applied.
Many think the decision to not move forward at this last meeting was its own version of a “one and done.” In other words, just an obvious blunder not to move when clearly they should have and will be long forgotten in the coming weeks. However, I believe there was far more to this latest policy error than what was taken at first blush.
What transpired both during as well as right after Ms. Yellen’s FOMC presser was anything but a clarification of where the Fed. as a whole thinks, or believes is happening not only in the U.S. – but globally. And it was in this clarity for the observer, not the Fed., where the realization of troubling issues were on display for anyone caring to look with a concerning eye; rather than the usual sycophantic ear displayed by most of the financial media.
Here are a few things where I was left dumbfounded as to not be pursued or pressed with vigor by any of the financial media during that conference. For the implications are far from minuscule:
Why did “international” eclipse domestic concerns? If China is stating publicly they have things under control, why is the Fed. basing its decision to avoid “normalization” for domestic monetary policy? And if “international” was not a code word for China, then what other global development was the decision based on?
How is it during the weeks and months of this most telegraphed “intent” to raise where Fed. officials have been more vocal about the need, as well as the ability, to move off of the zero bound since the economy has improved via the Fed’s own talking points. Yet – did not? Were officials just talking up the economy? Or, are we in worse straights than we’re being told from official channels?
Is the Fed. underestimating the potential backlash for second guessing future decisions as this one inherently clouds certainty rather than clarifies? The exact opposite of what the Fed. has tried to dispel.
Last but not least: How is it for the first time in Fed. history a member openly stated (via the Dot Plot) the forethought or desire that Fed. interest rate policy would not only remain low but in fact cross the Rubicon into a negative rate policy when clearly the Fed. itself is signaling an improving economy? The two not only don’t fit, but the timing of such a declaration is counter-intuitive.
And that last one is the very question that has changed everything in ways I truly believe the Fed. itself (and most of the financial media) doesn’t understand. Which in and of itself – is another very troubling matter from my viewpoint.
During her presser Ms. Yellen gave what many take as the typical “Fed. speak” responses to questions such as (I’m paraphrasing) “Not something we seriously considered.” Or: “We would look at all available tools and evaluate it under ….” And so forth. However, the issue here is while everybody wants to think of it as a parting members final statement. No one can be sure if it wasn’t Ms. Yellen herself. Because, after all – they are made and publicized in anonymity. It could be any member.
Speculation has now become a clarifying qualifier. And that’s a very new, very troublesome epiphany I would imagine the Fed. has yet to fully comprehend.
Thought exercises such as the following are not relegated to the conspiratorial. With what has taken place over the past few weeks, if you’re not asking questions and trying to come up with answers that seem absurd today – you aren’t thinking hard enough. Especially if you’re in business that demands understanding of how your interests coincide and are either influenced, or altered, alongside Fed. policies and decisions. To wit:
Maybe it wasn’t some “parting shot” (e.g., a dot in the negative field on the Fed’s Dot Plot) as others have reported. Maybe it was intentional as to get this subject on the table for current Fed. members. In other words not out of spite, but rather, as a farewell (agreed upon) parting gift.
Let’s not forget. An institution like the Fed. is just that – an institution. And a powerful one at that. If it was done as some form of “parting shot” the implications of just how bitter and divided the Fed. has possibly become are staggering. For such an action as this one risks being seen as a pariah, and quite possible shunned in retaliation from anything “banker” related for the rest of one’s life. And if one has spent their life as a “banker of bankers” doing so would have even more onerous implications. Don’t let the implications inherent on so many levels be lost on you. Truly ponder this, for those implications are extraordinary.
Let me illustrate with this. Imagine how much of an “off-the-reservation” or “political-nightmare” the following hypothetical would be:
Imagine if there were the equivalent publicized communique emanating from the Joint Chiefs of Staff which included the President along with the House and Senate leaders, where they publicly stated anonymously their forecast for a nuclear strike via a “dot plan.”
