The Fed is now putting out bogus December inflation projections to justify pushing rates higher in 2023.

A lot of Wall Street economists are looking at the Fed’s 2022 projection for core PCE and thinking there’s no way it could have incorporated Tuesday’s CPI report because if it did, then it would imply a big pop in core inflation in December https://t.co/SzxaSyHsMS

— Matthew B (@boes_) December 16, 2022

The bond market clearly doesnt believe the Fed.
Thats why they've priced into futures markets 2 percentage points of rate cuts by end of 2024.

They dont believe the "keep rates higher for longer" all thru 2023 mantra by the Fed.

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

What are the world's billionaire oligarchs going to buy to protect their wealth instead of U.S. Treasuries?

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

What are the world's billionaire oligarchs going to buy to protect their wealth instead of U.S. Treasuries?

---

A. Are you suggesting that the Fed rate setting has nothing to do with rates consumers get? Do we need to review how that all works?

B. Just wait and see. It's already happening that diversification in occurring.

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

What are the world's billionaire oligarchs going to buy to protect their wealth instead of U.S. Treasuries?

---

A. Are you suggesting that the Fed rate setting has nothing to do with rates consumers get? Do we need to review how that all works?

B. Just wait and see. It's already happening that diversification in occurring.

---

What does your A have at all to do with what I said?

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

---

A. Some of us have longer lifespans than others. I'm not putting a timetable on it, but it WILL happen.

B. Of course there's evidence. There are many quotes by Trump and other politicians who have said where they want rates.
That the Fed is traditionally a separate non-partisan entity…I could very easily see that changing if politicians are able convince the electorate that it should not be. And voters are, as we've seen, completely malleable, gullible.

Yes, bubbles are non-partisan, and we may have one now, may be creating a new one now!
What I was saying is this:
Very simply and obviously….Trump knows that low rates are stimulative. He wants that stimulation so he can claim economic expansion (and he doesn't care about the accompanying inflation risks which would offset his desired gains). He wants to control the army, the Supreme Court, the voting machines, and he would want to control the Fed. If he could control the statistical data releases of how fast the economy is growing, how many jobs were added, inflation measurements, he would do that, too. You and I both know that is true.

Elon Musk also has supreme confidence in self. He bought Twitter so he could control speech. It's pretty funny how his experience is going. I'm going to check in his poll about whether he should step down as CEO. See you in that thread next.

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

What are the world's billionaire oligarchs going to buy to protect their wealth instead of U.S. Treasuries?

---

A. Are you suggesting that the Fed rate setting has nothing to do with rates consumers get? Do we need to review how that all works?

B. Just wait and see. It's already happening that diversification in occurring.

---

What does your A have at all to do with what I said?

---

Huh?

Dajo: Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

CT: Fed sets rates… rates that are for money from itself to biggest banks.
Banks therefore have a baseline, or a bogey, to which it can lend to everyone else. I was not on the Bond side of the floor, so the mechanics escape me, but are you to argue that the Fed rate announcements have no impact, that it's all just "supply and demand"?

Perhaps I went wrong earlier in the thread. I said that Republicans WILL choose to have a tethered Fed to WH policy. That has not happened, nor is it a certainty. I was cynically saying that some radical MAGA republicans would want that to be the case.

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

What are the world's billionaire oligarchs going to buy to protect their wealth instead of U.S. Treasuries?

---

A. Are you suggesting that the Fed rate setting has nothing to do with rates consumers get? Do we need to review how that all works?

B. Just wait and see. It's already happening that diversification in occurring.

---

What does your A have at all to do with what I said?

---

Huh?

Dajo: Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

CT: Fed sets rates… rates that are for money from itself to biggest banks.
Banks therefore have a baseline, or a bogey, to which it can lend to everyone else. I was not on the Bond side of the floor, so the mechanics escape me, but are you to argue that the Fed rate announcements have no impact, that it's all just "supply and demand"?

Perhaps I went wrong earlier in the thread. I said that Republicans WILL choose to have a tethered Fed to WH policy. That has not happened, nor is it a certainty. I was cynically saying that some radical MAGA republicans would want that to be the case.

---

If the Fed sets rates out of the vicinity wanted by the capital markets they will not get their desired result. Instead they will just wreak havoc on the economy and be forced to retreat back to levels desired by supply and demand driven capital markets.

