Time to sharpen sticks on both ends, put one end in the ground, and a fed's head on the other end, then line the washington mall with all the fed's workers and bosses!!
We are wasting over trillion dollars, american soldiers and other lives, a year as well being overseas! How about we close down those 700+ bases overseas and bring home the thousands of troops that are overseas? That makes sense to me.
As far as not knowing which companies borrowed these dollars from their central banks, when Grayson deposits his pay check in the bank, does he know which company gets that money next? LOL!!!
Most of them don't care about something as cerbral as this. They would have to think too hard. Far easier to consider flag burning amendments and homo marraige.
Rep. Alan Grayson is a very smart man. Willing to put his life on the line for Americans. I think there are only 3 Congress persons that has this courage, the rest are just worthless memes. Americans that understands the FED is is Americas down fall, have your back Mr. Grayson, but beware of this most corrupt crime organization called the Federal Reserve that has a shady past & I dont trust them. Every time you grill Ben his voice cracks and he sounds like he going to cry or have a break down.
Good to see someones fighting back.And now is the time to back the true American's fighting this up hill battle . . looks like there going to audit the fed>>:) .We have to audit the fed . now we can see where all this money went. power to the people
The great thing about the Obama presidency is that white people now see what blacks have been seeing for decades
We see the corruption we see the lies and imorality we see the devilish deceit
Now that one black man is in the office of the elite surrounded by the same number of whites. Whites think its a black takeover and with that train of thought it forces them to look in the mirror but they think they are looking at something they despise but they are looking at themselves LOL
I feel that as long as we Americans think of our self's as "whites" and blacks we are doomed no matter who is in office. Honestly, who gives a shit what color the president is? Me? No. You? Yes. I would guess that color plays a huge role in your life. By far, one of the most racist comments I have ever read and I bet you don't see it that way. I voted for Ron Paul. He has been trying to audit the fed for 30ys not just since Obama. What ignorance you beleave. Fucking sad.
No No No! I give a shit less if you call me white! That is not what pissed me off. It is that fact that you assume that you know what a white person is thinking because there is a black president. First I give a shit less what color I am. I had no choice in that. Second, I give a shit less what color you are. You had no choice in that too. Third, as long as we think of our self's as white and black we are by definition "divided and conquered". This has nothing to do with color. Peace!!!
I just want you to know what I see. It seems to be "their" game. "Keep them thinking about the small things so they can't see what is really going on!" Audit the FED is first on my list! That will control the spending and the killing of the dollar. Then second will be give an open offer to every man women and child to stand up for their basic rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and the rest will fall in line. White and Black are just words, so is Human.
I am glad that so many democrats are on board, but lets give credit where credit is due. Also, we need to look at other policy changes that Rep. Paul has been suggesting since he has been in office. It is time for the people (Dems and Reps) to take our country back from the international bankers.
I am glad that this guy is speaking out against the fed. However, its amazing how the democrats are trying to take credit and put their face on this movement. We all know that this movement was founded by Ron Paul, in fact, he has seen the Fed for what it is for the past 30 years. time the people(dems and reps) take the country back.
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance."
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences."
"For the first time in its history, Western Civilization is in danger of being destroyed internally by a corrupt, criminal ruling cabal which is centered around the Rockefeller interests, which include elements from the Morgan, Brown, Rothschild, Du Pont, Harriman, Kuhn-Loeb, and other groupings as well. This junta took control of the political, financial, and cultural life of America in the first two decades of the twentieth century."
Oh so sad to see some of the comments here of supposedly educated people who make things sound so complicated. The facts are simple. The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATELY OWNED BANK accountable to NO ONE. I don't think everyone realizes that Ron Paul and Alan Grayson just saved this country.
I bet they pay people to walk across the screen at 2:14 and to stay away from the seats around him when he gives his speech. A brave man. A really brave man.
What is happening is that investors are borrowing dollars to buy assets and investments outside of the United States. This is due to the low US interest rates and the knowledge that the US Dollar has to devaluate further. This happened in the 80's. Although Grayson is right about more check and balances are needed, this currency "swap" needed to happen. ALL the Fed needs to do is just print more money to balance the inconsistencies.
Excellent !!! Grayson/Paul in 2012 ... or Paul/Grayson ... either way, they're both no-nonsense representatives. If we're gonna hand out money, let's know where the hell it's going.
We have to get rid of every single politician in this country. They have been destroying this country. Term limits of 4 years should be mandatory. As for the Fed, it is the politicians that have allowed the Fed to go on since 1913 and take the dollar to junk status.
You have got to get educated. There is actually only a one party system in the US. It doesn't matter who's in office. Both parties subscribe to the same special interests. Special interests call the shots. Bush runs on small government, no nation building, fiscal responsibility. Obama runs on transparency, troops out of Iraq, change. Nothing happens. It's all a bunch of BS. Good cop, bad cop. We need a viable third party because the DNC and the GOP do NOT represent the people.
It's obvious that 90% of the electorate are not well educated on the issues. The proof is in the pudding, so to speak. This is the reason the country is so screwed up.
Term limits, as far as I can see, doesn't change the fact that people may be poorly educated.
Instead of limiting a persons ability to run and hold office and the publics ability to vote, Why not to better educate the people, so that they can make informed choices?
I really don't know how to better educate the people. Seems like the powerful teacher's union have the incumbent politicians under their thumb. If the politicians want to get re-elected, they have to play ball with the union. The only thing the union is interested in is more and more members and could care less about the quality of education. It's a vicious cycle.
Ron Paul wants just about everything privatized. There's a term for when you privatize the state, and that's fascism. Grayson is more of a socialist like Kucinich.
Paul is a socialist on the issue of the Federal Reserve though. Good for him! We need GOVERNMENT oversight.
government oversight against its own is called the balance of power idiot. that's how the constitution was designed. good job turning the words of a subject you have absolutely no clue of into some quasi philosophical text. hilarious.
where do you think the slogan "End the fed" came from? who just published a book by the same name? HR 1207 was sponsored by Ron Paul & is co sponsored by 311 in the house including Mr A. Grayson. Mr Grayson was responsible for making this a non partisan effort by bringing many democrats on board, He deserves & recieves much respect from the Ron Paul community for his efforts on this.
S 604 is the companion Senate Bill Introduced by Mr B.Sanders it currently has 30 co-sponsors. .........
....... all of these politicians deserve our thanks for understanding & taking action on something that effects EVERY person that uses the Dollar.
If You are against Corporatism (Michael Moore mistakenly calls it capitalism in his movie) you should be also supporting these bills. the only way we can bring down the corporate beast is to cut off it's corrupt money supply.
Corporatism is also called fascism (the economic system) which is private ownership but with government control.That is why we need to watch how regulation is passed. One other thing if you want to know the truth remember C-Span is your friend.The politicians hate them.
Where are you getting your news? Ron Paul also is sponsoring this bill also.One of the things that turned me off of the Democratic party is its ceaseless class warfare rhetoric.The Republican party turns me off by being often on the wrong side of history. Be smart , support good people regardless what vehicle (party) they used to get elected.
This Grayson. Man, people are going to write books about this guy down the road. He seems to be constantly trying to make actual changes that mean something. The other rat bag politions must be pulling their hair out behind closed doors. Likely asking the questions, "Doesn't this guy know we're here to do nothing suck lobbyist balls? Why does he want to ruin a good thing here? We've got a good thing going." Ha, ha, ha! Seriously keep up the good work Grayson! People are proud of you!
More Democrats should be supporting Grayson as we try to figure out where our money is going. It leaves us in lurch here at home while we try to do worthwhile things domestically.
I disagree with Paul on other issues but I'm glad he at least sticks to his principles. It's a much more honest opposition than what the rest of the GOP offers.
That being said I wish he didn't have blind faith in the corporations to do what's right for America.
The answer to the question many ask about how our massive debt will be repaid is clear and simple: It will not be repaid. The selfish and short-sighted policies which propel us in this direction will continue until our currency is destroyed or virtually destroyed. Dollar denominated assets and liabilities will become virtually worthless.
We will become like a third-world country in many ways until both our exports and also our consumption of imported goods allow a equal, Balance Of Paymts.
how come ppl are screaming this in congress, y'all got fukin frauding in teh united states, generations from now will be paying off this debt, you think its hard to live now, its gonna get worst!!!!
I'm a constituent of Rep Ron Paul and I wish every district in every State of the Union would have one of you or one him to represent everyone - then things would work as they should - intelligently.
Rep. Grayson, It's about time you got back to" The Fedreal Reserve." These ass think they own OUR money. They need show US Who, Where, and WHY! they are just giving OUR money out like it's candy.. If not, Then isn't it Theft? It is in all other business....
you are just ill-informed. the republican candidates were asked in a debate, who doesn't believe in evolution. paul was not one of them.
and I wanna see the bill that ron paul supported to teach creationism. he wants to abolish federal education, he definitely didn't vote for a federal education bill doing anything.
I wasn't implying anything, I don't know if Wright is racist or not. neither do I care.
I like Grayson, but he's dead wrong here. The Fed's actions keep interest rates here lower, which stimulates the economy. Otherwise, we may have no recovery.
let me try this: a federal agency should flood the market with bread. that keeps the prices of bread lower, and stimulates the budget of americans.
does make sense?
interest rates are prices, the price of money. if you fix it, like the fed does, that creates distortions. like: noone is encouraged to save, because it doesn't pay anything, even though the US barely has any savings.
just like noone is encouraged to manufacture bread if the price of bread is fixed.
it has nothing to do with bread. It has to do with money velocity which has to stay constant to avoid a slowdown that is greater than need be. When dollar hoarding occurs, as it still does now, the monetary expansion is not keeping up with money demand. Since the dollar is the world reserve currency and rose sharply as the flight of safety occurred during the meltdown, the demand for dollars went up all over the world. So, the Fed lends dollars to foreign central banks who will pay it back
it had little to do with velocity. sure there was some of that, as is in every recession, but the big reason for the monetary expansion was the destruction of money/credit through insolvent credit institutions.
the monetary expansion was little more than another banking bailout.
Okay, apparently you have no idea what money velocity is, yet you have the nerve to be condescending. When there is destruction of money, or any reason, money volecity goes down proportunately.
Since you think you know so much, tell me what money velocity is, along with nominal GDP targeting verus the Taylor rule, and what indicators are used for each type of targeting. This is basic economics and if you can't answer these questions quickly, then you have no idea what you're talking about
no. destruction of credit doesn't equal slowing down of money velocity.
the taylor rule? are you serious?
a rule on how a central bank should conduct monetary policy (i.e. fixing the price of money) should be "basic economics" for me when I doubt the whole concept of fixing prices?
I don't care how you do it. the right price for money can't be found by a commission inside the fed, no matter what method you're usnig.
lol Money velocity involves the rate of transactions x monetary value of those transactions and you think credit destruction doesn't lower it? lmao You are retarded. It's one thing to be ignorant. It's another to be ignorant and condescending, apparently not realizing that your knowledge is relatively limited. We can play the economics quiz game all day and I doubt you'd get even one question right. You are a part of a problem with this country: Ignorant people making visceral decisions.
so that the new money can be sucked back in later, before causing inflation. It is good for us that foreign central banks get these swaps, because otherwise they sould come into our markets seeking dollars, and raise the value of the dollar during a deflationary period, making our situation even worse.
I wish the Fed would create more money, that that we have enough to meet the excess demand, returning nominal GDP growth to it's century and a half trend.
yeah I'll be waiting for that (sucking back the money), that'll be fun. try to take a look how that's going to happen. there is no exit strategy.
there is MASSIVE inflation right now, it's called asset inflation.
inflation doesn't hit all parts of the economy at the same time, when it hits the CPI...
you can read about that from all parts of the political spectrum. if you wanna read it from someone who is near obama and supported his stimulus, read roubini.
Really? No exit strategy? So, you have special knowledge of future Fed plans? You should be playing the markets with those plans.
Gee, it's not as if the Fed can simply sell the assets on its balance sheet to reign in the money released when they were purchased, eh? The Fed can also always raise reserve requirements. Again, you only offer ignorance.
Whatever. The lack of Fed transparency frees up FOMC debate and prevents companies from fearing being outted during a financial crisis, ensuring the destruction of the company in the latter case and the reluctance to seek assistanc in the first. This would mean more systemically important failures and more and more expensive bailouts.
Secrecy frees up the debate to anything the FOMC feels. Some of the things the FOMC can discuss in secrecy is how to allocate $500 billion to their buddies overseas.
Transparency removes the comfort of knowing a company can just go to the fed for a bailout if their bad practices go astray and this makes the marketplace efficent. A company that not a going concern should not be proped up at the expense of the entire system because this contributes to systemic risk by encouraging malpractice
You imply that there is moral hazard promoted when bankd and other companies can go to the Fed for access to the discount window. However there is no such problem with the management of such companies, who don't care if their companies live or die, so long as they make themselves richer. The share and bondholders don't care either, because many have already realized huge profits before the company is threatened.
There is moral hazard when banks can borrow money at 0% or at any manged level by the CB. These banks have the priviledge of borrowing money cheaper than anyone else and then lending to the markets at a higher price. Pure speculation.
Transparency doesnt mean congress will control the FRB but it will be accountable.
Shareholders would care if they didnt have easy money as this would make them invest in productive actiivities in order to maximise their profits.
Everything you do in life could be seen as "speculation" I suppose but your choices should entail consequences for you and not others. Other people shouldnt be forced to help you through debasing money etc... but they can help you if they think it is right out of their own will.
In a free market banks would also profit from lending at higher rates than they borrow but they wouldnt obtain funds from depositors or similar if they employed unsound investment/lending practises.
f secrecy had nothing to do with it. What evidence do you have that secrecy had any influence over the development of the bubble or the Fed's failure to ensure that the money supply kept up with the demand for money?
Fed secrecy was the main contributing factor to the creation of this bubble. New lending comes from the fed and has provided all the liquidity necesary for the commercial banks to create 500 odd trillion in derivatives of various types which sistemically undermined the world system. Transparency would of made apparent a massive expansion of credit was creating massive disclocations. By transparency I dont mean self reporting by the FRB either, independant auditing is vital.
no they can't. look up their balance sheet. half of it is mortgage backed securities, still rising. they are the MBS market right now.
reserve requirements are total nonsense in this context. they only apply to M1 (mostly demand deposits) and don't have much effect.
that you bring this up shows that you have all your "knowledge" from a textbook only, because the US reserve requirement barely changed in decades. the Fed didn't even try to use it as part of its monetary policy.
Okay, the mortgage-backed securities should rise in value as real estate prices recover as excess supply diminishes.
Second, of course raising reserve requirements decreases the money supply. If banks have to keep more reserves on hand, they have less to lend out. I guess your googling led to epic fail in this case. There's no substitute for actually knowing this stuff.
did you read my comment? I never said reserve requirements have no effect on money supply. I said little. and that it isn't actually used as an instrument of monetary policy. it might be in the future, but I doubt it.
yeah, sure. when real estate is back to bubble prices the Fed won't have a problem to dump it.
I guess we'll wait for that then?
adjustable mortgages written in bubble times are still resetting, the majory until about 2012.