It would be one thing for some of those “dots” to appear near a so-called “inevitable” line from time to time. However, if it were during a time of heightened tensions and sabre rattling from not just one, but rather a consortium of rival nations. If one of those “dots” appeared for the first time in history to be in the “need to launch today” area. It changes everything, and I do mean – everything. For nations would have to speculate – It very well could have been the President! And not doing so would be a dereliction of one’s duty or office where lives, and national sovereignty are at risk. What it would also do is saddle every foreseeable press conference with an almost unavoidable stampede of demands at the exclusion of nearly all else for “clarification” on this one sole premise.
This is what happened in-kind with the Federal Reserve’s latest publishing of their own Dot Plot. One of the members placed their “dot” in the monetary equivalent of the “nuclear option” showing their forecast or propensity that the Fed should not only not be raising rates, but rather, should relinquish ZIRP for NIRP. e.g. from zero to negative. This changes everything in ways I’m not sure even the Fed. itself has estimated.
As I stated earlier, one could use all the conjecture one wants as to speculate with near certainty it was this member or that member, or never this one, or that. However, it’s all just that: conjecture. Because anonymity allows for exactly the opposite arguments of; it very well could be Ms. Yellen herself. No one knows. But the trouble is, it is now the most important speculative thought exercise everyone must now carry around and contemplate along with everything else. For that Genie is now out of the bottle.
Adding to all this which quite possibly made matters even worse was Fed. Chair Yellen’s latest speech in Amherst Massachusetts where towards the end she experienced obvious health complications. The speculation is now swirling as to what type of “event” did she experience. i.e., Dehydration? Or something worse? Although it’s all speculation from afar the one thing I heard from people I asked who are in the medical field that was unanimous: The impetus was more than likely stress related.
Personally that diagnosis makes absolute sense in my view. However, one thing still scratches at the back of my mind. At first they said “dehydration.” Fair enough it’s a reasonable conclusion. Yet, being from Boston I’m personally well aware some of the finest facilities in the world capable of diagnosing her are available. If the Fed. wanted to dispel any rumors or at the least quell many concerns all a press agent needed to do was to say something like the following:
“It appears like a dehydration issue and the EMT’s (I’m assuming they were called) concur with this. However, Ms. Yellen is going to be have a quick exam and possibly an MRI as to make sure it was nothing else before she returns. (for a person of Ms. Yellen’s stature the pathways would have been cleared with immediacy) After all, we’re very fortunate such an event happened within such a renowned medical area.”
Simple, easy, and squashes a boatload of speculation. Also, is that not just plain commonsense? Why would you not? Or, they did and they won’t say. For as of this writing Fed. official channels are remaining tight-lipped on any further details.
And as such, as I related to earlier once again there are far more questions interjected via the Fed’s own hand that have global implications for uncertainty and resolutions rather, than give any clarity for the foreseeable future such as…
Did a parting member decide to stick it to the current Fed. and open up a can of worms? A can the Fed. may not be able to settle out in the near future? And if so – what does that say for the unity or condescension of current members?
Was the “nuclear option” seen within the current Dot Plot a choreographed move done as to give cover to current members or Chair as to get the issue on the table in some form of “test balloon” scenario wrapped in plausible deniability with a very Keynesian thinkers parting?
Was this action of no action so contentious between members that the decision was more of an arm twisting consensus rather than a consensus of agreeing minds? And if so, why so?
Did the Chair have a near revolt on its hands with standing pat? For many of the once dovish viewed members were speaking publicly very hawk-ishly including the Chair herself.
Who or what changed as to allow not only what many saw as a complete reversal of previously choreographed and publicized intent – but have a publicly stated Fed. communique showing a never before in history vote (via the Dot Plot) for negative, repeat; neg-a-tive interest rate policy? All while members continue to publicly state the U.S. economy has and still is recovering.
Scenarios such as these one can easily presume would bring on quite the stressful situation for any Chair.
To reiterate; one can easily see there are far more questions today than answers. All from an institution that has set as its communication policy – more is better – as to clarify and help remove uncertainty from both the markets as well a what their intents going forward will be.
