- 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: Our President tweets that we don't have a Tariff problem we have a Fed problem!
Posted on 8/30/19 at 11:39 am to funnystuff
Posted on 8/30/19 at 11:39 am to funnystuff
we should have never raised them so much to begin with, as if a strong economy by a president other than barack obama deserves to be penalized, it unecessarily penalized Americans while other counties drift into negative rate status, what was the point of raising them in the first place? just because of tradition or because some group of economist determined the growth rate should only be 2%? Must we always buy into the crap we're fed? no pun intended
2
Posted on 8/30/19 at 11:46 am to KeyserSoze999
It’s not about penalizing the president or blindly observing tradition. That’s just dumb. It’s about giving us enough of a cushion so that we can kick start an economy that falters. Another recession will eventually hit. When it does, we don’t want rates so low that they can’t be used to combat it.
The tax cuts gave us a great boost, and that boost finally gave us enough room to reestablish our safety net. It would be beyond foolish to waste that hard earned safety net on boosting an economy that’s already growing steadily.
The tax cuts gave us a great boost, and that boost finally gave us enough room to reestablish our safety net. It would be beyond foolish to waste that hard earned safety net on boosting an economy that’s already growing steadily.
Posted on 8/30/19 at 11:51 am to KeyserSoze999
quote:
so create a recession
the administration's own projections said we'd be at a 2.7 3-month by 2019, and still be able to sustain 3.2% in rGDP
we're nowhere near 3.2 this year, and that's with a reduction to 2.25 from 2.5 on the FFR
Posted on 8/30/19 at 11:52 am to BuckyCheese
The US dollar has been steadily strengthening over the last year and exports have been becoming more expensive because of it. Yet all the same, we continue to see report after report that we are continuing to grow strong.
Just because export cost can theoretically cause a recession doesn’t mean that every movement needs to be actively combated. We have enough other factors working in our favor that we don’t need to blow our wad to protect exporters every time there’s a currency movement.
Just because export cost can theoretically cause a recession doesn’t mean that every movement needs to be actively combated. We have enough other factors working in our favor that we don’t need to blow our wad to protect exporters every time there’s a currency movement.
Posted on 8/30/19 at 12:09 pm to KeyserSoze999
quote:The point or raising rates is generally to keep the inflation in check at a reasonable rate, which they set at 2 or so percent since that is one of the Fed’s two mandates, with the other being maximum employment. Lower rates tend to increasing spending, which tend to increase inflation as well.
what was the point of raising them in the first place?
quote:I’m not sure what 2% growth rate you’re referring to. They did decide to target the inflation rate at 2% or so.
group of economist determined the growth rate should only be 2%?
But you seem to be referring to GDP growth, but that’s based on GDP growth after accounting for inflation. For example, nominal GDP grew immensely under Carter at about 11.1% annually, but inflation was so high that real GDP growth was only about 3.2% annually.
And then what did the fed do under Reagan? They raised rates because inflation was too high. And while high inflation is bad for an economy, deflation is bad too. So instead of raising them, they lower rates to fight deflation. But if rates are already low, then the risk is that the fed will have less power to fight deflation.
Posted on 8/30/19 at 12:20 pm to buckeye_vol
I'm referring to the bogus claim that 2% inflation is what is desired. This is a swamp/globalist claim. But I'm obviously off the plantation group think on this one and the circular argument that we must create a recession by slowing a booming economy so as to show that we can help get the economy going again by the globalist cabal called the FED, is going nowhere, so I'll veer away from the anti-plantation narrative
Posted on 8/30/19 at 12:21 pm to BuckyCheese
quote:How so exactly, especially if it’s based in a strong dollar instead of some broader economic issue?
If our exports become too expensive due to exchange rates that can help induce a recession.
First of all, trade imbalance actually has a strong correlation with GDP growth, so a larger imbalance is associated with greater GDP growth. Furthermore, if it’s based on a stronger dollar, then the people and companies that have and spend those dollars have more purchasing power. And since a trade imbalance is offset by capital inflows, then in this case, we’re bringing in more capital because we have more power to purchase it.
Posted on 8/30/19 at 12:28 pm to KeyserSoze999
quote:What? I mean economists vary on the exact figure, but they all seem to be around 2%. And just from a practical perspective, 2% seems reasonable as it’s not so high that we’ll lose our purchasing power so quickly that we’ll need to spend as much as possible as soon as possible. Yet, it’s not so low (or deflationary) that we’ll stop spending and investing, which stimulate growth.
I'm referring to the bogus claim that 2% inflation is what is desired. This is a swamp/globalist claim.
quote:Well this is an argument that I’ve seen made for the first time, but you’re right that it’s a dumb circular argument. It just seems to be one that you created.
the circular argument that we must create a recession by slowing a booming economy so as to show that we can help get the economy going again by the globalist cabal called the FED,
Posted on 8/30/19 at 1:00 pm to KeyserSoze999
quote:
I'm referring to the bogus claim that 2% inflation is what is desired. This is a swamp/globalist claim. I'm obviously off the plantation group think on this one and the circular argument that we must create a recession by slowing a booming economy so as to show that we can help get the economy going again by the globalist cabal called the FED, is going nowhere, so I'll veer away from the anti-plantation narrative
You think some other target rate is better?
What target rate of inflation would stop short of "creating a recession" IYV? Show your work, pls.
This post was edited on 8/30/19 at 1:01 pm
Posted on 8/30/19 at 1:03 pm to KeyserSoze999
quote:
aligning rates at a closer interval as the world-wide trading partners, while maintaining a premium as to help american exporters, is now currency manipulation?
the typical Trumpian would say yes if it were the Chinese but Trump---no he can do no bad.
Posted on 8/30/19 at 1:21 pm to kmdawg17
quote:
we have a Fed problem
Absolutely... Un-elected bureaucrat globalist bankers.... Damn straight we have a fed problem
Posted on 8/30/19 at 1:29 pm to Thunder
quote:And what’s the alternative: elected politicians who are not bankers?
Absolutely... Un-elected bureaucrat globalist bankers.... Damn straight we have a fed problem
The amusing thing though, is the abolish the Fed argument had been based on the exact opposite actions up until recently: they were recklessly infusing money into the economy, propping up corporations, and deceasing the purchasing power of regular everyday people.
This post was edited on 8/30/19 at 1:34 pm
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News