Yes, and you were wrong in everything you posted. How you can think raising reserve requirements can't rein in the money supply... You must have read a bad Wiki or badly misunderstood it. If banks currently have a loan/reserve ratio of 10 and it's cut in half to 5, the bank can only lend half as much money as before. Wow, your ignorance is massive. and it doesn't matter how many times this has been done, only that it can be done. The past is no predictor of the future.
If you don't understand basic monetary policy, then you're aren't in a position to understand Roubini, who favored massive monetary and fiscal stimulus, despite possible future problems.
that I don't understand it is your conclusion. I said I don't care which target because it doesn't matter. I don't care which way of central economic planning communist countries use either.
I know that roubini favoured it, that's why I mentioned him, but he also sees the problems of it, that you deny.
if I meantioned some austrian economist who disagreed with the whole thing you'd probably just dismiss it. roubini maybe you read. he is a good start, but I wouldn't stop there.
Austrians try to use 80 year-old economics today. There's been zero progress in that theory since then. It'd be like holding on to the Bohr theory of the atom, except his theory was far more useful.
And targeting nGDP versus using pure inflation indicators with an over-reliance on the Taylor rule does matter. The formet "targets the forecast" as revealed in futures and TIPs spreads. It allows for market expectations to behave as if there will be inflation, even without creating new $
Yes, you want time to look up the answers in Wiki, but you'll still get them wrong, because Wiki si sometimes wrong and it is almost always woefully incomplete. It aslo takes time to work through all the implcations, which is why you've made so many ridiculous replies.
There's no such thing as proven or "disproven" in science. Some models simply fit better than others given available data. And you want references? Try MIlton Friedman's Monetary HIstory of the United States, which he partly won the Nobel for. You can also look at the work of Scott Sumner at Bentley and even Ben Bernanke when at Princeton, though sadly, the Fed has not followed his recommendations through enough. Look at the work of any monetarist, basically.
You're assuming that gravity cannot qualitatively change. There is no reason to believe this is the case. We've already found that the speed of light, while constant compared to sub-light velocities, changes over time. No matter how long we think gravity has existed, it may not be there 5 minutes from now.
Indeed, some fundamental forces of the universe may have disappeared shortly after the big bang, and there is always at least a quantum mechanical probability that gravity can fail.
Stop trying to 'scientifically 'defend the indefensible.
You clearly have no background in science, you clearly have no fundamental understanding of economics otherwise you'd see your arguments implode on themselves.
Bottom line: you're a fraud looking for attention.
First, look at your nick and then tell me again about seeking attention. My nick is taken from the name of a physicist. Do you know who?
And if I'm a fraud, then what have I claimed to be? You're just a total waste of subhuman flesh. You've mentioned nothing about economics or any other subject at hand, because you're a stupid, ignorant pussy troll. Now go home to your momma, douche bag.
wrong. Sure, saying Austrian economics is oudated is an opinion, but it's a sound one in my judgement. The data doesn't fit into the models. It's that simple.
So, real wages go down, real debtloses value, savings take a hit, but all rther slight and short-term. The real wage reductions keep employees on the job The lower real value of debt improves balance sheets and punishes irresponsible lenders,while improving the balance sheets of leveraged consumers and businesses. It keeps money velocity constant, with the above benefits, when means the resource misallocations can be undone more quickly. How can resource reallocation procede more quikcly
with lower money velocity and people out of work who can't spend as much in more adaptive ways to rebalance the economy? How can a shift to lower employment work off the bad debt more quickly? Keeping people at work for lower real wages temporarily, with the real value of debt and savings temporarily diminishing is how we pay for the previous malinvestment as quickly and cheaply as possible. Then the economy can simply grow into the new money supply.
i want to know more about this "The real wage reductions keep employees on the job The lower real value of debt improves balance sheets and punishes irresponsible lenders,while improving the balance sheets of leveraged consumers and businesses" how is having a lower real wage good for the employee? and how does lower real debt (through the destruction of the dollar through inflation by the FED) help Leveraged consumers and businesses? They have lost all their savings, tell that to the Homeless.
Having a lower wage is good for the employee because he/she won't be laid off due to a fall in money velocity. The lower wage is very temporary and rises when real GDP begins to increase.
And savers don't lose all of their savings or anywhere close to it. IN pure supply and demand terms, it would take an unlimited amount of inflation to bring real savings to zero. I'm talking about single percentage points. The real savings would go up again as real GDP increases.
I understand your argument about your belief that it might be "good" ( wouldn't use that word) for the employee to have lower REAL wage when adjusted to rising inflation in a slowing economy because if the Employee is dumb enough he won't realize immediately he is being robbed of purchasing power. but for Moral and sound economic policy reasons, i do not agree that it is a GOOD thing.
And you said savers don't lose their money... did you forget the past year? people invested SAVINGS into HOUSES.
Is it more moral to have all workers take a slight paycut for a short amount of time or to have millions unemployed, many more millions under-employed, and still have millions losing hours and wages?
And if you knew economics, you would know that houses are not savings. Houses are net assets or liabilities. If you mean that people shifted savings to assets and liabilities, then that may be true,but real savings would only go down slightly with the nGDP approach.
OMG, dude why do you keep trying to insult me? I meant the latter, which you said is true. and you can look at all the GNP and nGDP figures you want, the value of the dollar is still being eroded. try and argue how that is such a great thing for savers. you can't.
With nGDP targeting, there is a 3% real growth rate + a 2% inflatino buffer, to prevent errors that could cause deflation. IF real growth falls to say, 1%, then enough new money is created to keep the nominal rate at 5%. Hence, the supply of money meet the demand for money, and money velocity remains unchanged. The inflation causes a slight temporary drop in real wages, overcoming the sticky wage problem and keeping employment up, and lowers the real value of debt, so bad loans take a hit.
Naturally,. this is all lost on the 'tards you listen to, because they simply ignore all of the work done in economics since the 30s, because they dismiss government intervention out of hand. The Fed's real mistake was not having money creation keeping up with demand starting in 2006 to maintain a 5% nominal target, which would have avoided a recession altogether. We would have merely had a slowdown.
Instead, the Fed sets inflation targets, which makes little sense without nGDP.
Well, I won't pretend to be an economist on the internet, but you said the Fed needed to return the GDP growth rate to the same levels we've maintained for the past 150 years. That isn't exactly making a strong case for the Fed, since they didn't appear until about halfway through that time frame.
Apparently, you fail to realize that until 1913, the downturns were much deeper with returns to sustainable growth much shorter. There were much more extreme ups and downs an prolonged periods of negative or low GDP, such as the Long Depression, which began in 1873. We had a Great Depression in 1930-1940, because the Fed failed to live up to its mandate and let the money supply decrease by 1/3. Look up the Milton Friedman explanation of this on youtube.
Go to Friedman's grave and tell him that. Then contact the Nobel committee and tell them to retract his prize. Or, you can just read Friedman's Monetary History of the United States, so you won't come across as the complete moron you do here right now.
OK PAL, i asked you a question, you don't have to insult people. Second, obviously it would be preposterous for someone like me to challenge the super geniuses that run the Nobel committees, they obviously choose wisely. (that was a joke) Third, i will respond in reply to your other comment.
"the fed's real mistake was not having money creation keeping up with demand" So there you go. If that is your argument, then you have just defeated yourself. because the FED is NEVER going to be smart enough to know what the interest rates ought to be and therefore will never know what the money supply should be. it's great to say "they didnt do this" but to say that you must admit they DIDNT DO IT. SO WHY KEEP LETTING THEM RUN OUT MONETARY POLICY.
