Congress to audit the FED

Should congress to audit the FED?

  • Yes, Congress should audit the FED

    Votes: 46 88.5%
  • No, Congress should not audit the FED

    Votes: 6 11.5%

  • Total voters
    52
Obama already choose 30% or so of the FOMC. If you guys still want to see a hate hike in your lifetime you better hope Congress doesnt audit monetary policy
 
Quote from krazykarl:



Fact is you appear to be a troll, and an uneducated one at that. Please go back to the yahoo boards.

He is a troll...
Almost positive he is the same guy as Dataa.
And I don't think he's American either so I don't know what he's all upset about, quite frankly.
 
Quote from Daal:

Obama already choose 30% or so of the FOMC. If you guys still want to see a hate hike in your lifetime you better hope Congress doesnt audit monetary policy
Congress auditing monetary policy would definitely be letting the fox guard the henhouse. Whatever incentive issue you think the Fed has with raising rates/leaning against bubbles, it's orders of magnitude worse with a proper political institution, such as Congress.

Furthermore, word-for-word transcripts of all FOMC/Board meetings are available to the public after 5 years. You can dissect every sentence uttered during monetary policy discussions to your heart's content.
 
Quote from Martinghoul:

Congress auditing monetary policy would definitely be letting the fox guard the henhouse. Whatever incentive issue you think the Fed has with raising rates/leaning against bubbles, it's orders of magnitude worse with a proper political institution, such as Congress.

Furthermore, word-for-word transcripts of all FOMC/Board meetings are available to the public after 5 years. You can dissect every sentence uttered during monetary policy discussions to your heart's content.

Unfortunately we don't have access to the trading desks of the Fed and Treasury. As when Alan Grayson grilled the guy from the Fed in a Congressional hearing about the Fed's ability to buy/sell equity products in the equity markets. The answer from the Fed was that it was within their power.
 
Quote from Martinghoul:

Right, but that's plain silly, achilles... If I lend myself 10 bucks at 10% daily interest and then pay myself 11 bucks back tomorrow, where have I suffered anything, apart from, potentially, what you call "debasement"?


First, FED debasement via monetization keeps rates artificially low, which fuels Government deficits and asset bubbles. Are you going to tell me that the Nasdaq and Banking Bubble didn't hurt the average American?

Second, debasement (inflation-tax) is real since Government + contractors spend borrowed money first. But the inflation tax is present if the FED monetizes with interest, or without.

Third, the interest charge is a cost to Taxpayers because they have to pay it, and it's the Government + contractors who enjoy the lower prices, because of it. Basically, in effect, a Government subsidy or an additional tax levied on citizens to finance Government deficit spending (a great idea).

Last, if you really think borrowing from ourselves - at interest - is no different then just printing the money without interest, then why not just print the money without interest?

Quote from Martinghoul:

Furthermore, if you're unhappy about the government issuing treasuries and spending the proceeds in an unproductive fashion, what does that have to do with the Fed? Fix your dysfunctional government...

The FED is part of the dysfunctional Government. This is not an either-or argument. Congress and FED are the problem. The FED loves Congress because they keep it's charter and secrecy intact. And Congress love the FED because it finances endless bubbles and deficits which keep political whores elected. The problem is two-headed. Well, actually three-headed when the IRS is considered (collection-wing for the FED).


Quote from Martinghoul:

Finally, your objection to me sounds analogous to complaining about the IRS while loving the idea of income taxes. If you like the idea of taxes, you'd better accept the costs of running the IRS. If you like the idea of a monetary economy with a unified medium of exchange, you'd better accept the costs of running a Central Bank. If, on the other hand, you think the whole conceptual framework is wrong, there's no point having a discussion.

Nice straw man. I don't love income taxes, nor the IRS. We didn't have either before 1913, yet the Country grew remarkably. Why is that?

The claim we need a Central Bank for any money-based economy is wrong. Gold and silver are unified methods of exchange without the need for a Central Bank. In fact, that's how most of the worlds economies operated before fiat money and Central Banking - gold and silver. Last, if you don't want to talk, that's fine. I'm not forcing you to discuss anything.