In my eyes it seems to be working exactly the same as its other policy outcomes: adding confusion, uncertainty, and having the exact opposite of intended results.
- 8656 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -


It's not just the Cleveland accent...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiHsWiJid8E
too many similarities to ignore.
So you are suggesting he is Janet Yellen's son?
Or lost brother?
it begs further investigation.
Yellen and Dr. Evil are one and the same. The Yellen version just wears a wig. If you don't believe me watch her make a demand for one million dollars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJR1H5tf5wE
The most important thing is that we trust our leaders
http://www.denk-bubbles.com/trust-us
...and never question their judgement or motives.
"they’ve made their communiques outright suspect for the foreseeable future"
To anyone paying any real attention, that should have happened long ago. It's really easy to appear confused when you don't know what the f**k you're doing.
The Fed's goal IS confusion. They know exactly what they are doing.
Action, or lack thereof, speaks louder than words.
No confusion at all ... unemployement is under 6% ... and interest rate hike still on the table this year, cough, cough.
Janet Yellen: the face that makes rats shudder.
Trust? Leadership? Honesty? Those are not goals of the Federal Reserve. Devaluing your "money" is the goal.
What can you buy for just a penny? Just a nickel? Just a dime? Just a quater? Those items are ONLY a fraction of some other unit. They are obsolete. Thank you FED.
So someone help me - "tools"
Apart from printing more FRNs and adusting deposit interest rates and - federal funds/resereve rates I guess...
what other "tools" are there, really?
I mean this is perhaps a simplistic reduction but
http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/03/112003.asp
isn't this basically the case?
If so - or if essentially so, what strikes me, personally, as a guy who is still very much learning about basic finance/econ etc. is just the sheer, no kidding, absolute horseshit that comes out of their mouths to obfuscate the nature of the game.
We all know any fiat money system by design creates more debt than there is currency extant to actually pay it.
We also know that the rich {aggregated capital} get richer because they have more capital in the first place.... in other words, basic math tells me that I can make more lending or investing 100k at 5% than 10k.... which means that over time...in any fiat system with compound interest, and **especially** with fractional reserve debt-money creation, over time, more and more of any newly created money goes more and more quickly to the already wealthy -oligarchs and banks.
That being the case, however inelegantly phrased...
The only thing that can happen is
Collapse
or significant Debt Repudiation.
I remain unsure how adjusting rates **actually** has much effect on unemployment given {to borrow from my background} the significant confounds - illegal immigrant labor, H1Bs, continued offshoring, continued deficit spending, etc etc.
Orthodox libertarians may not want to hear it, but the smartest and best thing we could do for the "economy" in the longer run, and for the country itself, is commie pinko massive investment in public education.
Its no accident public schools are toilets while a handful of Ivy Schools are conveyer belts to banks and government.
anyway.. jmo, I could be wrong...
His name was a slightly "toned down" Francis Sawyer.[sp] ;-D
You're one smart [kosher] cookie.
Ah... Francis.
I must admit that I miss many of the 'old crew' that posted here some years ago... some were racist, others were crazy, and a few were just jagoffs, but the entertainment value of this board was undeniable in those days...
Perhaps TD could grant a few pardons and coax a few of the old MVPs back into the fray? Or perhaps a separate "zoo" board could be maintained where the HOF animals could just 'be themselves' while the rest of us watch and throw peanuts...?
I couldn't agree more.
I think Francis has worn the "dunce cap" long enough.
He's eloquent, and extremely well versed.
I'm not of the original faith, but if Francis used his " get out of jail free" card with the Tylers, he might be a nice addition to Z/H.
I think Fonz has also been in " time -out" too long.
We can always bring back basic algebra?
I find group-hate to be manifestly illogical, the morality/ethics aside.
But I also find the absolute silence in our culture on wildly disproportionate Zionist *and* Jewish {qua such} POWER to be illogical, frustrating, and I think dangerous.
No matter what one does, to criticize Israel, or to note the transnational nature of said disproportionate power, one will be called x, y, and z names.
Of course, a principle component of Jewish power/privilege is to use "anti-Semitism" as a means to *obfuscate* that power.