As explained above, the Fed can using nominal GDP targeting to anticipate the need for money creation or destruction. With a nominal GDP of 5%, with 3 percent real GDP growth(150 year trend) and 2% as an inflatinary buffer against deflation, relevant adjustments can be made.
Signals from the market, such as futures prices and TIPs spreads reveal market expectations toward which the Fed can act proactively. For example, if commodity, stock and bond, etc. futures are falling
along with the difference in inflation protected bond prices and non-protected bond prices can tell you the market expects a fall in real GDP. This drop is measurable. So, if the market expects a fall in real GDP growth of 2%, then there can be a 2% rate of money creation to get to the nominal target of 5%. Then wages, the value of debt, and savings fall 2%, if the market doesn't expect this inllation. However, if the Fed has credibility, the market will expect the inflation and act as if
there is inflation and adjust accordingly without any need for actual changes in the money supply. So, as real GDP returns to 3%, workers' real wages also increase 2%, as do the real values of debt and savings. The Fed can either let the economy grow into the new money supply, and/or can sell the assets on its balance sheet or change reserve requirements.
And my position has nothing to do with Russia, as Russia didn't have a free floating currency, with changes determined by a largely free
I understand but only on the planet Vulcan from Star Trek, average population IQ 300 with totally suppressed emotions, could he do that. We talking monkeys on Earth need showmanship.
Is Grayson going to run again? It's tragic he's not in the Congress anymore.
Notecrusher 4 months ago
you go Alan - ask those hardball questions - get those lies on record - and lets get the Justice show on the road.
BornPatriot 6 months ago
Bernanke is a looter, through and through.
shmeebegek1 8 months ago
Time to sharpen sticks on both ends, put one end in the ground, and a fed's head on the other end, then line the washington mall with all the fed's workers and bosses!!
canisdormit 1 year ago
Alan, I will vote and financially support you in the future. Please re run!
phillisthebarbarian 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
is there anybody who cares to change things in congress except grayson and Paul?
DREwestcoast 1 year ago
is there anybody who cares to change things in congress except grayman and Paul?
DREwestcoast 1 year ago
Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, & Alan Grayson for U.S.A. 2012!
YoungIvyScholar 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice hair Asian women ***lushfmlk.info***
ayomapeti 1 year ago
Big fan of Grayson too...need to document where the money goes and why.
AccuracyMarked 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
there Try asian brides #lushfmlk.info#
oweelvver 1 year ago
We are wasting over trillion dollars, american soldiers and other lives, a year as well being overseas! How about we close down those 700+ bases overseas and bring home the thousands of troops that are overseas? That makes sense to me.
bleckmon 1 year ago
Great job Congressman. Thank God for people like you and my representative Tim Ryan from OH 17th district. Keep up the good work sir.
lukerosenburgh 1 year ago
He is the only congressman in Florida that truly represents the people. The rest of them here in Florida are sorry to say "payola" congressmen.
branscom81203 1 year ago
everytime i see alan grayson and ron paul they are the two most sensible people in the entire US government
thehalo2renegade 1 year ago
Half a trillion was handed out?
I thought you said they were swaps?
Swaps, the exact opposite of a handout.
As far as not knowing which companies borrowed these dollars from their central banks, when Grayson deposits his pay check in the bank, does he know which company gets that money next? LOL!!!
jimmyrtle 1 year ago
It's ironic, how these particular clips always have trouble buffering and other less important ones don't, anybody else notice that?
LatinoParaSiempre 2 years ago
@LatinoParaSiempre yes i do notice that ! i thought it was because more people were watching them but the views are less.
UniqueleyCrazy 1 year ago
Wow, it really make you ask what are people working for.
underyourskindvd 2 years ago
I just have a question for anyone who knows: how come in these hearings the seats are nearly empty.. is there no public forum within congress???
bluehorse888 2 years ago
Most of them don't care about something as cerbral as this. They would have to think too hard. Far easier to consider flag burning amendments and homo marraige.
gumpydoood 2 years ago
@gumpydoood it might eat up their valuable time to educate themselves, plus there's football tonite, no time for this
DREwestcoast 1 year ago
Rep. Alan Grayson is a very smart man. Willing to put his life on the line for Americans. I think there are only 3 Congress persons that has this courage, the rest are just worthless memes. Americans that understands the FED is is Americas down fall, have your back Mr. Grayson, but beware of this most corrupt crime organization called the Federal Reserve that has a shady past & I dont trust them. Every time you grill Ben his voice cracks and he sounds like he going to cry or have a break down.
stophypocrisy 2 years ago 4
this speech made me cry. seriously.
just so happy for his courage.
charlottediscordian 2 years ago 10
Good to see someones fighting back.And now is the time to back the true American's fighting this up hill battle . . looks like there going to audit the fed>>:) .We have to audit the fed . now we can see where all this money went. power to the people
Reaper006900 2 years ago 6
Grayson is THE MAN!
bigdickfatwallet 2 years ago 15
Grayson is a Tool!
atlasdaddy 2 years ago
The great thing about the Obama presidency is that white people now see what blacks have been seeing for decades
We see the corruption we see the lies and imorality we see the devilish deceit
Now that one black man is in the office of the elite surrounded by the same number of whites. Whites think its a black takeover and with that train of thought it forces them to look in the mirror but they think they are looking at something they despise but they are looking at themselves LOL
God works
Amerikaten 2 years ago 3
I feel that as long as we Americans think of our self's as "whites" and blacks we are doomed no matter who is in office. Honestly, who gives a shit what color the president is? Me? No. You? Yes. I would guess that color plays a huge role in your life. By far, one of the most racist comments I have ever read and I bet you don't see it that way. I voted for Ron Paul. He has been trying to audit the fed for 30ys not just since Obama. What ignorance you beleave. Fucking sad.
atlasdaddy 2 years ago 3
I truly agree with what you are saying about people dividing themselves by color or race and thats our problem
You are correct
And to you I apologize for offending YOU
However in order to get to the point where we can be just humans we have to at least be accountable for the things before us
The first step to solving a problem is acknowledging that there is a problem
You were offended that I specifically used the word "white" I apologized but that still doesn't make my comment False
Amerikaten 2 years ago
No No No! I give a shit less if you call me white! That is not what pissed me off. It is that fact that you assume that you know what a white person is thinking because there is a black president. First I give a shit less what color I am. I had no choice in that. Second, I give a shit less what color you are. You had no choice in that too. Third, as long as we think of our self's as white and black we are by definition "divided and conquered". This has nothing to do with color. Peace!!!
atlasdaddy 2 years ago
I just want you to know what I see. It seems to be "their" game. "Keep them thinking about the small things so they can't see what is really going on!" Audit the FED is first on my list! That will control the spending and the killing of the dollar. Then second will be give an open offer to every man women and child to stand up for their basic rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and the rest will fall in line. White and Black are just words, so is Human.
atlasdaddy 2 years ago
i didnt like bush.
vegaspilot03 2 years ago
I am glad that so many democrats are on board, but lets give credit where credit is due. Also, we need to look at other policy changes that Rep. Paul has been suggesting since he has been in office. It is time for the people (Dems and Reps) to take our country back from the international bankers.
leximaster 2 years ago
I am glad that this guy is speaking out against the fed. However, its amazing how the democrats are trying to take credit and put their face on this movement. We all know that this movement was founded by Ron Paul, in fact, he has seen the Fed for what it is for the past 30 years. time the people(dems and reps) take the country back.
leximaster 2 years ago
Bernenke obviously needs to be ousted. Blank Checks aren't dismissable.
rborchers7 2 years ago
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance."
James Madison
1RastaWarrior 2 years ago
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences."