It always amazes me that in order to not be perceived as a heretic you must always believe in supply and demand EXCEPT in the case of the price of money, for which you must believe that suddenly the government is all powerful and supply and demand is irrelevant.

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

---

B. Of course there's evidence. There are many quotes by Trump and other politicians who have said where they want rates.

That the Fed is traditionally a separate non-partisan entity…I could very easily see that changing if politicians are able convince the electorate that it should not be. And voters are, as we've seen, completely malleable, gullible.

---

Huh?
The Fed is the purvue of Congress.
Not the Executive Branch. The Fed was created in 1913 by Congress.

Aside from the semi-annual Humprey-Hawkins testimony by the Fed Chairman, Congress has literally nothing to do with the Fed. The last time that they had any impact on the Fed is back in 1978 when Jimmy Carter signed into law the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act, which stipulated that the Fed and its Board of Governors should establish monetary policy that achieves a dual-mandate, full employment while minimizing inflation and promoting price stability . . . and give a twice a year "update" to Congress.

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

---

B. Of course there's evidence. There are many quotes by Trump and other politicians who have said where they want rates.

That the Fed is traditionally a separate non-partisan entity…I could very easily see that changing if politicians are able convince the electorate that it should not be. And voters are, as we've seen, completely malleable, gullible.

---

Huh?
The Fed is the purvue of Congress.
Not the Executive Branch. The Fed was created in 1913 by Congress.

Aside from the semi-annual Humprey-Hawkins testimony by the Fed Chairman, Congress has literally nothing to do with the Fed. The last time that they had any impact on the Fed is back in 1978 when Jimmy Carter signed into law the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act, which stipulated that the Fed and its Board of Governors should establish monetary policy that achieves a dual-mandate, full employment while minimizing inflation and promoting price stability . . . and give a twice a year "update" to Congress.

---

Aren't you opposing yourself?
You said back to back that the Fed is the purview of Congress and that the Fed has nothing to do with congress.

Question:
Who nominates Fed governors, its chairman?

This morning's discussion is confusing all of us.

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

What are the world's billionaire oligarchs going to buy to protect their wealth instead of U.S. Treasuries?

---

A. Are you suggesting that the Fed rate setting has nothing to do with rates consumers get? Do we need to review how that all works?

B. Just wait and see. It's already happening that diversification in occurring.

---

What does your A have at all to do with what I said?

---

Huh?

Dajo: Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

CT: Fed sets rates… rates that are for money from itself to biggest banks.
Banks therefore have a baseline, or a bogey, to which it can lend to everyone else. I was not on the Bond side of the floor, so the mechanics escape me, but are you to argue that the Fed rate announcements have no impact, that it's all just "supply and demand"?

Perhaps I went wrong earlier in the thread. I said that Republicans WILL choose to have a tethered Fed to WH policy. That has not happened, nor is it a certainty. I was cynically saying that some radical MAGA republicans would want that to be the case.

---

If the Fed sets rates out of the vicinity wanted by the capital markets they will not get their desired result. Instead they will just wreak havoc on the economy and be forced to retreat back to levels desired by supply and demand driven capital markets.

It always amazes me that in order to not be perceived as a heretic you must always believe in supply and demand EXCEPT in the case of the price of money, for which you must believe that suddenly the government is all powerful and supply and demand is irrelevant.

---

I'm a heretic?????
Lol

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

What are the world's billionaire oligarchs going to buy to protect their wealth instead of U.S. Treasuries?

---

A. Are you suggesting that the Fed rate setting has nothing to do with rates consumers get? Do we need to review how that all works?

B. Just wait and see. It's already happening that diversification in occurring.

---

What does your A have at all to do with what I said?

---

Huh?

Dajo: Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

CT: Fed sets rates… rates that are for money from itself to biggest banks.
Banks therefore have a baseline, or a bogey, to which it can lend to everyone else. I was not on the Bond side of the floor, so the mechanics escape me, but are you to argue that the Fed rate announcements have no impact, that it's all just "supply and demand"?

Perhaps I went wrong earlier in the thread. I said that Republicans WILL choose to have a tethered Fed to WH policy. That has not happened, nor is it a certainty. I was cynically saying that some radical MAGA republicans would want that to be the case.

---

If the Fed sets rates out of the vicinity wanted by the capital markets they will not get their desired result. Instead they will just wreak havoc on the economy and be forced to retreat back to levels desired by supply and demand driven capital markets.

It always amazes me that in order to not be perceived as a heretic you must always believe in supply and demand EXCEPT in the case of the price of money, for which you must believe that suddenly the government is all powerful and supply and demand is irrelevant.

---

I'm a heretic?????
Lol

---

No. I'm a heretic. Because I believe in supply and demand for the price of money.

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Huh?
The Fed is the purvue of Congress.
Not the Executive Branch. The Fed was created in 1913 by Congress.

Aside from the semi-annual Humprey-Hawkins testimony by the Fed Chairman, Congress has literally nothing to do with the Fed. The last time that they had any impact on the Fed is back in 1978 when Jimmy Carter signed into law the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act, which stipulated that the Fed and its Board of Governors should establish monetary policy that achieves a dual-mandate, full employment while minimizing inflation and promoting price stability . . . and give a twice a year "update" to Congress.

---

Aren't you opposing yourself?
You said back to back that the Fed is the purview of Congress and that the Fed has nothing to do with congress.

Question:
Who nominates Fed governors, its chairman?

This morning's discussion is confusing all of us.

---

No, I'm not opposing myself at all.

Congress created the FED in 1913 and aside from the Banking Act of 1935 and legislation promoting a "dual-mandate" in 1978 they've literally had nothing to do with the power and autonomy of the Federal Reserve. The power that Bernanke was able to yield during the CDS Crisis in 2009 should tell you as much. With the stroke of his "magic" wand, he was able to guarantee all counter-party risk for market participants involved in CDS with AIG.

The President appoints the Fed Chair, Vice Chair, and Governors.
A full-term is 14 years. The Senate (advises) and confirms them.

As someone who claims to have been a portfolio manager of a $20 Billion Dollar Mutual Fund, I would have thought that you would have been aware of this.

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

---

A. Some of us have longer lifespans than others. I'm not putting a timetable on it, but it WILL happen.

B. Of course there's evidence. There are many quotes by Trump and other politicians who have said where they want rates.
That the Fed is traditionally a separate non-partisan entity…I could very easily see that changing if politicians are able convince the electorate that it should not be. And voters are, as we've seen, completely malleable, gullible.

Yes, bubbles are non-partisan, and we may have one now, may be creating a new one now!
What I was saying is this:
Very simply and obviously….Trump knows that low rates are stimulative. He wants that stimulation so he can claim economic expansion (and he doesn't care about the accompanying inflation risks which would offset his desired gains). He wants to control the army, the Supreme Court, the voting machines, and he would want to control the Fed. If he could control the statistical data releases of how fast the economy is growing, how many jobs were added, inflation measurements, he would do that, too. You and I both know that is true.

Elon Musk also has supreme confidence in self. He bought Twitter so he could control speech. It's pretty funny how his experience is going. I'm going to check in his poll about whether he should step down as CEO. See you in that thread next.

---

How so?
1. He's allowed a few Conservative voices back
2. He's outted what we already knew - that the FBI and DHS were suppressing free speech on Twitter (and, ergo, on other social media), all an after affect of the Patriot Act, and Eric Holder / Barack Obama
3. He's purging bots
4. He's clamping down on child exploration
5. Site traffic is at record levels
6. He's slashed bloat
7. He'll quickly add new functionality

movielover said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

---

A. Some of us have longer lifespans than others. I'm not putting a timetable on it, but it WILL happen.

B. Of course there's evidence. There are many quotes by Trump and other politicians who have said where they want rates.
That the Fed is traditionally a separate non-partisan entity…I could very easily see that changing if politicians are able convince the electorate that it should not be. And voters are, as we've seen, completely malleable, gullible.

Yes, bubbles are non-partisan, and we may have one now, may be creating a new one now!
What I was saying is this:
Very simply and obviously….Trump knows that low rates are stimulative. He wants that stimulation so he can claim economic expansion (and he doesn't care about the accompanying inflation risks which would offset his desired gains). He wants to control the army, the Supreme Court, the voting machines, and he would want to control the Fed. If he could control the statistical data releases of how fast the economy is growing, how many jobs were added, inflation measurements, he would do that, too. You and I both know that is true.