To what end?
Power by an ethnocentric, supremacist mythos to control and delimit the intellectual, economic, and social lives of "the other" whom they view as lesser beings.
The Iraq war was mostly about Israel. The "neocons" were mostly Jewish ultra-nationalists {"Zionist"} though most probably are atheist.
The sheer obviousness of this combined with the "magick" surrounding the inability to SAY so - is what got my attention at the beginning and during the worst stages of Iraq.
antisemite antisemite antisemite
it is a word designed to stop thinking.
Just like "conspiracy theorist"
I support free speech and open discussion of who has power over my city, my state, may nation, and my world.
Jeb Bush is able to pick Paul Wolfowitz to advise him
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/jeb-bush-adviser-paul-wolfowitz
That is batshit crazy and only possible due to a useless mainstream media and Jewish/zionist power matrices inside the Beltway.
Wolfowitz and Perle {and Cheney and Rice} "should' be taken from their beds, put up against a wall and shot.
That they are free to pontificate at Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs {odd that there is no such, say Catholic or Scotch-Irish institute, eh?} dinners about MOAR war and receive funding and applause is also absurd.
And Jewish/Zionist power is responsible for that, was largely but not solely responsible for US entry into WW1, into Iraq, and have lied about Iran and Syria for years now.
antisemite antisemite antisemite
uttered most of all by warmongers, idiots, and ethnosupremacist twats.
That one shouldn't hate any given individual based on anything but what that individual does in this world is axiomatic.
But it is also axiomatic that the truth is inconvenient for any person, group, or entity that craves power.
It's only confusing if you rely on what comes out of their mouth in the first place. And if you're trading, then, the more confusion , the better . And more frequent the opportunity.
I momentarily feel for the fundamentalists , and for the pained expression on the financial journalists face.
How they must discuss the ambiguity of it all, trying to rationalize every word..... lol.
Pssst, we'll get a rate increase next month....
The human eye isn't capable of seeing the reptilian shape shifter during transition phase.
Werewolves and Vampires are easier to spot, as they're on-world species.
full supermoon tonight
my powers are at their height
Hagee, Adelson, Kristol
Wolfowitz, Perle, Saban
Cheney, Woolsey, Shrub
Netanyahu Netanyahu Netanyahu
113
43
55
44
812
567
Take a gander at the moon tonight about 10.
And make a wish.
Pretty cool.
I actually remember the last supermoon in '82.
This enclave called 'Coto de Caza' was being built in Irvine, East Newport Beach, and I was dating a girl named Nicole.
We were sitting on the edge of some half built house, with our legs dangling, and drinking wine coolers.
It was a very nice evening. :-)
A first-grade teacher, Ms Brooks, was having trouble with one of her students. The teacher asked, 'Harry, what's your problem?'
Harry answered, 'I'm too smart for the 1st grade. My sister is in the 3rd grade and I'm smarter than she is! I think I should be in the 3rd grade too!'
Ms. Brooks had had enough. She took Harry to the principal's office.
While Harry waited in the outer office, the teacher explained to the principal what the situation was. The principal told Ms. Brooks he would give the boy a test. If he failed to answer any of his questions he was to go back to the 1st grade and behave. She agreed.
Harry was brought in and the conditions were explained to him and he agreed to take the test.
Principal: 'What is 3 x 3?'
Harry: '9.'
Principal: 'What is 6 x 6?'
Harry: '36.'
And so it went with every question the principal thought a 3rd grader should know.
The principal looks at Ms. Brooks and tells her, 'I think Harry can go to the 3rd grade'
Ms. Brooks says to the principal, 'Let me ask him some questions..' The principal and Harry both agreed.
Ms. Brooks: 'What does a cow have four of that I have only two of?'
Harry, after a moment: 'Legs.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What is in your pants that you have but I do not have?'
Harry: 'Pockets.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What does a dog do that a man steps into?'
Harry: 'Pants.'
The principal sat forward with his mouth hanging open.
Ms. Brooks: 'What goes in hard and pink then comes out soft and sticky?'
