Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The President has no power to stop FED actions. They created specifically so the FED could carry out its mandate without needing presidential or congressional approval. It is an independent body. This is objective reality.
The President can attempt to change the some of the members on the board of the FED, but some of that needs congressional approval.
My point is, the president approves of the QE1-QE4. If he did not, he would sure as hell vilify the fed as if they were Republicans in congress, or corporate jet owners, or Wall Street fat cats, corporate CEOs etc...
Some people have forgotten what the function of government is. We elect people to represent our interests, and if we don't want our tax dollars wasted on Chinese prostitutes, then our representatives should end that wasteful expenditure.
LOL, again, there are 300 million people in this nation who have all kinds of interests that may differ from you, many businesses, there are international relationships to further US interests.
If you think the federal government should only carry out programs that fit just your narrow interests only, or only look into subjects that you are personally interested in knowing about, I suggest you don't want to live in this nation, because public policy will never be decided on that basis. It can't.
This is why a discussion and explanation is needed about any policy as to the reason it was created, whether is created for a sound reason and if it is carrying out its mission.
You want to bypass that and say well because I don't like the sound of the program or because I don't care about the subject matter that the program is measuring then it is wasteful, that is an insane and illogical way to have a public policy discussion.
My point is, the president approves of the QE1-QE4. If he did not, he would sure as hell vilify the fed as if they were Republicans in congress, or corporate jet owners, or Wall Street fat cats, corporate CEOs etc...
Have you heard President Obama or his surrogates come out in support of the FED's actions?
LOL, again, there are 300 million people in this nation who have all kinds of interests that may differ from you, many businesses, there are international relationships to further US interests.
If you think the federal government should only carry out programs that fit just your narrow interests only, or only look into subjects that you are personally interested in knowing about, I suggest you don't want to live in this nation, because public policy will never be decided on that basis. It can't.
This is why a discussion and explanation is needed about any policy as to the reason it was created, whether is created for a sound reason and if it is carrying out its mission.
You want to bypass that and say well because I don't like the sound of the program or because I don't care about the subject matter that the program is measuring then it is wasteful, that is an insane and illogical way to have a public policy discussion.
I'm one of many who would oppose this type of wasteful spending. And if enough of us write our representatives in the senate and congress they can end this waste. So don't tell me i need to sit down and accept whatever stupid crap our government does.
I'm not like you, I do not worship the politicians and bureaucrats as if they are masterminds who have all the answers, and everything they do is honest, above board and is never wasteful or corrupt.
As members of Congress fight over what to cut in the current federal budget to avert a government shutdown, lawmakers are about to receive a blockbuster report that could provide a roadmap to potentially hundreds of billions of dollars in waste. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) is poised to release a report Tuesday that one senator said "will make us all look like jackasses."
"Go study that (report). It will show why we're $14 trillion in debt," said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. "Anybody that says we don't look like fools up here hasn't read the report."
I am glad you brought this up and this has been in the forum before but unfortunately never really was discussed in detail. If we had real leadership we would not be releasing illegals and using fear mongering tactics but instead looking at this report and taking some action. It is not like there has been no good plans to cut spending, Simpson/Bowles also had solid ideas.
Have you heard President Obama or his surrogates come out in support of the FED's actions?
The summit has been overshadowed by disagreements over the U.S. Federal Reserve's quantitative easing (QE) policy under which it will print money to buy $600 billion of government bonds. The move could depress the dollar and cause a destabilising flow of money into emerging economies.
"I will say that the Fed's mandate, my mandate, is to grow our economy. And that's not just good for the United States, that's good for the world as a whole," Obama said during a trip to India. "The worst thing that could happen to the world economy, not just ours, is if we end up being stuck with no growth or very limited growth."
Have you heard President Obama or his surrogates come out in support of the FED's actions?
Obama did not have to say a word his actions tell the whole story, after all he choose to give Uncle Ben another term. If he was against he would have gave Barnanke the axe and picked Richard Fisher from the Dallas FR to replace him. Almost everything Barnanke does Fisher is against and if he would have been at the helm all the QE would have ended. Plus Obama is not stupid he knows that the money/credit has to end up some place and that place is the stock market. I mean with out Uncle Ben who is going to buy treasuries with 0% interest? and who would take the slop off of the banks books and buy their mortgage backed securities. Obama loves Uncle Benny he almost makes him look good.
LOL, This is what the whole discussion is supposed to be about. I have not come out against cutting any teeny tiny program. I only said the basis of why to cut a program is based on the reason the program was created, if the creation is for a sound reason, and if the program is carrying out its mission.
conservatives want to cut programs based on nothing, if the name sounds silly to them, if the program is looking at a subject that the conservative is not interested in knowing, that is a completely illogical and insane way to conduct public policy discussions.
So did you think spending money on a study of why chinese whores drink is a waste of money
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