Elon Musk also has supreme confidence in self. He bought Twitter so he could control speech. It's pretty funny how his experience is going. I'm going to check in his poll about whether he should step down as CEO. See you in that thread next.

---

2. He's outted what we already knew - that the FBI and DHS were suppressing free speech on Twitter (and, ergo, on other social media), all an after affect of the Patriot Act, and Eric Holder / Barack Obama

---

Please explain how Eric Holder and Barack Obama are responsible for FBI and DHS actions well into the Trump Presidency and under Trump appointees? Your accusations of extreme Trump weakness are quite the spectacle.

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Huh?
The Fed is the purvue of Congress.
Not the Executive Branch. The Fed was created in 1913 by Congress.

Aside from the semi-annual Humprey-Hawkins testimony by the Fed Chairman, Congress has literally nothing to do with the Fed. The last time that they had any impact on the Fed is back in 1978 when Jimmy Carter signed into law the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act, which stipulated that the Fed and its Board of Governors should establish monetary policy that achieves a dual-mandate, full employment while minimizing inflation and promoting price stability . . . and give a twice a year "update" to Congress.

---

Aren't you opposing yourself?
You said back to back that the Fed is the purview of Congress and that the Fed has nothing to do with congress.

Question:
Who nominates Fed governors, its chairman?

This morning's discussion is confusing all of us.

---

No, I'm not opposing myself at all.

Congress created the FED in 1913 and aside from the Banking Act of 1935 and legislation promoting a "dual-mandate" in 1978 they've literally had nothing to do with the power and autonomy of the Federal Reserve. The power that Bernanke was able to yield during the CDS Crisis in 2009 should tell you as much. With the stroke of his "magic" wand, he was able to guarantee all counter-party risk for market participants involved in CDW with AIG.

The President appoints the Fed Chair, Vice Chair, and Governors.
A full-term is 14 years. The Senate (advises) and confirms them.

As someone who claims to have been a portfolio manager of a $20 Billion Dollar Mutual Fund, I would have thought that you would have been aware of this.

---

I am fully aware. That's why I asked you the question - questions that were in part 1 of my nasd series 7 exam. And I scored a 93. Or was it an 87? Oh hell, I don't remember. But it was a high score, when 70 is passing and many don't pass. Mind you, it's no bar exam, or CFA, which I did not pass. But I had 4.5 kids by that point, and I digress….

You said the executive branch has nothing to do with the Fed. That's wrong. The President appoints. That was my point. A Republican President like Trump would want to break down the independence of the Fed.

Come on, let's stop talking past each other. We both know that there are people who want to control everything. And they today are the MAGA type. I was ripping on the Magas. Go back and read my comment. Am I still misunderstood?

dajo9 said:

---

movielover said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

---

A. Some of us have longer lifespans than others. I'm not putting a timetable on it, but it WILL happen.

B. Of course there's evidence. There are many quotes by Trump and other politicians who have said where they want rates.
That the Fed is traditionally a separate non-partisan entity…I could very easily see that changing if politicians are able convince the electorate that it should not be. And voters are, as we've seen, completely malleable, gullible.

Yes, bubbles are non-partisan, and we may have one now, may be creating a new one now!
What I was saying is this:
Very simply and obviously….Trump knows that low rates are stimulative. He wants that stimulation so he can claim economic expansion (and he doesn't care about the accompanying inflation risks which would offset his desired gains). He wants to control the army, the Supreme Court, the voting machines, and he would want to control the Fed. If he could control the statistical data releases of how fast the economy is growing, how many jobs were added, inflation measurements, he would do that, too. You and I both know that is true.

Elon Musk also has supreme confidence in self. He bought Twitter so he could control speech. It's pretty funny how his experience is going. I'm going to check in his poll about whether he should step down as CEO. See you in that thread next.

---

2. He's outted what we already knew - that the FBI and DHS were suppressing free speech on Twitter (and, ergo, on other social media), all an after affect of the Patriot Act, and Eric Holder / Barack Obama

---

Please explain how Eric Holder and Barack Obama are responsible for FBI and DHS actions well into the Trump Presidency and under Trump appointees? Your accusations of extreme Trump weakness are quite the spectacle.

---

Who cares what ML posts?
Gobblygook nonsense.

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

What are the world's billionaire oligarchs going to buy to protect their wealth instead of U.S. Treasuries?