Harry: 'Bubble gum.'
Ms. Brooks: 'What does a man do standing up, a woman does sitting down and a dog does on three legs?'
Harry: 'Shake hands .'
Ms. Brooks: 'What word starts with an 'F' and ends in 'K' that means a lot of heat and excitement?'
Harry: 'Firetruck.'
The principal: Put Harry in the fifth-grade, I got the last seven questions wrong.
Fire the Fed!
St. Cyr is baffled by the fed's bullshit.
:points: ha ha! [/nelson]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo
It's a worldwide central bank pyramid scheme, run by the elites pulling the strings of the central bankers to: punish responsible savers, destroy sound money, sovereignty, and what's left of a middle class.
The lack of clarity, and resultant confusion, is intentional.
Are authors really so naive? Seriously? EVERYTHING any member of the federal reserve or federal government says is a pure, unadulterated, manipulative LIE, or a pure, unadulterated RATIONALIZATION.
The federal reserve has one purpose... to make its owners and primary allies as rich and powerful as possible.
How does "rationalization" work? Simple.
First they decide what they want to do/happen next.
Then they invent a story that justifies what they want to do/happen.
That's it! The story they invent doesn't have to bear any relationship to reality, they just need to believe the story (as in "lie") will be effective. PERIOD.
The federal reserve, the central banksters, the federal government (the elite and "deep state"), other "western" governments, and the NWO/globalist cabal are in the process of weakening mankind to the point they can kill most of them off without breaking a sweat, then utterly and totally enslave the few remaining humans to do their bidding.
Everything they say is merely a rationalization created to get "regular folks", the sheeple, to accept the fate the predators-that-be have designed for them. Period. NOTHING ELSE.
That authors actually take the verbal bait spewed by human predators DBA "central bank", "government", "IMF", "BIS", "UN" and so forth is absurd. Surely any author who writes articles that appear in ZH must know better... must already know everything I said above.
And yet they continue to justify these human predators, take their rationalizations seriously, and thereby help spread the impression they are something other than human predators on a mission to destroy mankind.
Why? Fear?
At this point, the answer can't be stupidity. Their motives and actions are much too obvious to any honest, thoughtful sentient being.
Normalcy bias? Do authors really believe part of being an author is to accept all the false premises of whatever predators-that-be happen to be dominant at the time they write their articles? Or what? I suppose it doesn't matter, because humans are hopeless. But... the vast majority of authors who behave this way should be ashamed of themselves. They aid the destruction of everything good, and serve the predators.
H
2O
2 combined with tap water NUKES aphids.
I've been battling aphids all summer, on my bell pepper plants. I shit you not!
2 troy ounces of 3% Hydrogen Peroxide mixed with one quart of water explodes those little bastards on contact.{totally harmless} doesn'tdamage the plant. No residue.
I've used every freakin pesticide known to man, and accidentially stumbled across this gem of gardening.
I had powdery mildew on my pumpkins, and some "pot growing" thread I was reading really helped me.
Also I planted my pumpkins and squash in July this year. The fruit is huge, and the bugs are breeding, instead of eating my garden.
Chinese Junksters.
Yen realtime Pumpkin patch.
As I said, I waited until July to plant my pumpkins. These are heirloom Connecticut Field Pumpkins. They are great for carving, and EATING! Yum Yum.
I shall try your peroxide solution YC on my cabbage!!!
For powdery mildew, I give you this:
https://njaes.rutgers.edu/pubs/soilprofile/sp-v20.pdf
A: The Federal Reserve
Q: What makes you laugh?
A: People who parse fed minutes.
Q: What makes you laugh?
The Fed’s insertion of the words “international developments” added confusion not clarity. So now, one has to wonder what data point is now relevant for a Fed. decision? i.e., U.S. unemployment data? Or, does Brazil’s free-fall and rising inflation combined with a Petrobas™ calamity now preempt or overrule? Can (or will) other “international developments” now overshadow a U.S. economy concern? "
The significance of this consideration should NOT be underestimated. It likely isn't new within the Fed, although, given their seeming blindness to the cause of our dead economy, and the futility with which they chronically deploy failed methods to resurrect the dead, one has to wonder.
