Jerome Powell

ClemsonCO14

Member
Dec 11, 2016
152
33
22
Needs to go.

Side note - the search function on this board sucks unless I'm missing something.


Even though you’ve failed to articulate an informed point of view every time you’re asked - and instead resort to re-posting Twitter comments - I’d like to understand why you think Powell should be replaced? What did he do wrong in taming the rampant inflation caused by pandemic-era stimulus? Why should he ignore all other inputs (decline private payroll #s, expected increase in inflation from declining dollar, pass through of tariffs on prices) and relationships (inverse for rates and inflation) to decrease rates?

One more question - do you see any conflicts of interest with Pulte advocating for lower rates? If not, why?
 

TigerGrowls

Well-known member
Dec 21, 2001
35,541
852
113
This post nails it imo. End the fed!!!



Remember: Powell and the Federal Reserve did a rate cut before the 2024 election to help Harris.

But now they are stridently resisting any rate cut at all as Trump lures them out into the open.

WHAT IF - I know this is gonna be a RADICAL CONCEPT for many of you, but just go with me here for a minute - WHAT IF…the foreign-owned Central Bank that sets and controls the USA’s monetary policy actually DOESN’T seek the best for our country?

What if the foreign oligarch families behind that Central Bank we call ‘the Federal Reserve’ have ever and always placed THEIR OWN FINANCIAL PROFITS over and above the interests of the United States ? What if for more than 100 years, the United States of America has had its monetary policy being controlled by America Last globalists ?

What allows them to be able to continue to set the US monetary policy when they CLEARLY are just out for themselves? Isn’t it the national debt? Isn’t it the trillion dollars we pay them every year to use their money?

How could you go about exposing the fact these people who control our country’s monetary system are literally and deliberately SABOTAGING us to increase their own profits?

Wouldn’t you do…exactly what Donald J. Trump has been doing for the last six months? 🤔😏

Have you noticed what an increasingly indefensible position Powell and his foreign oligarch family-owned Central Bank are currently in?

AND IT’S ONLY GONNA GET WORSE FOR THEM GOING FORWARD.

Because they can’t cut the rates. They just can’t. Cutting the rates would be like cutting their own throats.

Everything Trump is doing - which is now producing A FREAKING BUDGET SURPLUS AFTER JUST 3 MONTHS OF THE NEW TARIFF/TRADE POLICIES - will be ACCELERATED if they do a rate cut.

Revenues would explode even MORE. Trump would be able to begin actually PAYING OFF THE NATIONAL DEBT.

WHAT IF -again, just go with me here - WHAT IF the goal of the foreign-owned Federal Reserve is to maintain its control and power over our country by continuing to use our debt for that control?

What if the central bank doesn’t WANT to see the USA begin reducing the debt we owe it? What if it doesn’t WANT our country to pay off that debt and remove that America Last control they’ve enjoyed since 1913?

What if it’s becoming increasingly clear that Trump fully intends to completely REVERSE 1913?

DO YOU REALLY THINK THE FOREIGN-OWNED CENTRAL BANK IS GONNA HELP HIM DO THAT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM?

If they cut the rates, these AMERICA LAST globalist families who’ve been in control since 1913 can see by now EXACTLY what Trump and Bessent and Lutnick would DO with those extra hundreds of billions of dollars a year they’d be handed.

They cannot allow that.

They WILL not allow that.

Which is exactly why Trump is framing the conflict between the America First US Treasury and the America Last Federal Reserve as a CONFLICT OF WILLS.

Because that is exactly what it is.

And Powell and his globalist oligarch Central Bank families WILL lose this contest.

And you can quote me on that…
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Allornothing

baltimorened

Active member
May 29, 2001
333
285
63

here's the thing..the FED has a dual mandate (and I don't know where that came from) inflation and employment. And. from those measures they are doing OK. BUT, IMO, Trump is somewhat right in saying that this FED lives up to it's nickname "too late'. They were too late in cutting rates, then too late in raising rates and now, possibly, too late in lowering them. Back last year before the election the inflation rate was 2.4% and unemployment 4.2%. The FED cut .5% and then .25%. Last meeting the numbers were exactly the same but no cut.
So I understand what Powell is saying about the possible impact of tariffs in the future, but the impact in the present on the housing market is real. People can't afford homes with the rates where they are and people aren't moving as normal, because of rates. It won't be long until we get a cut back on new construction and layoffs.
I think the FED needs to have another mandate added to its work. That is, economic growth. Right now, growth isn't on their radar it seems. So right now Trump and FED are at counter points. Trump wants growth and FED is happy where economy is right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

yoshi121374

Active member
Jan 26, 2006
11,340
363
83
here's the thing..the FED has a dual mandate (and I don't know where that came from) inflation and employment. And. from those measures they are doing OK. BUT, IMO, Trump is somewhat right in saying that this FED lives up to it's nickname "too late'. They were too late in cutting rates, then too late in raising rates and now, possibly, too late in lowering them. Back last year before the election the inflation rate was 2.4% and unemployment 4.2%. The FED cut .5% and then .25%. Last meeting the numbers were exactly the same but no cut.
So I understand what Powell is saying about the possible impact of tariffs in the future, but the impact in the present on the housing market is real. People can't afford homes with the rates where they are and people aren't moving as normal, because of rates. It won't be long until we get a cut back on new construction and layoffs.
I think the FED needs to have another mandate added to its work. That is, economic growth. Right now, growth isn't on their radar it seems. So right now Trump and FED are at counter points. Trump wants growth and FED is happy where economy is right now.