---

A. Are you suggesting that the Fed rate setting has nothing to do with rates consumers get? Do we need to review how that all works?

B. Just wait and see. It's already happening that diversification in occurring.

---

What does your A have at all to do with what I said?

---

Huh?

Dajo: Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

CT: Fed sets rates… rates that are for money from itself to biggest banks.
Banks therefore have a baseline, or a bogey, to which it can lend to everyone else. I was not on the Bond side of the floor, so the mechanics escape me, but are you to argue that the Fed rate announcements have no impact, that it's all just "supply and demand"?

Perhaps I went wrong earlier in the thread. I said that Republicans WILL choose to have a tethered Fed to WH policy. That has not happened, nor is it a certainty. I was cynically saying that some radical MAGA republicans would want that to be the case.

---

If the Fed sets rates out of the vicinity wanted by the capital markets they will not get their desired result. Instead they will just wreak havoc on the economy and be forced to retreat back to levels desired by supply and demand driven capital markets.

It always amazes me that in order to not be perceived as a heretic you must always believe in supply and demand EXCEPT in the case of the price of money, for which you must believe that suddenly the government is all powerful and supply and demand is irrelevant.

---

I'm a heretic?????
Lol

---

No. I'm a heretic. Because I believe in supply and demand for the price of money.

---

I believe in S & D too.
But governments are also able to fix exchange rates for currencies.

"Don't fight the Fed." They are the Big Dog.

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

What are the world's billionaire oligarchs going to buy to protect their wealth instead of U.S. Treasuries?

---

A. Are you suggesting that the Fed rate setting has nothing to do with rates consumers get? Do we need to review how that all works?

B. Just wait and see. It's already happening that diversification in occurring.

---

What does your A have at all to do with what I said?

---

Huh?

Dajo: Rates are low because of capital market supply and demand - not the Fed.

CT: Fed sets rates… rates that are for money from itself to biggest banks.
Banks therefore have a baseline, or a bogey, to which it can lend to everyone else. I was not on the Bond side of the floor, so the mechanics escape me, but are you to argue that the Fed rate announcements have no impact, that it's all just "supply and demand"?

Perhaps I went wrong earlier in the thread. I said that Republicans WILL choose to have a tethered Fed to WH policy. That has not happened, nor is it a certainty. I was cynically saying that some radical MAGA republicans would want that to be the case.

---

If the Fed sets rates out of the vicinity wanted by the capital markets they will not get their desired result. Instead they will just wreak havoc on the economy and be forced to retreat back to levels desired by supply and demand driven capital markets.

It always amazes me that in order to not be perceived as a heretic you must always believe in supply and demand EXCEPT in the case of the price of money, for which you must believe that suddenly the government is all powerful and supply and demand is irrelevant.

---

I'm a heretic?????
Lol

---

No. I'm a heretic. Because I believe in supply and demand for the price of money.

---

I believe in S & D too.
But governments are also able to fix exchange rates for currencies.

"Don't fight the Fed." They are the Big Dog.

---

Governments can fix exchange rates - until they break.

I must be right. I passed the CFA exams (and the series 7).

You have correctly amended my statement, which supports MY original statement, somewhere back there, that the US Dollar as THE reserve currency is also going to break. Eventually.
We live in a privileged era in this regard. And most take it for granted and are wholly unaware.

Congratulations. I'm truly jealous.
What was your study prep routine? Mine sucked. Books and videos in isolation. A waste for me. I needed interactive group discussion - classes.

Many ways, one being taking the DOJ from a non partisan department to highly partisan. The best example of that was the over 20 DOJ attorneys who participated in the Mueller Weismann hack investigation all magically, and concurrently, 'accidentally' erasing their Federal government smart phones. Those are Federal property, and erasing a smart phone is a tedious project. It was coordinated and illegal. What were they hiding?

Second was their focus on so-called 'domestic terrorists' and 'white supremacists' while leaving our country open to human traffickers, fentanyl, and the Central and South American cartels.

concordtom said:

---

You have correctly amended my statement, which supports MY original statement, somewhere back there, that the US Dollar as THE reserve currency is also going to break. Eventually.
We live in a privileged era in this regard. And most take it for granted and are wholly unaware.

Congratulations. I'm truly jealous.
What was your study prep routine? Mine sucked. Books and videos in isolation. A waste for me. I needed interactive group discussion - classes.