Quote from Martinghoul:

Mine wasn't really a question, but point taken. Apologies.

No worries.
 
Quote from HiF trader:


Why is business done with these international bankers when we don't need them at all.

Why are we cutting them in when we don't have to, this is crazy

Exactly. We don't need Central Banks. They do nothing but print money out of thin air, charge interest, and blow asset bubbles.

It's a scam.
 
Quote from stock piker:
Unfortunately we don't have access to the trading desks of the Fed and Treasury. As when Alan Grayson grilled the guy from the Fed in a Congressional hearing about the Fed's ability to buy/sell equity products in the equity markets. The answer from the Fed was that it was within their power.
So what? Existence of social contracts means that all sorts of authorities/associations have all sorts of powers.

Furthermore, as I keep saying, you do have access to the NY Fed's portfolio. You can see how much of each security the NY Fed's SOMA account holds. At a higher level, you can see the Fed's balance sheet.

What I really really don't get here is why all this angst about the Fed. Why is it that nobody seems to have such a large and painful beef with the Supreme Court, an organization that a) is not accountable to anyone; b) elects its members for life; c) has virtually unlimited powers? Why haven't I been inundated by conspiracy theories that the Supreme Court has been suborned by the secret cult of Papua New Guinean fire-devil worshipers?
 
Martinghoul wrote this about the US Supreme Court:
"elects its members for life;"

No, they don't elect their own "members".
Justices are appointed by POTUS, and must be approved by Congress before being seated on that lofty bench.
 
Quote from IanMacQuaide:

Martinghoul wrote this about the US Supreme Court:
"elects its members for life;"

No, they don't elect their own "members".
Justices are appointed by POTUS, and must be approved by Congress before being seated on that lofty bench.
Sorry, I should have said "has its members appointed for life"... The key element of what I said was "for life". However, I agree I should have been more careful. I am aware of the process through which Supreme Court Justices end up on the bench. I am also aware that, strictly speaking, a Justice's tenure can be terminated by impeachment, conviction etc. However, my point still stands... Any Fed governor could only dream of the sort of mandate that a Supreme Court justice gets handed.
 
Quote from krazykarl:

The fed is routinely "audited" by congress - why do you think it's not? Did you read some crazy blog article

Congress can see anything they want in the Fed's books, regardless if it's in one of the public entities or the private entities. Just subpoena it, bam, a few days later they have whatever they want.

Wrong. Key aspects of FED operations can't be audited. Get off the Koolaid, bud.

"Currently, GAO lacks audit authority over the Federal Reserve's monetary policy, foreign transactions, and Federal Open Market Committee operations. Legislation pending before Congress would remove all restrictions on GAO's authority to examine Federal Reserve activities."
http://www.gao.gov/products/T-GGD-94-44


What does that mean in practice?

The GAO can’t review most of the Fed’s monetary policy actions or decisions, including discount window lending (direct loans to financial institutions), open-market operations and any other transactions made under the direction of the Federal Open Market Committee. It also can’t look into the Fed’s transactions with foreign governments, foreign central banks and other international financing organizations.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/08/31/what-would-a-federal-reserve-audit-show/tab/article/


The Federal Reserve holds more raw power than the President of the United States, or Congress.

They can literally print, bribe, prop-up and bailout entire Countries, in total secrecy, by writing checks against America. Can you imagine what kind of power that is? A Saddam needs a few billion in slush money to wage war against Iran. Can't do it in the transparent public arena of Congress? Or under the Office of the President? Fine. Get a Volker to cut him a check. Need to fund the Contras, or wage some clandestine war against South American guerrillas off-balance sheet? Fine. Cut a check. Want to bribe half the judgeship in some Latin American shithole for British Petroleum? Great. Done.

Money makes the world go 'round. Anyone with the ultimate power to print BILLIONS in secrecy, and gift it to any Corporation, Foreign Government or Central Bank, that's PURE POWER. Warfare through proxies and total Crony Capitalism.

Imagine what people would do for a few million. Now imagine what they'd do for BILLIONS. The shortsightedness here is astonishing.
 
Back
Top