I can see it both ways honestly. I get the concerns about being late to reduce rates, but it's completely fair to be concerned about the tariffs effects, particularly with the unprecedented amounts and constant changes. The recent inflation numbers weren't very good, and that's concerning.

I absolutely hate the politicizing of the FED. We have got to have some parts of our system that aren't infected by partisanship. The direct attacks on the chairman is really bad and shouldn't be allowed.
 

dpic73

Active member
Jul 27, 2005
21,752
460
83

Pfft, cost overruns are typical for huge renovation projects but that doesn't make them Powell's fault. We all know this is a drummed up excuse to fire him for cause.

What happened with the renovation?​

The original cost of the renovation of the Fed’s three office buildings overlooking the National Mall in Washington D.C. was estimated at $1.9 billion in 2019 but swelled to $2.5 billion. The more than 33% increase in budget was due to design changes, costs of materials, equipment, and labor and other “unforeseen conditions” like more asbestos than anticipated and toxic contamination in soil, the Fed’s FAQ said.

 

TigerGrowls

Well-known member
Dec 21, 2001
35,541
852
113
Pfft, cost overruns are typical for huge renovation projects but that doesn't make them Powell's fault. We all know this is a drummed up excuse to fire him for cause.

What happened with the renovation?​

The original cost of the renovation of the Fed’s three office buildings overlooking the National Mall in Washington D.C. was estimated at $1.9 billion in 2019 but swelled to $2.5 billion. The more than 33% increase in budget was due to design changes, costs of materials, equipment, and labor and other “unforeseen conditions” like more asbestos than anticipated and toxic contamination in soil, the Fed’s FAQ said.

More than the Dallas Cowboys stadium...come on man!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Allornothing

baltimorened

Active member
May 29, 2001
333
285
63
I can see it both ways honestly. I get the concerns about being late to reduce rates, but it's completely fair to be concerned about the tariffs effects, particularly with the unprecedented amounts and constant changes. The recent inflation numbers weren't very good, and that's concerning.

I absolutely hate the politicizing of the FED. We have got to have some parts of our system that aren't infected by partisanship. The direct attacks on the chairman is really bad and shouldn't be allowed.
I don't like politicization of the FED either. But a case can be made that the FED already politicized itself. Back before the election inflation was 2.4% and unemployment was 4.2%. The FED cut rates twice. Last month the rates were exactly the same, but no cut. There were just as many uncertainties about the future before the election, different ones for sure, but those uncertainties didn't hold them back from cutting. Right now, you can make a pretty good case that the high rates are holding the economy back. A more robust economy would bring in more tax revenues, reduce interest on the national debt, increase wages, reopen the housing market and likely overcome the effect of tariffs.

And, why is 2% the target? When I was younger economists were happy with 4% inflation. Why not 3%??
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

yoshi121374

Active member
Jan 26, 2006
11,340
363
83
I don't like politicization of the FED either. But a case can be made that the FED already politicized itself. Back before the election inflation was 2.4% and unemployment was 4.2%. The FED cut rates twice. Last month the rates were exactly the same, but no cut. There were just as many uncertainties about the future before the election, different ones for sure, but those uncertainties didn't hold them back from cutting. Right now, you can make a pretty good case that the high rates are holding the economy back. A more robust economy would bring in more tax revenues, reduce interest on the national debt, increase wages, reopen the housing market and likely overcome the effect of tariffs.

And, why is 2% the target? When I was younger economists were happy with 4% inflation. Why not 3%??

You can also make the case that these tariffs are increasing inflation and we haven't seen their full effect yet. I can't blame the Fed for being cautious.
 

TigerGrowls

Well-known member
Dec 21, 2001
35,541
852
113
From your article.

The Consumer Price Index rose 2.7 percent from a year earlier, the swiftest pace since February, data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed on Tuesday. That is slightly higher than expected and up from an annual pace of 2.4 percent in May.

2.4 to 2.7. I can live with that. Its still seismically lower than it was under the treasonous commie dems and yes thats what I label you as.
 

yoshi121374

Active member
Jan 26, 2006
11,340
363
83
From your article.

The Consumer Price Index rose 2.7 percent from a year earlier, the swiftest pace since February, data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed on Tuesday. That is slightly higher than expected and up from an annual pace of 2.4 percent in May.

2.4 to 2.7. I can live with that. Its still seismically lower than it was under the treasonous commie dems and yes thats what I label you as.

So you admit that you were wrong as usual?
 

dpic73

Active member
Jul 27, 2005
21,752
460
83
From your article.

The Consumer Price Index rose 2.7 percent from a year earlier, the swiftest pace since February, data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed on Tuesday. That is slightly higher than expected and up from an annual pace of 2.4 percent in May.

2.4 to 2.7. I can live with that. Its still seismically lower than it was under the treasonous commie dems and yes thats what I label you as.
The ROI was the same in January under the commie Dems, LOL