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.
LOL Bretton Woods only operated 12 years and you don't know your history that you claim to know....rant rant rant
Perhaps you can actually read what was stated? To quote myself "The modern currency regime I'm referring is the post-Bretton woods system. Namely, a global system of fiat currencies that freely float against each other".
Quote:
Originally Posted by lumbollo
This is simply incorrect. The Federal Reserve made no significant changes in 2004. In fact it made no changes at all during this year.
Amazing. You just rant without ever even looking anything up! The FED increased the Fed Funds rate and the Discount Rate 5 times (by .25%) in 2004.
They didn't start to tighten monetary policy until the end of 2005 when they started to understand the significance of the bubble they created. This tightening did not peak until after the real estate markets had begun to collapse in the major bubble markets in the USA.
Grossly inaccurate again. In the end of 2005 the Fed funds rate was already 4.25 it peaked at 5.25 in 2006 before the real estate bubble collapsed. Most of the tightening occurred before the end of 2005, contrary to your suggestion. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of what you want to believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lumbollo
"mind of its own?" haha Bubbles are not creatures with minds though I suppose a novice might think of them in this manner. It's nothing more than an analogy to describe complex monetary phenomena that has failed.
Initially when I read about the bubble, I thought it was more of the banks fault because they were the ones who lent the money. As well as the Fed's fault because they have the ability to increase the money supply. But was it the other way around, that people, politicians, presidents, acts (like community reinvestment act) that pressured banks to lend? Not that the banks needed much pressure, since everybody was making money and times were 'good.'
People, Banks, etc are always greedy, if you give them a knife that is too sharp they will cut themselves. Congress started to deregulate the banking industry and as a result a number of new financial instruments were created. Almost every bubble has been formed from a new financial instrument that had the effect of increasing the money supply (by increasing credit).
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheenie2000
It just seems though that since there is the ability to control monetary policy and the money supply that we should be able to have a society with stability.
The money supply was growing in nonstandard ways, so the FED would not be able to fight its growth with open market operations. The FED did try in 2004, but it was completely ineffective. It was really congress that needed to act, not the FED. Even if the FED fully understood what was going on it would be hard for them to stop it with the tools at their disposal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheenie2000
Can't there be a way to have stability rather than this up and down roller coaster through taxes and monetary policy.
Sure, communism. A capitalist economy is always going to have business cycles.
The creation of the Fed has not provided the stability it was claimed to do.
The business cycles have been more moderate since the creation of the FED. The big exceptions are the depression and today, but many things were not understood in the 1930's as far as monetary policy goes.
....
Amazing. You just rant without ever even looking anything up! The FED increased the Fed Funds rate and the Discount Rate 5 times (by .25%) in 2004. .....
Son, do you even know how to read a finance report? Go read a graph of the data. However I think Alan Greenspan would know what was going on and he has stated that he did not start tightening monetary policy to halt the credit bubble until late 2005 early 2006. The fed monetary policy is not limited to setting rates.
Perhaps you can actually read what was stated? To quote myself "The modern currency regime I'm referring is the post-Bretton woods system. Namely, a global system of fiat currencies that freely float against each other". Yawn.
OK if this is your definition now I will answer you question. You have a habit of changing the discussion. You said there is no examples in this new "regime" but there is. I will give you not one, but two examples. Iceland's currency failed two years ago exactly for the reasons discussed in this topic and which you dispute. This was one of the most advanced economies of the world and met its demise when the rest of the world refused to accept the Krona, almost overnight, because it had become worthless. They had no assets to back the currency.
Another example that is taking place right now is Vietnam. It's currency is in the process of collapsing, the people have moved to handling day to day transactions in Gold (something you said in the other topic has no worth), and the government finally relented and just bought 5 tons of Gold in an attempt to prop up the Dong.
There are others as well, but it's basically a waste of time. (Actually 3 examples now) As people have pointed out in other topics you basically attack examples given that you demand as proof.
You are fairly rude to people with your "yawn" comments which is odd for someone who is consistently wrong as you are.
That's not true, just doing a quick google search, the following panics came up: Panic of 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893, 1907.
If you read old newspaper articles on the library of congress's website, you can read very similar articles being written then like today.
Instability cannot be directly correlated to the creation of the Fed when so many similar things happened prior to that.
The good part about the panics in the 1800's is that they were fairly short. Since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 there has been more recessions and depressions and they have lasted longer.
There was a recession in 1919 very similar to the so-called big one in 1929. Luckily the Fed and the government didn't get involved in 1919 and it actually was quite short. There were a few recessions in the 1920's, then a depression and recession throughout the 1930's and 1940's. Then more in the late 1940's, a couple in the 1950's, 1960, then the late 1960's, the mid 1970's with high inflation, then the early 1980's, the late 1980's into the early 1990's, and finally early 2000 and the current one now.
So yea, the Federal Reserve has done an extrodinary job. Maybe we should have two of them.
Also, the Austrian school of economics has predicted most of the bubbles and recessions throughout the 1900's.
Son, do you even know how to read a finance report? Go read a graph of the data.... .
Amazing. You are going to continue to pretend as if you're right even though the information that says otherwise if there for anybody to see?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lumbollo
Iceland's currency failed two years ago exactly for the reasons discussed in this topic and which you dispute. This was one of the most advanced economies of the world and met its demise when the rest of the world refused to accept the Krona, almost overnight, because it had become worthless.
Are you serious? I mean really...I hope you're just pulling my leg here. Iceland is a country with a population of around 300,000...
Quote:
Originally Posted by lumbollo
Another example that is taking place right now is Vietnam. It's currency is in the process of collapsing, the people have moved to handling day to day transactions in Gold
Ugh....
Anyhow, it is apparent that you are going to believe whatever you wish. Good luck with that.
Amazing. You are going to continue to pretend as if you're right even though the information that says otherwise if there for anybody to see? ...Are you serious? I mean really...I hope you're just pulling my leg here. Iceland is a country with a population of around 300,000...Anyhow, it is apparent that you are going to believe whatever you wish. Good luck with that.
Of course this is your response as you simply didn't address the real points of my post. i.e. The 3 countries that are examples that you said didn't exist. Insults.
-----------------
Thanks to everyone who sent me rep for that post.
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.