---

Interesting. I am the opposite. Prep books and practice tests in isolation - over and over again. I don't learn well with interactive group discussions. But you won because you got the job in the industry - I never did (or not a good one, anyway), likely due to my lack of people skills. I am very happy with my career but it is not a CFA related career so I let my CFA lapse many years ago.

movielover said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

---

A. Some of us have longer lifespans than others. I'm not putting a timetable on it, but it WILL happen.

B. Of course there's evidence. There are many quotes by Trump and other politicians who have said where they want rates.
That the Fed is traditionally a separate non-partisan entity…I could very easily see that changing if politicians are able convince the electorate that it should not be. And voters are, as we've seen, completely malleable, gullible.

Yes, bubbles are non-partisan, and we may have one now, may be creating a new one now!
What I was saying is this:
Very simply and obviously….Trump knows that low rates are stimulative. He wants that stimulation so he can claim economic expansion (and he doesn't care about the accompanying inflation risks which would offset his desired gains). He wants to control the army, the Supreme Court, the voting machines, and he would want to control the Fed. If he could control the statistical data releases of how fast the economy is growing, how many jobs were added, inflation measurements, he would do that, too. You and I both know that is true.

Elon Musk also has supreme confidence in self. He bought Twitter so he could control speech. It's pretty funny how his experience is going. I'm going to check in his poll about whether he should step down as CEO. See you in that thread next.

---

How so?
1. He's allowed a few Conservative voices back
2. He's outted what we already knew - that the FBI and DHS were suppressing free speech on Twitter (and, ergo, on other social media), all an after affect of the Patriot Act, and Eric Holder / Barack Obama
3. He's purging bots
4. He's clamping down on child exploration
5. Site traffic is at record levels
6. He's slashed bloat
7. He'll quickly add new functionality

---

His chaotic leadership (to put it charitably) has resulted in a massive defection of advertisers and a drain of the vast majority of their competent employees. Looks like ad revenue will be down over 30% in Q4 vs 2021.

So many of your individual points are just Elno's propaganda but there is no point in going blow by blow with you since you seem to inhabit an alternate reality where right wing talking points, no matter how obviously fabricated, come to life.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

movielover said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

---

A. Some of us have longer lifespans than others. I'm not putting a timetable on it, but it WILL happen.

B. Of course there's evidence. There are many quotes by Trump and other politicians who have said where they want rates.
That the Fed is traditionally a separate non-partisan entity…I could very easily see that changing if politicians are able convince the electorate that it should not be. And voters are, as we've seen, completely malleable, gullible.

Yes, bubbles are non-partisan, and we may have one now, may be creating a new one now!
What I was saying is this:
Very simply and obviously….Trump knows that low rates are stimulative. He wants that stimulation so he can claim economic expansion (and he doesn't care about the accompanying inflation risks which would offset his desired gains). He wants to control the army, the Supreme Court, the voting machines, and he would want to control the Fed. If he could control the statistical data releases of how fast the economy is growing, how many jobs were added, inflation measurements, he would do that, too. You and I both know that is true.

Elon Musk also has supreme confidence in self. He bought Twitter so he could control speech. It's pretty funny how his experience is going. I'm going to check in his poll about whether he should step down as CEO. See you in that thread next.

---

How so?
1. He's allowed a few Conservative voices back
2. He's outted what we already knew - that the FBI and DHS were suppressing free speech on Twitter (and, ergo, on other social media), all an after affect of the Patriot Act, and Eric Holder / Barack Obama
3. He's purging bots
4. He's clamping down on child exploration
5. Site traffic is at record levels
6. He's slashed bloat
7. He'll quickly add new functionality

---

His chaotic leadership (to put it charitably) has resulted in a massive defection of advertisers and a drain of the vast majority of their competent employees. Looks like ad revenue will be down over 30% in Q4 vs 2021.

So many of your individual points are just Elno's propaganda but there is no point in going blow by blow with you since you seem to inhabit an alternate reality where right wing talking points, no matter how obviously fabricated, come to life.

---

It's deeply weird that people who claim to love Trump because of his "populist" nature are falling all over themselves to defend a tech billionaire's every move.

dajo9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

You have correctly amended my statement, which supports MY original statement, somewhere back there, that the US Dollar as THE reserve currency is also going to break. Eventually.
We live in a privileged era in this regard. And most take it for granted and are wholly unaware.