Whether or not China's collapse has been on the Fedscope...
...it is now.
And it SHOULD be. The Chinese collapsing house of cards reflects our own demise soon to follow, for they would not be in their predicament were we still well-employed, and able to consume their exports. Their failure is our failure, regardless of who goes first.
By tying the American economic quagmire's "recovery" policy decisions, even in part, to the Chinese economic enigma, the Fed is revealing just how bad the global situation is. Our exports to China, or anyone else, never compared well with our import numbers, so this is not merely about maintaining some balance of trade with them.
Nor is this a stall justification on raising a rate either. Those things matter (at least, in the Fed's mind), but not to the extent a collapsing economy the size of China's does. This is HUGE and, I expect in the days and weeks to come, will grow by orders of magnitude in significance.
It wouldn't surprise me if president Xi's American visit was as much about seeking help and advice about what to do, as it was about anything else.
Increasingly, it seems to me we will not be able to delay the inevitable beyond the end of this year...
m
"In my eyes it seems to be working exactly the same as its other policy outcomes: adding confusion, uncertainty, and having the exact opposite of intended results."
In honor of Il Popo's visit to CONUS, let me give you a couple of quotes. I KNOW, he's a fracking Argentinian, but he HAS to speak Latin, you know (His Jesuit Papal controllers told him to):
'Ut Ex Pertubatione' ('Order from confusion')
'Novus Ordo Seclorum' ('The New Order of the ages')
1.3 billion Catholics (and a few million Jew controllers) don't really give a shit about 'honesty'. The END justifies the MEANS.
Even Yellen can't handle it anymore (her conscience overcame her on stage, I see, just a week ago or so, as she almost fainted).
The 'Fed' SHOULD trouble you, ZH contributor 'Tyler'. Their very EXISTENCE in the world is an ANATHEMA to human LIFE.
I believe this item contains a lot of unfair criticism of the Fed. To go to the heart of the matter - it is not the Fed's responsibiliby to guarantee the profits of speculators. There are any number of academics and media people who are pressuring the Fed and trying to put words into the mouth of the Chair and her spokespeople. To all of them I say: Back off ! Enough is enough. To attempt to attribute the Fed's recent decision to Chinese difficulties is a severe logical error - attempting to base the decision on a small piece of evidence. In order to meet its responsibilities the Fed cannot forecast its future actions with the precision that speculators would like. So be it. That is the way a central bank works. It must protect the integrity of the nation's money and its employment goals from the manipuations of Wall Street and coporate management. Admittedly, free-speaking members of the Board and regional presidents do not seem to understand that the Fed is not a university cafeteria where all sorts of policy possibilities can be openly discussed. By placing their "dots" they seem not to care about the need for uniformity in the presentation of their decisions to the public. It's time to erase the dots.
FUCK!
I NEVER thought i would see a real-life FED APOLOGIST here!
Article I, sec. VIII
Article I, sec. X
FUCK! YOU!
To attempt to attribute the Fed's recent decision to Chinese difficulties is a severe logical error - attempting to base the decision on a small piece of evidence."
Respectfully,
The Fed (Yellen) made "international developments" at least part of the reason...itself.
It was a blunder to add more handcuffs if you really believe a rate rise is necessary and doable. Particularly when those handcuffs involve circumstances beyond Fed control. If anything, it is evidence of the Fed straying from it's OWN prime directives, rather than the racketeers leading it there.
Blunder though it is, China is out of gas, and unlike Greece, can't be shrugged off. It matters, especially in what it signifies, short sighted western corporate outsourcing's inevitable endpoint is now arriving...
m
Confusion IS the intended result of Fed policy right now.
Too big to jail.
Well, when your business for the past 100+ years has been building skyscrapers on foundations of quicksand, I would suppose that eventually you WILL go out of business....
the managerial staff at the Fed know exactly what they are doing and what is going down....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jt377DV2BKs