Carroll Quigley
1RastaWarrior 2 years ago
"For the first time in its history, Western Civilization is in danger of being destroyed internally by a corrupt, criminal ruling cabal which is centered around the Rockefeller interests, which include elements from the Morgan, Brown, Rothschild, Du Pont, Harriman, Kuhn-Loeb, and other groupings as well. This junta took control of the political, financial, and cultural life of America in the first two decades of the twentieth century."
Carroll Quigley
1RastaWarrior 2 years ago
Oh so sad to see some of the comments here of supposedly educated people who make things sound so complicated. The facts are simple. The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATELY OWNED BANK accountable to NO ONE. I don't think everyone realizes that Ron Paul and Alan Grayson just saved this country.
Lynoreable 2 years ago
get um!
marniespeaks 2 years ago
I bet they pay people to walk across the screen at 2:14 and to stay away from the seats around him when he gives his speech. A brave man. A really brave man.
Duphe 2 years ago
What is happening is that investors are borrowing dollars to buy assets and investments outside of the United States. This is due to the low US interest rates and the knowledge that the US Dollar has to devaluate further. This happened in the 80's. Although Grayson is right about more check and balances are needed, this currency "swap" needed to happen. ALL the Fed needs to do is just print more money to balance the inconsistencies.
JoseThePhd 2 years ago
Ron Paul has been trying to do this for 20, thanks for your support Mr. Grayson.
PressForFreedom 2 years ago
We live in scary times.
stewart0312 2 years ago
Excellent !!! Grayson/Paul in 2012 ... or Paul/Grayson ... either way, they're both no-nonsense representatives. If we're gonna hand out money, let's know where the hell it's going.
tonofshit 2 years ago
The FED, Wall Street and Washington needs adult supervision.
mrscot 2 years ago
Thank God for Ron Paul. Obama wants to give all control over to his buddy Geithner
midwestcharm 2 years ago 2
alan grayson is awesome!
RiseRobotRise1 2 years ago 2
We have to get rid of every single politician in this country. They have been destroying this country. Term limits of 4 years should be mandatory. As for the Fed, it is the politicians that have allowed the Fed to go on since 1913 and take the dollar to junk status.
czubspenx 2 years ago
@czubspenx
Why do you need term limits? If you don't like a politician, people can vote them out, can't they?
Silveracity 2 years ago
Builds citizen Congress vs career politicians.
Breaks ties to special interests, lobbyists.
Destroys seniority/enhances meritocracy.
Improves timeliness of Congresss thinking.
Eliminates power of old bulls caucus.
Introduces fresh thinking, new ideas.
Would provide inescapable, bracing reminders of what life in the real world is like.
Improves tendency to vote on principle.
Reduces power of staff, bureaucracy.
Increases competition among candidates.
czubspenx 2 years ago 2
I add to that wipe out the Republican :Party from the face of the earth.
junevi2000 2 years ago
You have got to get educated. There is actually only a one party system in the US. It doesn't matter who's in office. Both parties subscribe to the same special interests. Special interests call the shots. Bush runs on small government, no nation building, fiscal responsibility. Obama runs on transparency, troops out of Iraq, change. Nothing happens. It's all a bunch of BS. Good cop, bad cop. We need a viable third party because the DNC and the GOP do NOT represent the people.
czubspenx 2 years ago
Term limits laws signify that the people are too stupid to vote out bad politicians, is that what you believe?
Silveracity 2 years ago
It's obvious that 90% of the electorate are not well educated on the issues. The proof is in the pudding, so to speak. This is the reason the country is so screwed up.
czubspenx 2 years ago
Term limits, as far as I can see, doesn't change the fact that people may be poorly educated.
Instead of limiting a persons ability to run and hold office and the publics ability to vote, Why not to better educate the people, so that they can make informed choices?
Silveracity 2 years ago
I really don't know how to better educate the people. Seems like the powerful teacher's union have the incumbent politicians under their thumb. If the politicians want to get re-elected, they have to play ball with the union. The only thing the union is interested in is more and more members and could care less about the quality of education. It's a vicious cycle.
czubspenx 2 years ago
Paul / Grayson 2012
I'd vote for that.
FatoDrunkoAndoStupid 2 years ago 3
Are you fucking serious? They are polar opposites.
Paul sucks KKK dick.
TheAntiAuthoritarian 2 years ago
what makes you say that?
blugreenblu 2 years ago
Ron Paul wants just about everything privatized. There's a term for when you privatize the state, and that's fascism. Grayson is more of a socialist like Kucinich.
Paul is a socialist on the issue of the Federal Reserve though. Good for him! We need GOVERNMENT oversight.
TheAntiAuthoritarian 2 years ago
government oversight against its own is called the balance of power idiot. that's how the constitution was designed. good job turning the words of a subject you have absolutely no clue of into some quasi philosophical text. hilarious.
spyletu 2 years ago
The fed is made up of both PRIVATE and government institutions, halfwit. Nice try though, really.
TheAntiAuthoritarian 2 years ago
Oh, sorry. I forgot that I said Paul sucks KKK dick. With that comment I was referring to Ron Paul's bigoted newsletters and policies.
TheAntiAuthoritarian 2 years ago
is there some good sources for this info?
blugreenblu 2 years ago
Oligarchy Fascism runs this country. End the Fed and reign in Wall Street Banksters starting with Morgan Stanley Chase
Bronnster 2 years ago 2
Sen. Grayson, keep this up. You are doing your job very well.
villagescribe 2 years ago 5
Call 'em out, Grayson!
Rock and Roll!
Tell them that plenty of us are short of dollars, too!
TerryEFV2 2 years ago
Grayson on the march!! What A G!!!!
jibsmokestack1 2 years ago
I don't see any republicans questioning the Federal reserve.
What are the repubs good for again?
qwertywxyz 2 years ago
Are you kidding me? Ron Paul introduced this bill and most co sponsors are republican.
daniel987878 2 years ago
daniel,
if a tree falls in the forest...?
elected but afraid to speak other than the lock-step party line = USELESS
TerryEFV2 2 years ago
Both parties are useless.
daniel987878 2 years ago
where do you think the slogan "End the fed" came from? who just published a book by the same name? HR 1207 was sponsored by Ron Paul & is co sponsored by 311 in the house including Mr A. Grayson. Mr Grayson was responsible for making this a non partisan effort by bringing many democrats on board, He deserves & recieves much respect from the Ron Paul community for his efforts on this.
S 604 is the companion Senate Bill Introduced by Mr B.Sanders it currently has 30 co-sponsors. .........
davidpark68 2 years ago 2
....... all of these politicians deserve our thanks for understanding & taking action on something that effects EVERY person that uses the Dollar.
If You are against Corporatism (Michael Moore mistakenly calls it capitalism in his movie) you should be also supporting these bills. the only way we can bring down the corporate beast is to cut off it's corrupt money supply.
davidpark68 2 years ago
@davidpark68 Amen!End the FED now!
killergames187 2 years ago
Corporatism is also called fascism (the economic system) which is private ownership but with government control.That is why we need to watch how regulation is passed. One other thing if you want to know the truth remember C-Span is your friend.The politicians hate them.
floridagrandpa 2 years ago
Where are you getting your news? Ron Paul also is sponsoring this bill also.One of the things that turned me off of the Democratic party is its ceaseless class warfare rhetoric.The Republican party turns me off by being often on the wrong side of history. Be smart , support good people regardless what vehicle (party) they used to get elected.
floridagrandpa 2 years ago
I searched my way back to this video just to add this: "You give me hope man" And I never say crap like the that. So there you go.