Congratulations. I'm truly jealous.
What was your study prep routine? Mine sucked. Books and videos in isolation. A waste for me. I needed interactive group discussion - classes.

---

Interesting. I am the opposite. Prep books and practice tests in isolation - over and over again. I don't learn well with interactive group discussions. But you won because you got the job in the industry - I never did (or not a good one, anyway), likely due to my lack of people skills. I am very happy with my career but it is not a CFA related career so I let my CFA lapse many years ago.

---

I don't mean to end our discussion with such a short reply, but all I can think of is without getting too deep into it al is …
You're a swell guy.

sycasey said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

movielover said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

---

A. Some of us have longer lifespans than others. I'm not putting a timetable on it, but it WILL happen.

B. Of course there's evidence. There are many quotes by Trump and other politicians who have said where they want rates.
That the Fed is traditionally a separate non-partisan entity…I could very easily see that changing if politicians are able convince the electorate that it should not be. And voters are, as we've seen, completely malleable, gullible.

Yes, bubbles are non-partisan, and we may have one now, may be creating a new one now!
What I was saying is this:
Very simply and obviously….Trump knows that low rates are stimulative. He wants that stimulation so he can claim economic expansion (and he doesn't care about the accompanying inflation risks which would offset his desired gains). He wants to control the army, the Supreme Court, the voting machines, and he would want to control the Fed. If he could control the statistical data releases of how fast the economy is growing, how many jobs were added, inflation measurements, he would do that, too. You and I both know that is true.

Elon Musk also has supreme confidence in self. He bought Twitter so he could control speech. It's pretty funny how his experience is going. I'm going to check in his poll about whether he should step down as CEO. See you in that thread next.

---

How so?
1. He's allowed a few Conservative voices back
2. He's outted what we already knew - that the FBI and DHS were suppressing free speech on Twitter (and, ergo, on other social media), all an after affect of the Patriot Act, and Eric Holder / Barack Obama
3. He's purging bots
4. He's clamping down on child exploration
5. Site traffic is at record levels
6. He's slashed bloat
7. He'll quickly add new functionality

---

His chaotic leadership (to put it charitably) has resulted in a massive defection of advertisers and a drain of the vast majority of their competent employees. Looks like ad revenue will be down over 30% in Q4 vs 2021.

So many of your individual points are just Elno's propaganda but there is no point in going blow by blow with you since you seem to inhabit an alternate reality where right wing talking points, no matter how obviously fabricated, come to life.

---

It's deeply weird that people who claim to love Trump because of his "populist" nature are falling all over themselves to defend a tech billionaire's every move.

---

These people love rich white men, because they think they have a lot in common with rich white men even though socio-economically speaking they are more like inner city Latinas.

concordtom said:

---

Come on, let's stop talking past each other. We both know that there are people who want to control everything. And they today are the MAGA type. I was ripping on the Magas. Go back and read my comment. Am I still misunderstood?

---

You really need to stop obsessing over the guy to the point where you involve him in every single post, even about the Federal Reserve and Monetary Policy.

He's done.
Put a fork in him and MOVE ON.

dimitrig said:

---

sycasey said:

---

It's deeply weird that people who claim to love Trump because of his "populist" nature are falling all over themselves to defend a tech billionaire's every move.

---

These people love rich white men, because they think they have a lot in common with rich white men even though socio-economically speaking they are more like inner city Latinas.

---

The Cuban population in Florida is the poster child for this.

concordtom said:

---

I am fully aware. That's why I asked you the question - questions that were in part 1 of my nasd series 7 exam. And I scored a 93.

---

Who cares?

I scored an 89 and never used it.
It's meaningless.

Stereotype much?

DiabloWags said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

sycasey said:

---

It's deeply weird that people who claim to love Trump because of his "populist" nature are falling all over themselves to defend a tech billionaire's every move.

---

These people love rich white men, because they think they have a lot in common with rich white men even though socio-economically speaking they are more like inner city Latinas.

---

The Cuban population in Florida is the poster child for this.

---

Cubans love freedom.

movielover said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

sycasey said:

---

It's deeply weird that people who claim to love Trump because of his "populist" nature are falling all over themselves to defend a tech billionaire's every move.

