- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: UPDATE: Fed Chair Yellen is testifying live on CNBC now. (9:34 am, 2/11/16)
Posted on 2/10/16 at 6:17 pm to ItNeverRains
Posted on 2/10/16 at 6:17 pm to ItNeverRains
I came home after lunch today, and for s&g flipped between all of the business channels. Some older guy, and I don't remember who, said part of her job is to act as cheerleader, and part of her job is to be decisive. She has failed at both. Although the second point is disingenuous.
Not that it matters, but for whatever reason I took a dislike to her early on, actually before she became Fed Chair. So I guess the above is as good of a reason as any, albeit not very logical.
Everyone talks about laissez faire (well, no one ever really uses this exact term), but when push comes to shove, the vast majority were for the bank bailouts, and probably had no opinion on keeping interest rates low for as long as they have been. I had really thought a sharp, short depression to clear up some things would have been a good thing. And I just can't help but think the extended period of low interest rates will not be at least partially responsible for the next asset bubble, whatever and whenever it ends up being.
If I could have ever reconciled some of Ron Paul's more extreme views, I probably would have supported him. He always had some very practical, and very sound economic points.
Not that it matters, but for whatever reason I took a dislike to her early on, actually before she became Fed Chair. So I guess the above is as good of a reason as any, albeit not very logical.
Everyone talks about laissez faire (well, no one ever really uses this exact term), but when push comes to shove, the vast majority were for the bank bailouts, and probably had no opinion on keeping interest rates low for as long as they have been. I had really thought a sharp, short depression to clear up some things would have been a good thing. And I just can't help but think the extended period of low interest rates will not be at least partially responsible for the next asset bubble, whatever and whenever it ends up being.
If I could have ever reconciled some of Ron Paul's more extreme views, I probably would have supported him. He always had some very practical, and very sound economic points.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News