TillThenPlease 2 years ago 2
This Grayson. Man, people are going to write books about this guy down the road. He seems to be constantly trying to make actual changes that mean something. The other rat bag politions must be pulling their hair out behind closed doors. Likely asking the questions, "Doesn't this guy know we're here to do nothing suck lobbyist balls? Why does he want to ruin a good thing here? We've got a good thing going." Ha, ha, ha! Seriously keep up the good work Grayson! People are proud of you!
TillThenPlease 2 years ago 2
WHY are there always so damn many does anyone else work????
ccm800 2 years ago
thank GOD for this guy - maybe there is hope for what used to be the USA
ccm800 2 years ago 3
I like this gadfly. Might not agree with every thing he pushes but agree with him about this and health care.
floridagrandpa 2 years ago
i agree, can't love him, but he is at least asking questions.
vegaspilot03 2 years ago 2
You go get them, Representative!
hgryphon 2 years ago
Grayson and Paul are both right on this issue.
More Democrats should be supporting Grayson as we try to figure out where our money is going. It leaves us in lurch here at home while we try to do worthwhile things domestically.
I disagree with Paul on other issues but I'm glad he at least sticks to his principles. It's a much more honest opposition than what the rest of the GOP offers.
That being said I wish he didn't have blind faith in the corporations to do what's right for America.
route99 2 years ago 2
The answer to the question many ask about how our massive debt will be repaid is clear and simple: It will not be repaid. The selfish and short-sighted policies which propel us in this direction will continue until our currency is destroyed or virtually destroyed. Dollar denominated assets and liabilities will become virtually worthless.
We will become like a third-world country in many ways until both our exports and also our consumption of imported goods allow a equal, Balance Of Paymts.
trime1851 2 years ago
*how come ppl are NOT screaming this in congress
solojam 2 years ago 2
how come ppl are screaming this in congress, y'all got fukin frauding in teh united states, generations from now will be paying off this debt, you think its hard to live now, its gonna get worst!!!!
solojam 2 years ago
I'm a constituent of Rep Ron Paul and I wish every district in every State of the Union would have one of you or one him to represent everyone - then things would work as they should - intelligently.
econewpower 2 years ago 2
Rep. Grayson, It's about time you got back to" The Fedreal Reserve." These ass think they own OUR money. They need show US Who, Where, and WHY! they are just giving OUR money out like it's candy.. If not, Then isn't it Theft? It is in all other business....
1958louief 2 years ago
I'm so glad the HR is done with that health care bill so Grayson can focus on this again. END THE FED!
harvey101107 2 years ago
Question:
Where did this half a trillion dollars come from.
HailRasec 2 years ago
China, which in turn got it from us. The chinese can only buy US products and services with US dollars so it really doesn't matter
LeopardFrogPilboxhat 2 years ago
those where currency swaps. don't have to come from anywhere when you're a central bank.
expansion of the balance sheet. increased assets(USD), increased liabilities(foreign currency)
some people call that "printing money".
myrelative 2 years ago
Only Sarah Palin supporters can make Wrong Paul look intelligent. Soap suds have firmer grasp on reality Wrong Paul.
mintvagoo 2 years ago
you are just ill-informed. the republican candidates were asked in a debate, who doesn't believe in evolution. paul was not one of them.
and I wanna see the bill that ron paul supported to teach creationism. he wants to abolish federal education, he definitely didn't vote for a federal education bill doing anything.
I wasn't implying anything, I don't know if Wright is racist or not. neither do I care.
myrelative 2 years ago
Thats because federal education is brainwashing our kids, and he knows it.
Kids singing Barack Obama songs in school on youtube and on CNN? Come on now, can you say hello dictator Obama!
I wouldn't vote for that bill either, screw the federal government. They need to stay the hell out of our lives.
TheSilencer1313 2 years ago
Grayson and Paul fighting side to side? Must be good.
Koba82 2 years ago 5
no more racist than the newsletters? well, those were definitely racist.
not ron paul's view though.
ron paul never pushed creationism.
myrelative 2 years ago
Ask the tough questions, make them accountable - Grayson you're the best!!!
ziger123456 2 years ago 2
Fix your audio levels on this VIDEO!
cmdreno 2 years ago
finally spending your time doing something worthwhile Grayson.
jrccdhetlr1 2 years ago
Al, you are pretty good on the federal reserve accountability issue. So why are you just nuts on so many other things?
TalkerOne 2 years ago
If i was allen or Paul i would choke fucking Ben out. Call up chuck norris. Thats all you really need to do.
MystiK570 2 years ago
I like Grayson, but he's dead wrong here. The Fed's actions keep interest rates here lower, which stimulates the economy. Otherwise, we may have no recovery.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
that's what they tell you.
let me try this: a federal agency should flood the market with bread. that keeps the prices of bread lower, and stimulates the budget of americans.
does make sense?
interest rates are prices, the price of money. if you fix it, like the fed does, that creates distortions. like: noone is encouraged to save, because it doesn't pay anything, even though the US barely has any savings.
just like noone is encouraged to manufacture bread if the price of bread is fixed.
myrelative 2 years ago
it has nothing to do with bread. It has to do with money velocity which has to stay constant to avoid a slowdown that is greater than need be. When dollar hoarding occurs, as it still does now, the monetary expansion is not keeping up with money demand. Since the dollar is the world reserve currency and rose sharply as the flight of safety occurred during the meltdown, the demand for dollars went up all over the world. So, the Fed lends dollars to foreign central banks who will pay it back
Zeldovich 2 years ago
the fed caused the expansion and the contraction.
bailout follows bailout follows bailout.
it had little to do with velocity. sure there was some of that, as is in every recession, but the big reason for the monetary expansion was the destruction of money/credit through insolvent credit institutions.
the monetary expansion was little more than another banking bailout.
myrelative 2 years ago
Okay, apparently you have no idea what money velocity is, yet you have the nerve to be condescending. When there is destruction of money, or any reason, money volecity goes down proportunately.
Since you think you know so much, tell me what money velocity is, along with nominal GDP targeting verus the Taylor rule, and what indicators are used for each type of targeting. This is basic economics and if you can't answer these questions quickly, then you have no idea what you're talking about
Zeldovich 2 years ago
no. destruction of credit doesn't equal slowing down of money velocity.
the taylor rule? are you serious?
a rule on how a central bank should conduct monetary policy (i.e. fixing the price of money) should be "basic economics" for me when I doubt the whole concept of fixing prices?
I don't care how you do it. the right price for money can't be found by a commission inside the fed, no matter what method you're usnig.
myrelative 2 years ago
lol Money velocity involves the rate of transactions x monetary value of those transactions and you think credit destruction doesn't lower it? lmao You are retarded. It's one thing to be ignorant. It's another to be ignorant and condescending, apparently not realizing that your knowledge is relatively limited. We can play the economics quiz game all day and I doubt you'd get even one question right. You are a part of a problem with this country: Ignorant people making visceral decisions.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
at least go to wikipedia before you answer, thank you.
myrelative 2 years ago
so that the new money can be sucked back in later, before causing inflation. It is good for us that foreign central banks get these swaps, because otherwise they sould come into our markets seeking dollars, and raise the value of the dollar during a deflationary period, making our situation even worse.
I wish the Fed would create more money, that that we have enough to meet the excess demand, returning nominal GDP growth to it's century and a half trend.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
yeah I'll be waiting for that (sucking back the money), that'll be fun. try to take a look how that's going to happen. there is no exit strategy.
there is MASSIVE inflation right now, it's called asset inflation.
inflation doesn't hit all parts of the economy at the same time, when it hits the CPI...
you can read about that from all parts of the political spectrum. if you wanna read it from someone who is near obama and supported his stimulus, read roubini.
myrelative 2 years ago
Keep it up guys.
This is how I learn.
Youtube is great!
cosmosgato 2 years ago 2
Really? No exit strategy? So, you have special knowledge of future Fed plans? You should be playing the markets with those plans.
Gee, it's not as if the Fed can simply sell the assets on its balance sheet to reign in the money released when they were purchased, eh? The Fed can also always raise reserve requirements. Again, you only offer ignorance.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
We cant have transparency at the Fed because it could cause a global financial crisis like the one we just had because of fed secrecy. Beautiful.
daniel987878 2 years ago 2
Whatever. The lack of Fed transparency frees up FOMC debate and prevents companies from fearing being outted during a financial crisis, ensuring the destruction of the company in the latter case and the reluctance to seek assistanc in the first. This would mean more systemically important failures and more and more expensive bailouts.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
Secrecy frees up the debate to anything the FOMC feels. Some of the things the FOMC can discuss in secrecy is how to allocate $500 billion to their buddies overseas.
Transparency removes the comfort of knowing a company can just go to the fed for a bailout if their bad practices go astray and this makes the marketplace efficent. A company that not a going concern should not be proped up at the expense of the entire system because this contributes to systemic risk by encouraging malpractice
daniel987878 2 years ago
You imply that there is moral hazard promoted when bankd and other companies can go to the Fed for access to the discount window. However there is no such problem with the management of such companies, who don't care if their companies live or die, so long as they make themselves richer. The share and bondholders don't care either, because many have already realized huge profits before the company is threatened.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
There is moral hazard when banks can borrow money at 0% or at any manged level by the CB. These banks have the priviledge of borrowing money cheaper than anyone else and then lending to the markets at a higher price. Pure speculation.
Transparency doesnt mean congress will control the FRB but it will be accountable.
Shareholders would care if they didnt have easy money as this would make them invest in productive actiivities in order to maximise their profits.
daniel987878 2 years ago
Everything we do in life is pure speculation and of course banks get the money at the lower interest rates. Otherwise, they wouldn't lend it!
Shareholders would want higher interest rates to choke off their earnings, but that's irreievant.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
Everything you do in life could be seen as "speculation" I suppose but your choices should entail consequences for you and not others. Other people shouldnt be forced to help you through debasing money etc... but they can help you if they think it is right out of their own will.
In a free market banks would also profit from lending at higher rates than they borrow but they wouldnt obtain funds from depositors or similar if they employed unsound investment/lending practises.
daniel987878 2 years ago
f secrecy had nothing to do with it. What evidence do you have that secrecy had any influence over the development of the bubble or the Fed's failure to ensure that the money supply kept up with the demand for money?
Zeldovich 2 years ago
Fed secrecy was the main contributing factor to the creation of this bubble. New lending comes from the fed and has provided all the liquidity necesary for the commercial banks to create 500 odd trillion in derivatives of various types which sistemically undermined the world system. Transparency would of made apparent a massive expansion of credit was creating massive disclocations. By transparency I dont mean self reporting by the FRB either, independant auditing is vital.
daniel987878 2 years ago
no they can't. look up their balance sheet. half of it is mortgage backed securities, still rising. they are the MBS market right now.
reserve requirements are total nonsense in this context. they only apply to M1 (mostly demand deposits) and don't have much effect.
that you bring this up shows that you have all your "knowledge" from a textbook only, because the US reserve requirement barely changed in decades. the Fed didn't even try to use it as part of its monetary policy.
myrelative 2 years ago
Okay, the mortgage-backed securities should rise in value as real estate prices recover as excess supply diminishes.
Second, of course raising reserve requirements decreases the money supply. If banks have to keep more reserves on hand, they have less to lend out. I guess your googling led to epic fail in this case. There's no substitute for actually knowing this stuff.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
did you read my comment? I never said reserve requirements have no effect on money supply. I said little. and that it isn't actually used as an instrument of monetary policy. it might be in the future, but I doubt it.
yeah, sure. when real estate is back to bubble prices the Fed won't have a problem to dump it.
I guess we'll wait for that then?
adjustable mortgages written in bubble times are still resetting, the majory until about 2012.
myrelative 2 years ago
Yes, and you were wrong in everything you posted. How you can think raising reserve requirements can't rein in the money supply... You must have read a bad Wiki or badly misunderstood it. If banks currently have a loan/reserve ratio of 10 and it's cut in half to 5, the bank can only lend half as much money as before. Wow, your ignorance is massive. and it doesn't matter how many times this has been done, only that it can be done. The past is no predictor of the future.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
If you don't understand basic monetary policy, then you're aren't in a position to understand Roubini, who favored massive monetary and fiscal stimulus, despite possible future problems.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
that I don't understand it is your conclusion. I said I don't care which target because it doesn't matter. I don't care which way of central economic planning communist countries use either.
I know that roubini favoured it, that's why I mentioned him, but he also sees the problems of it, that you deny.
if I meantioned some austrian economist who disagreed with the whole thing you'd probably just dismiss it. roubini maybe you read. he is a good start, but I wouldn't stop there.
myrelative 2 years ago
Austrians try to use 80 year-old economics today. There's been zero progress in that theory since then. It'd be like holding on to the Bohr theory of the atom, except his theory was far more useful.
And targeting nGDP versus using pure inflation indicators with an over-reliance on the Taylor rule does matter. The formet "targets the forecast" as revealed in futures and TIPs spreads. It allows for market expectations to behave as if there will be inflation, even without creating new $
Zeldovich 2 years ago
you really wanna play econimics quiz now, don't you?
anyway, write some more comments, I'll answer tomorrow :D
myrelative 2 years ago
Yes, you want time to look up the answers in Wiki, but you'll still get them wrong, because Wiki si sometimes wrong and it is almost always woefully incomplete. It aslo takes time to work through all the implcations, which is why you've made so many ridiculous replies.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
I needed time to sleep because I have some other things to do besides writing youtube comments.
myrelative 2 years ago
theories are outdated when they're disproven.
please refer me to that paper.
myrelative 2 years ago
There's no such thing as proven or "disproven" in science. Some models simply fit better than others given available data. And you want references? Try MIlton Friedman's Monetary HIstory of the United States, which he partly won the Nobel for. You can also look at the work of Scott Sumner at Bentley and even Ben Bernanke when at Princeton, though sadly, the Fed has not followed his recommendations through enough. Look at the work of any monetarist, basically.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
"There's no such thing as proven or "disproven" in science."
Go jump off of a building while creaming SCIENCE HASN'T PROVEN THAT GRAVITY EXISTS!!!!!!!!
TheManiacalSatanist 2 years ago
You're assuming that gravity cannot qualitatively change. There is no reason to believe this is the case. We've already found that the speed of light, while constant compared to sub-light velocities, changes over time. No matter how long we think gravity has existed, it may not be there 5 minutes from now.
Indeed, some fundamental forces of the universe may have disappeared shortly after the big bang, and there is always at least a quantum mechanical probability that gravity can fail.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
Stop trying to 'scientifically 'defend the indefensible.
You clearly have no background in science, you clearly have no fundamental understanding of economics otherwise you'd see your arguments implode on themselves.
Bottom line: you're a fraud looking for attention.
TheManiacalSatanist 2 years ago
First, look at your nick and then tell me again about seeking attention. My nick is taken from the name of a physicist. Do you know who?
And if I'm a fraud, then what have I claimed to be? You're just a total waste of subhuman flesh. You've mentioned nothing about economics or any other subject at hand, because you're a stupid, ignorant pussy troll. Now go home to your momma, douche bag.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
if there is no such thing as disproven, there is no such thing as outdated.
myrelative 2 years ago
wrong. Sure, saying Austrian economics is oudated is an opinion, but it's a sound one in my judgement. The data doesn't fit into the models. It's that simple.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
So, real wages go down, real debtloses value, savings take a hit, but all rther slight and short-term. The real wage reductions keep employees on the job The lower real value of debt improves balance sheets and punishes irresponsible lenders,while improving the balance sheets of leveraged consumers and businesses. It keeps money velocity constant, with the above benefits, when means the resource misallocations can be undone more quickly. How can resource reallocation procede more quikcly
Zeldovich 2 years ago
with lower money velocity and people out of work who can't spend as much in more adaptive ways to rebalance the economy? How can a shift to lower employment work off the bad debt more quickly? Keeping people at work for lower real wages temporarily, with the real value of debt and savings temporarily diminishing is how we pay for the previous malinvestment as quickly and cheaply as possible. Then the economy can simply grow into the new money supply.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
i want to know more about this "The real wage reductions keep employees on the job The lower real value of debt improves balance sheets and punishes irresponsible lenders,while improving the balance sheets of leveraged consumers and businesses" how is having a lower real wage good for the employee? and how does lower real debt (through the destruction of the dollar through inflation by the FED) help Leveraged consumers and businesses? They have lost all their savings, tell that to the Homeless.
vegaspilot03 2 years ago
Having a lower wage is good for the employee because he/she won't be laid off due to a fall in money velocity. The lower wage is very temporary and rises when real GDP begins to increase.
And savers don't lose all of their savings or anywhere close to it. IN pure supply and demand terms, it would take an unlimited amount of inflation to bring real savings to zero. I'm talking about single percentage points. The real savings would go up again as real GDP increases.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
I understand your argument about your belief that it might be "good" ( wouldn't use that word) for the employee to have lower REAL wage when adjusted to rising inflation in a slowing economy because if the Employee is dumb enough he won't realize immediately he is being robbed of purchasing power. but for Moral and sound economic policy reasons, i do not agree that it is a GOOD thing.
And you said savers don't lose their money... did you forget the past year? people invested SAVINGS into HOUSES.
vegaspilot03 2 years ago
Is it more moral to have all workers take a slight paycut for a short amount of time or to have millions unemployed, many more millions under-employed, and still have millions losing hours and wages?
And if you knew economics, you would know that houses are not savings. Houses are net assets or liabilities. If you mean that people shifted savings to assets and liabilities, then that may be true,but real savings would only go down slightly with the nGDP approach.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
OMG, dude why do you keep trying to insult me? I meant the latter, which you said is true. and you can look at all the GNP and nGDP figures you want, the value of the dollar is still being eroded. try and argue how that is such a great thing for savers. you can't.
vegaspilot03 2 years ago
I'm not trying to be insulting.
The dollar devaluaton in this case is only temporary as the the value of the dollar will return to trend as GDP growth does likewise.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
No, theories should match the data, That's the only criteria.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
With nGDP targeting, there is a 3% real growth rate + a 2% inflatino buffer, to prevent errors that could cause deflation. IF real growth falls to say, 1%, then enough new money is created to keep the nominal rate at 5%. Hence, the supply of money meet the demand for money, and money velocity remains unchanged. The inflation causes a slight temporary drop in real wages, overcoming the sticky wage problem and keeping employment up, and lowers the real value of debt, so bad loans take a hit.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
Naturally,. this is all lost on the 'tards you listen to, because they simply ignore all of the work done in economics since the 30s, because they dismiss government intervention out of hand. The Fed's real mistake was not having money creation keeping up with demand starting in 2006 to maintain a 5% nominal target, which would have avoided a recession altogether. We would have merely had a slowdown.
Instead, the Fed sets inflation targets, which makes little sense without nGDP.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
Well, I won't pretend to be an economist on the internet, but you said the Fed needed to return the GDP growth rate to the same levels we've maintained for the past 150 years. That isn't exactly making a strong case for the Fed, since they didn't appear until about halfway through that time frame.
indyattic 2 years ago
Apparently, you fail to realize that until 1913, the downturns were much deeper with returns to sustainable growth much shorter. There were much more extreme ups and downs an prolonged periods of negative or low GDP, such as the Long Depression, which began in 1873. We had a Great Depression in 1930-1940, because the Fed failed to live up to its mandate and let the money supply decrease by 1/3. Look up the Milton Friedman explanation of this on youtube.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
Your logic is idiotic at best.
TheManiacalSatanist 2 years ago
Go to Friedman's grave and tell him that. Then contact the Nobel committee and tell them to retract his prize. Or, you can just read Friedman's Monetary History of the United States, so you won't come across as the complete moron you do here right now.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
OK PAL, i asked you a question, you don't have to insult people. Second, obviously it would be preposterous for someone like me to challenge the super geniuses that run the Nobel committees, they obviously choose wisely. (that was a joke) Third, i will respond in reply to your other comment.
vegaspilot03 2 years ago
I was responding to the idiot ManiacalSatanist. Whatever you think of the Nobel committee, they know more than this idiot does.
Zeldovich 2 years ago
"the fed's real mistake was not having money creation keeping up with demand" So there you go. If that is your argument, then you have just defeated yourself. because the FED is NEVER going to be smart enough to know what the interest rates ought to be and therefore will never know what the money supply should be. it's great to say "they didnt do this" but to say that you must admit they DIDNT DO IT. SO WHY KEEP LETTING THEM RUN OUT MONETARY POLICY.
End The Fed - gluck in old russia pal.
vegaspilot03 2 years ago
As explained above, the Fed can using nominal GDP targeting to anticipate the need for money creation or destruction. With a nominal GDP of 5%, with 3 percent real GDP growth(150 year trend) and 2% as an inflatinary buffer against deflation, relevant adjustments can be made.
Signals from the market, such as futures prices and TIPs spreads reveal market expectations toward which the Fed can act proactively. For example, if commodity, stock and bond, etc. futures are falling
Zeldovich 2 years ago
along with the difference in inflation protected bond prices and non-protected bond prices can tell you the market expects a fall in real GDP. This drop is measurable. So, if the market expects a fall in real GDP growth of 2%, then there can be a 2% rate of money creation to get to the nominal target of 5%. Then wages, the value of debt, and savings fall 2%, if the market doesn't expect this inllation. However, if the Fed has credibility, the market will expect the inflation and act as if
Zeldovich 2 years ago
there is inflation and adjust accordingly without any need for actual changes in the money supply. So, as real GDP returns to 3%, workers' real wages also increase 2%, as do the real values of debt and savings. The Fed can either let the economy grow into the new money supply, and/or can sell the assets on its balance sheet or change reserve requirements.
And my position has nothing to do with Russia, as Russia didn't have a free floating currency, with changes determined by a largely free
Zeldovich 2 years ago
did you say earlier that we didn't listen to Ben Bernanke ????
Ok,.... look at any peter schiff/ronpaul videos and you will see them warning about this for YEARS...
Let me show you the one you probably already forgot about, the one about your precious FED Reserve Chairman Benanke:
/watch?v=HQ79Pt2GNJo
vegaspilot03 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Keep it up guys.
This is how I learn.
Youtube is great!
cosmosgato 2 years ago 2
"Reins in," not "reigns."
mortysand 2 years ago
Right on. But you gotta dig those 3 button sack suits. So Ivy league.
ratbasket 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
is he finally done playing clown for keith olberman, and found his way back to congress?
good for him.
myrelative 2 years ago
-6, that was fast.
and I like grayson. I just prefer him not being the monkey for bad TV shows, but asking important questions.
myrelative 2 years ago 2
I understand but only on the planet Vulcan from Star Trek, average population IQ 300 with totally suppressed emotions, could he do that. We talking monkeys on Earth need showmanship.
cosmosgato 2 years ago