the conceit of central banks

[gwb72tii]

so a seat of the pants obeservation
the federal reserve has "stimulated" the US economy to the tune of $7+ trillion since 2008
we have have had a steadily declining GDP growth rate since 2010
Q1 GDP was 1.8%, barely stayling afloat
today Barclay's cut Q2 GDP estimate to 0.4%, Goldman to 1.3%
over 100 million are on gov't assistance

and some want to blame the "sequester" which isn't a sequester at all, its a reduction in the rate of growth of the government

and isn't it puzzling why a country like Japan, that was advised by Bernanke to pursue Keynesian money stimulus back in the late 1990's, and has been trapped in a deflationary-no growth economy since, decides to do more of the same, ON STERIODS
and even more puzzling that Bernanke, in the complete absence of any real world economic results that said policy is effective in stimulating economic growth, would pursue the same path. other than the man has an ego the size of Alaska.

so, where do we go from here, with europe in a depression (Germany is merely in a recession), italy being downgraded again and on its merry way to being the next greece (which will completely blow up the euro), and our economy slowing? can you speak japanese?

but hey! the stock market is up!!

[Dozyproductions]

Because New World Order.

[Fusion]

Even though some economists have been saying it for years, it isn't until now that people are waking up to the fact the there seriously is no way out of the whole ponzi scheme and we're seriously fuxored.
I say shit hits the fan by the end of the year.
Maybe its not such a coincidence that Obama gave DHS absolute control over all public/private communications just a couple days ago.

[Q5Quint]

There is a way out- might want to save this page before it gets deleted again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C3%B6rgl

Wörgl

You just have to decentralize the 'power/money' and bring it back to local control. Local as in your county, not local as in your continent.

over 100 million are on gov't assistance

You are talking about police, fire, and road construction right? I cant seem to find that number anywhere. I also don't know anybody on food stamps anymore, though the number is still around 50 million. Out of 320 million what percentage should we allow to be dirt poor? 15%? 30%? Everyone cant be a millionaire you know.

[gwb72tii]

You are talking about police, fire, and road construction right? I cant seem to find that number anywhere. I also don't know anybody on food stamps anymore, though the number is still around 50 million. Out of 320 million what percentage should we allow to be dirt poor? 15%? 30%? Everyone cant be a millionaire you know.

nope, not public workers whose wages and taxes are paid by the private sector

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-11/which-greater-full-time-jobs-or-americans-food-assistance-and-disability

and your statement "allow to be dirt poor" means what exactly? that it is governments role to give away money?

[matthugie]

so a seat of the pants obeservation
the federal reserve has "stimulated" the US economy to the tune of $7+ trillion since 2008
we have have had a steadily declining GDP growth rate since 2010
Q1 GDP was 1.8%, barely stayling afloat
today Barclay's cut Q2 GDP estimate to 0.4%, Goldman to 1.3%
over 100 million are on gov't assistance

and some want to blame the "sequester" which isn't a sequester at all, its a reduction in the rate of growth of the government

and isn't it puzzling why a country like Japan, that was advised by Bernanke to pursue Keynesian money stimulus back in the late 1990's, and has been trapped in a deflationary-no growth economy since, decides to do more of the same, ON STERIODS
and even more puzzling that Bernanke, in the complete absence of any real world economic results that said policy is effective in stimulating economic growth, would pursue the same path. other than the man has an ego the size of Alaska.

so, where do we go from here, with europe in a depression (Germany is merely in a recession), italy being downgraded again and on its merry way to being the next greece (which will completely blow up the euro), and our economy slowing? can you speak japanese?

but hey! the stock market is up!!

You know, I've read a few of your threads, and at no point in any of them have you made a coherent point. You spout out numbers like that somehow "proves" your point, but you've never stated what your point is. You aren't forming any sort of case for your argument, you're just spouting numbers that may or may not be related to each other. And if they are related they're often taken out of context and in a limited scope. Your OP here has a semblance of a point, but is by no means coherent and so oversimplified it's basically meaningless. Just because numbers are related doesn't establish correlation, especially when ignoring all other factors.