---

These people love rich white men, because they think they have a lot in common with rich white men even though socio-economically speaking they are more like inner city Latinas.

---

The Cuban population in Florida is the poster child for this.

---

Cubans love freedom.

---

They sure do!

sycasey said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

movielover said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Republicans want to destroy old norms in DC. They will hire Supreme Court justices who fulfill the requirement, as prescreened.
And they will appoint Fed members who do the same: lower rates for immediate boost even if it creates a bubble elsewhere down the road.

One day, the world will reject the dollar as reserve currency, stop buying our bonds. We are in real economic trouble then.

---

A.)That wont happen in our lifetime.

B.) Your comment "politicizing" only one party (GOP) regarding the Fed doesnt hold water. There's no evidence that supports your claim. Democrats have experienced plenty of Fed "bubbles" under their appointees.

---

A. Some of us have longer lifespans than others. I'm not putting a timetable on it, but it WILL happen.

B. Of course there's evidence. There are many quotes by Trump and other politicians who have said where they want rates.
That the Fed is traditionally a separate non-partisan entity…I could very easily see that changing if politicians are able convince the electorate that it should not be. And voters are, as we've seen, completely malleable, gullible.

Yes, bubbles are non-partisan, and we may have one now, may be creating a new one now!
What I was saying is this:
Very simply and obviously….Trump knows that low rates are stimulative. He wants that stimulation so he can claim economic expansion (and he doesn't care about the accompanying inflation risks which would offset his desired gains). He wants to control the army, the Supreme Court, the voting machines, and he would want to control the Fed. If he could control the statistical data releases of how fast the economy is growing, how many jobs were added, inflation measurements, he would do that, too. You and I both know that is true.

Elon Musk also has supreme confidence in self. He bought Twitter so he could control speech. It's pretty funny how his experience is going. I'm going to check in his poll about whether he should step down as CEO. See you in that thread next.

---

How so?
1. He's allowed a few Conservative voices back
2. He's outted what we already knew - that the FBI and DHS were suppressing free speech on Twitter (and, ergo, on other social media), all an after affect of the Patriot Act, and Eric Holder / Barack Obama
3. He's purging bots
4. He's clamping down on child exploration
5. Site traffic is at record levels
6. He's slashed bloat
7. He'll quickly add new functionality

---

His chaotic leadership (to put it charitably) has resulted in a massive defection of advertisers and a drain of the vast majority of their competent employees. Looks like ad revenue will be down over 30% in Q4 vs 2021.

So many of your individual points are just Elno's propaganda but there is no point in going blow by blow with you since you seem to inhabit an alternate reality where right wing talking points, no matter how obviously fabricated, come to life.

---

It's deeply weird that people who claim to love Trump because of his "populist" nature are falling all over themselves to defend a tech billionaire's every move.

---

The conservative movement is fueled by a number of things including white grievance and faux victimhood. No longer content to just pine for the confederate losers, Trump seized on this to endear all manner of "losers" to conservatives. He used it to great effect in his political career and it's become a prominent copycat trait amongst GOPers.

[EDIT: Forgot to mention that a big part of this is that the pretend victims are actually the perpetrators. In another thread ML just noted that a panel discussing the war in Ukraine was "pro Ukraine." Given that Ukraine is the victim of unprovoked aggression and war crimes from Russia, you would imagine that everyone would be pro-Ukraine (obviously other than Putin fanboys like cal88) but ML now feels like Putin/Russia is the victim here because most normal people favor Ukraine.]

Obviously Elno as tapped into this energy. People like ML think that Elno is just like him - an unfairly maligned, misunderstood great white man. I suppose simping for Elno helps them feel better about their lives. Or whatever. This is the same thing W.E.B. Du Bois said about the poor white southerners who defended/identified more with rich whites than poor black people, even though they would have been better off working with all poor people to forge a better path forward.

Look at the celebration of Kari Lake in a recent conservative event. Remember this is a person who has never won an election and just lost one that she easily could have won if she wasn't a nut job (even though she's completely unqualified and has no public service experience). Yet she's a hero to the modern conservative movement because she's a loser who claims she was wronged - just like the losers who form much of the conservative base.

OMG. Kari Lake’s intro at TPUSA tonight. pic.twitter.com/pnK2aMX3fL

— Ron Filipkowski 🇺🇦 (@RonFilipkowski) December 19, 2022