Paul Volcker's "policy and demeanor were very solid," explains Donald Trump in a brief Bloomberg interview, point out that the inflation-taming Fed head is a role model for the type of central banker he would pick. While admitting he "has always done well in a low rate environment," Trumps slammed the current Fed's ZIRP for "creating a bubble.. and the bubble could explode." Trump had - as usual - plenty to say on topics from Ex-Im Bank (against it as not "free enterprise"), to campaign financing (favoring full transparency of money in politics) careful to brag - jabbing at The Kochs - that "I don't need anybody else's money."
BloombergTV "With All Due Respect" Interview... [6]
Trump on Paul Volcker:
“((HEILEMANN: You think back on all the Fed chairs of the past. Who do you think has been the best?)) ….
TRUMP: I liked Paul Volcker a lot. I thought he was a terrific guy in so many different ways, and he had a good pulse and he had a good -- to me he had -- he was doing what had to be done…. From that standpoint I like low interest rates. From the country's standpoint I'm just not sure it's a very good thing, because I really do believe we're creating a bubble.
((HALPERIN: You said you liked Paul Volcker. And do you like the rule named after him as part of Dodd-Frank, the Volcker Rule?))
TRUMP: Well I'm not sure if he likes it, but if he's -- you know what, honestly, Mark, if he's happy, I'm happy. He was a terrific guy. I've met him a few times. And I thought he was terrific. But I think his policy and his demeanor there was something very solid about him. His demeanor were very good."
On the Ex-Im Bank:
"I don't like it because I don't think it's necessary. It's a one-way street also. It's sort of a feather bedding for politicians and others, and a few companies. And these are companies that can do very well without it. So I don't like it. I think it's a lot of excess baggage. I think it's unnecessary. And when you think about free enterprise it's really not free enterprise. I'd be against it."
On his favorite Treasury Secretary:
"I don't think I have an opinion on that. I think we've had some good ones. We've had some bad ones, but I really wouldn't have an opinion on that. We're going to -- I know they're talking about right now lots of beautiful pictures on beautiful bills, and we're going to see whether or not that works out, but I have no real opinion on that. I think actually Federal Reserve right now in this world the way we built it up, and probably has more of an impact than almost any other position, other than the couple of biggies."
On Citizens United:
"Campaign finance reform it certainly would be something that we could talk about. And I think more than anything else it's transparency. I mean there should be total transparency… You have tremendous power when you give money, especially when you give substantial money over the candidates. And a lot of times those candidates will do things, fellows, that are very bad for the country, but they're good for the company that the power group represents."
* * *