Also, you love to bash Bernanke and the administration as a whole claiming they are "economic fools" and whatnot, but you never proffer any sort of alternative solution. You say what they're doing "wrong" but never what you think would be the appropriate action. I'm really quite curious as to what your economic theory is, since it must obviously be better than that of a large team of Ph.D. economists and use better research than the NBER. And you talk about an ego the size of Alaska and conceit...

[sumoashe]

matthugie. That's because gwb can't admit to himself what he already know's as true. That no matter how many charts, graphs, blogs, websites, papers, ect.. he reads he can't win. He know's the market's are rigged against him, he know's the system as a whole is rigged against him. But he can't let go of the idea that he can beat them. It's no diff than a gambling addict who believes he can beat the house. Well guess what, the house always wins.

In truth, if he was as smart as he want's to think he is then he would pull out of the markets entirely. Because as long as he stays in it he's doing nothing more then feeding the machine he's afraid will eat him.

[gwb72tii]

here is the point matt. and i guess i should be more clear so thank you for that.
the fed has put all of us in a pickle. there is no economic data or history that supports the fed with its current policies.
transient wealth (stocks, bonds) have very little, if any, impact on consumer spending, yet the fed's stated goal is just that. somehow the stock market going up is supposed to get you and me to take our mastercards out for a walk.
so over the last 4+ years what do we have as a result? stagnant consumer spending and a sub 2% GDP. nothing the fed wants to have happen is happening. google bernanke and his foresight in economics. the man is right once in a blue moon, yet when questioned or challenged he will never show humility or admit is failings. he and paul krugman (economist) are twins from different mothers.
so tell me what else i'm missing and why the point i make lacks coherence?
this thread is about the failings of the fed and it's policies.

so what to do different? how about the fed exiting the market and allowing companies to fail when they deserve to fail. how about actually allowing the market to function on its own?

you need a doctorate to know this? or how about bernanke get's his ass fired for lack of performance and results.

and sumo, you're right, the market is rigged and bernanke is the reason. i can navigate around him, but what he's doing is benefiting the banks at the expense of savers and the elderly on fixed income. sound fair to you?
and if you've read anything i've posted before, i don't have a goal of beating him. we do have a goal of minimizing the damage bernanke is going to inflict on everyone. and being out of the market won't protect you.

and guess what? i'm mad at bernanke because he's fu****g with my profession, and he's hurting those who can least afford it, the elderly on fixed income.

[matthugie]

So, would you have let Bear Stearns fail?

[mrsleeve]

^
yes

[matthugie]

Any other opinions?

[mrsleeve]

nope

[matthugie]

Well, that shows a great deal of ignorance. Bear Stearns, when they would have failed, had 100,000,000 transactions pending. That isn't $100,000,000, that is 100,000,000 TRANSACTIONS pending. Allowing those transactions to fail literally would have taken down the entire financial system. Now, I know it's nice to say "well, if it's broken then let it fail." That is even more ignorant. When you think of the actual implications of that, you see it could not be allowed to happen then. Even in BFE Montana that can't be allowed to happen. It isn't a matter of "too big to fail" it's really "too interconnected to fail."

[mrsleeve]

I am just not going to argue with you.

Failure is always an option and should be.

[z31maniac]

Well, that shows a great deal of ignorance. Bear Stearns, when they would have failed, had 100,000,000 transactions pending. That isn't $100,000,000, that is 100,000,000 TRANSACTIONS pending. Allowing those transactions to fail literally would have taken down the entire financial system. Now, I know it's nice to say "well, if it's broken then let it fail." That is even more ignorant. When you think of the actual implications of that, you see it could not be allowed to happen then. Even in BFE Montana that can't be allowed to happen. It isn't a matter of "too big to fail" it's really "too interconnected to fail."

Got any links to back that up?

Or any opinions on why we should have a Federal Reserve (hint, we don't)