• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fed Announces New Round of Bond Buying to Spur Growth

Helix

Helix

Administrator
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
91,936
Reaction score
90,886
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
WASHINGTON — The Federal Reserve launched a new campaign to stimulate the economy Thursday that it said would continue until its help was no longer needed or its efforts became counterproductive, opening a fresh chapter in its five-year-old response to the financial crisis.
Click to expand...


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/14/business/economy/fed-announces-new-round-of-bond-buying-to-spur-growth.html?pagewanted=all
Click to expand...


apologies if this has already been posted; a quick search turned up nothing.

i'm exceptionally uncomfortable with expansion of QE.
 
As you should be.

It's increasingly obvious that Bersnakey & Co. want to maintain the status quo and not have to train a new administration.

This is the same crew that facilitated Bush and the Obusha. They are turning our money into dust for their own ends, not ours.



Helix said:


apologies if this has already been posted; a quick search turned up nothing.

i'm exceptionally uncomfortable with expansion of QE.
Click to expand...
 
OTOH, they are doing good for my gold and silver stash. Look at the PM charts and you'll see how silver dropped to 27 and then the insiders started buying. Fortunately, I saw this and did some serious buying @ 27 and now we're at 35 and rising.

Good grief©






specklebang said:
It's increasingly obvious that Bersnakey & Co. want to maintain the status quo and not have to train a new administration.

This is the same crew that facilitated Bush and the Obusha. They are turning our money into dust fo their own ends, not ours.
Click to expand...
 
How did it work the first two times??
 
i understand the theory a little, and i can see potential for short term benefits if it's done once. the only thing it's going to do this time, however, is prevent an immediate Wall Street drop. now that it has been done twice, traders were expecting it. as for a solution to longer term problems, it isn't. the problems in our economy might be partially due to liquidity, but the vast majority of the problem is that people don't have money to spend because there isn't enough hiring and wage growth, and there isn't enough hiring and wage growth because people aren't spending. increasing liquidity doesn't solve that problem.

it's frustrating because most proposals just top load the economy, when the problem is at the bottom. when your GDP is 70 percent consumer spending, you need a lot of consumers to keep that dirigible inflated.
 
Maybe if Congress would get off their ass and actually do something about the economy....Bernanke and the Fed seem to be the only people seeing the situation and wanting to do something about it.
 
iliveonramen said:
Maybe if Congress would get off their ass and actually do something about the economy....Bernanke and the Fed seem to be the only people seeing the situation and wanting to do something about it.
Click to expand...

I've yet to see a plan I think is even remotely logical come from either party. The stimulus was weak at best, and these so called "jobs bills" are crap. If they were serious in the first place they'd have taken that stimulus and given it to the damned consumer class in installments. If they were super, super serious, they'd have put stipulations on the money that it must be spent (no saving!). That would have automatically injected money into the economy.

Then, they should have held their asses on creating new regulations, halting oil/gas exploration and drilling, and demonizing banks. 'Cause all that did was make business inflexible and unwilling to take risks, so even when they could afford to hire, they didn't.
 
iliveonramen said:
Maybe if Congress would get off their ass and actually do something about the economy....Bernanke and the Fed seem to be the only people seeing the situation and wanting to do something about it.
Click to expand...


And what is Congress supposed to do when Harry Reid blocks everything sent up by the republican congress?
 
iliveonramen said:
That must be it, Harry Reid individually has brought Congress to a screeching halt.
Click to expand...

And what has he allowed to a vote since the repubs took the house? Can you name anything of substance?
 
j-mac said:
And what has he allowed to a vote since the repubs took the house? Can you name anything of substance?
Click to expand...

This brings up a question:

What are the procedural rules, exactly, in regards to voting on a bill? If Harry Reid says "we're not bringing it to vote" can that decision be overridden? I'm asking out of seriousness, I am unsure of the procedures.
 
tessaesque said:
This brings up a question:

What are the procedural rules, exactly, in regards to voting on a bill? If Harry Reid says "we're not bringing it to vote" can that decision be overridden? I'm asking out of seriousness, I am unsure of the procedures.
Click to expand...


As far as I know the Majority leader controls the agenda, so unless you start flooding the Senate with the same bill over and over, a complete waste of time....Reid can bottle everything up....Just look at how long since a budget was allowed a vote in the Senate.
 
tessaesque said:
I've yet to see a plan I think is even remotely logical come from either party. The stimulus was weak at best, and these so called "jobs bills" are crap. If they were serious in the first place they'd have taken that stimulus and given it to the damned consumer class in installments. If they were super, super serious, they'd have put stipulations on the money that it must be spent (no saving!). That would have automatically injected money into the economy.

Then, they should have held their asses on creating new regulations, halting oil/gas exploration and drilling, and demonizing banks. 'Cause all that did was make business inflexible and unwilling to take risks, so even when they could afford to hire, they didn't.
Click to expand...

I'm curious what sources you're going by that stated the stimulus didn't have a large impact. Any reputable study has a GDP impact of around 1% and jobs saved/gained in the millions.

Business don't take risks during a downturn! It has nothing to do with the regulatory environment and everything to do with the fact that liquid assets are desirable in a downturn. This happens during every downturn.
 
ok, someone please explain why this move to buy more mortgage bonds is going to stimulate employment
 
iliveonramen said:
I'm curious what sources you're going by that stated the stimulus didn't have a large impact. Any reputable study has a GDP impact of around 1% and jobs saved/gained in the millions.

Business don't take risks during a downturn! It has nothing to do with the regulatory environment and everything to do with the fact that liquid assets are desirable in a downturn. This happens during every downturn.
Click to expand...

Looking at adjusted GDP numbers and explanations, it seems unlikely that the growth was attributable to the stimulus.

Saved/gained millions of jobs is speculative, at best.
 
If you had elected Specklebang as President and we of The Logical Party had control, here's what would have been done.

Everyone who paid at least $500 in taxes and no more than $30,000 in taxes in 2010 would have received a $10,000.00 VISA card with no cash withdrawals and expiring in 6 months.

Is that not brilliant?
 
tessaesque said:
Looking at adjusted GDP numbers and explanations, it seems unlikely that the growth was attributable to the stimulus.

Saved/gained millions of jobs is speculative, at best.
Click to expand...

You could save a lot of time by just stating you don't believe any study that support your view.

So you blame the regulatory environment for our problems even though essentially everything points to a problem with lack of demand. I guess you're basing this on "what that guy said" or your gut reaction.....but multiple reputable sources pointing to the stimulus being a success are inccurate or based on speculation.
 
iliveonramen said:
You could save a lot of time by just stating you don't believe any study that support your view.

So you blame the regulatory environment for our problems even though essentially everything points to a problem with lack of demand. I guess you're basing this on "what that guy said" or your gut reaction.....but multiple reputable sources pointing to the stimulus being a success are inccurate or based on speculation.
Click to expand...


LOL! So when you say "Any reputable study..." LOL....Pot meet Kettle.
 
j-mac said:
It's not, it's just another Keynesian cluster.
Click to expand...

ok, please explain what is keynesian about the fed buying more mortgage bonds
 
j-mac said:
LOL! So when you say "Any reputable study..." LOL....Pot meet Kettle.
Click to expand...

Reputable is based on consensus and reputation.

"Anything of substance" is pulled out of your ass unless you can go down the list and point out why there is no substance to every vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom