"Highly trained and experienced economists" have been calling the shots for 100 years plus and we're 40 trillion in debt with insolvency of the dollar lurking.
Interesting point, but I’d add rivalries make it special, and conferences built rivalries, USC could lose that one game, even four games, and the end of the year UCLA game would still be big, Harvard Yale is still the game in the Ivy League. That could be gone, but not the Harvard Yale game
If we were on Jeopardy I'd take 'Who Didn't Read The Thread' for $1K Alex.Hey, @cawacko and @Teflon Don - here's what happens when world leaders gain control over their own monetary policy like you want trump to do. You guys are such fucking fools all the time. Seriously, gain some knowledge.
What harm can come by giving trump control over monetary policy:
Higher inflation risk
- If leaders keep rates artificially low, too much money can circulate.
- Businesses and consumers spend more, demand rises, and prices can accelerate.
- Once inflation becomes entrenched, bringing it down can require painful rate hikes and recessions.
Many countries that allowed heavy political control over central banks have experienced inflation spikes or even severe currency crises.
Loss of credibility
Market instability
- Markets care not just about policy, but trust.
- Investors want confidence that decisions are based on economic data rather than politics.
- If investors believe rates are manipulated for political goals, they may demand higher returns to compensate for uncertainty.
- Interest rates affect mortgages, retirement accounts, business investment, and the value of the dollar.
- Sudden politically motivated shifts can create volatility.
- Markets generally prefer predictable and evidence-based policy.
Potential pressure on government debt
- Presidents may want lower rates because they reduce borrowing costs for federal deficits.
- But if monetary policy becomes a tool to finance spending, it can weaken confidence in the currency.
Historical examples
- Richard Nixon pressured Arthur Burns before the 1972 election to keep policy easier. Some economists argue this contributed to the inflation problems of the 1970s.
- Countries like Turkey saw major economic instability when political leadership heavily influenced interest-rate policy.
The rivalry games would still be played, but I'm envisioning a scenario where a coach says the result here really doesn't alter our playoff standing. Thus resting some star players like they do in the NFL.
If you were on Jeopardy, a question about you might be, "Who doesn't know shit about how trump's desire to totally control everything might fuck America in the ass, Alex".
I'm not sure what to tell you LA. You come on here screaming at me over a position I've not taken.
You were trying to assure all of us, early in the thread of the Fed's independence. What you fail to take into account is that during trump 2.0 people trump appoints do his exact bidding.
Please point to the post that you take issue with.
We'll see. Trump at the moment isn't quite the "all mighty" he has been.
Or... you could cease being obtuse and own your mistakes.
They do not determine monetary policy. Their function is to control inflation and monitor rhe economy,
As stated, if you want to point out a post I made that you disagree with I'm happy to discuss. For whatever reason, I enjoy talking about the Fed.
From the little I know about economics, it seems now is not the time to lower rates.
I am not an expert, but I'll share what I know. There are of course two mandates for the Fed with inflation and employment.
So they say. In reality they serve no useful purpose.
The debt is decided by the politicians, not the economists. We did wall off the Fed from the politicians, and had a couple of decades of target inflation. Now we are going back to the politicians being in charge, like in the early 1970's, with assumably the same effect.
Or maybe it would be better not to have trump put us into a great depression?
The writing is already on the wall. It's just a matter of time Trump or no Trump.