Tax Cuts and Revenue

[piezoe]

I'd go toe to toe with you on finance every day of the week, and twice on sunday. I never did forget when you ran away and didn't answer the questions regarding dual mandate that I posed on you a while ago.

Shall we bring up all the times the Fed has been wrong? How about the simply issues with forecasting the Fed has had the last few years on something as basic as GDP?

Can we look at the forecast accuracy of Bernanke and Yellen? How about all the times they missed things like the blaringly obvious housing bubble?

Were I in a room with only Greenspan and myself, and I had to choose which of us should head the Fed, I'd choose Greenspan, of course, despite my knowledge, after the fact, that he made egregious errors while Chairman. No one is perfect, and some will do better than others. Legitimate differences of opinion and criticism of policy is fair and useful. But to talk of persons far more qualified then ourselves in the derogatory terms we encounter in these forums, as though they were goofuses running around with their zippers open, does more than reflect badly on those hurling the insults, it completely destroys their credibility. Likewise, it is foolhardy for us who point out errors made, to assume, therefore, that we know more than they. We don't.

 

[Ricter]

Were I in a room with only Greenspan and myself, and I had to choose which of us should head the Fed, I'd choose Greenspan, of course, despite my knowledge, after the fact, that he made egregious errors while Chairman. No one is perfect, and some will do better than others. Legitimate differences of opinion and criticism of policy is fair and useful , but to talk of persons far more qualified then ourselves in the derogatory terms we encounter in these forums, as though they were goofuses running around with their zippers open, does more than reflect badly on those hurling the insults, it completely destroys their credibility.

That's the beauty of the intardnet: sniping from the peanut gallery without consequence.

"I predict X will happen. If it doesn't, no one on the internet will care, and even fewer will remember. But if X does happen, I'll get to crow on and on about how right I was! So I'm gonna make more predictions!"

 

[jem]

just the fact piezoe even talks like the Fed and its governors have authority is a deceptive statist strategy...
Greenspan had no power... he was a paid spokesmodel.

The Federal Reserve is a privately owned bank which prints as much money as wants... and has caused 700% inflation... at least... in the last 50 years.
The Fed said this on its website that it has private shareholders...

"The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation’s central banking system, are organized much like private corporations–possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year."

I have provided Piezoe with case law showing the Federal Reserve is a privately owned bank.
see below...


http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?p=3917202&highlight=regional#post3917202

Were I in a room with only Greenspan and myself, and I had to choose which of us should head the Fed, I'd choose Greenspan, of course, despite my knowledge, after the fact, that he made egregious errors while Chairman. No one is perfect, and some will do better than others. Legitimate differences of opinion and criticism of policy is fair and useful , but to talk of persons far more qualified then ourselves in the derogatory terms we encounter in these forums, as though they were goofuses running around with their zippers open, does more than reflect badly on those hurling the insults, it completely destroys their credibility.

 

[Ricter]

that would be your thesis.

It's yours, too. Remember in the GDP thread where you were claiming the government wanted to post lower GDP numbers, so they subtracted their spending on Obamacare out?

 

[Tsing Tao]

"There's a recession coming, whippersnapper, you mark my words, there's a recession coming!"

So you make the same dumb comment, worded differently, and think that it increases the impact?

By the way, the first quarter QDP negative print is half way to recession. That's in case you weren't actually paying attention to anything but the sunshine.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Were I in a room with only Greenspan and myself, and I had to choose which of us should head the Fed, I'd choose Greenspan, of course, despite my knowledge, after the fact, that he made egregious errors while Chairman. No one is perfect, and some will do better than others. Legitimate differences of opinion and criticism of policy is fair and useful. But to talk of persons far more qualified then ourselves in the derogatory terms we encounter in these forums, as though they were goofuses running around with their zippers open, does more than reflect badly on those hurling the insults, it completely destroys their credibility. Likewise, it is foolhardy for us who point out errors made, to assume, therefore, that we know more than they. We don't.

Yes, put blind faith in someone appointed to the position in the government, because no government official can possibly be inept, is that it? You're the perfect sheep!

Let me ask you a question, since you brought up the analogy. Try not to dodge. If it was just you and Jim Grant in a room to head the Fed, who would you pick?

 

[Ricter]

So you make the same dumb comment, worded differently, and think that it increases the impact?

By the way, the first quarter QDP negative print is half way to recession. That's in case you weren't actually paying attention to anything but the sunshine.

I didn't consider your comment dumb when I reworded it. Only silly!

 

[Tsing Tao]

That's the beauty of the intardnet: sniping from the peanut gallery without consequence.

"I predict X will happen. If it doesn't, no one on the internet will care, and even fewer will remember. But if X does happen, I'll get to crow on and on about how right I was! So I'm gonna make more predictions!"

You continue to ignore the fact that many of these things don't happen overnight. You think that means you're right about your views, and that the financial acumen, if you can call it that, you preach is the smart path.

You'll vanish when times get tough, or pull your usual obfuscate tricks (dodge, redirect, whatever).

 

[Ricter]

You continue to ignore the fact that many of these things don't happen overnight.

Of course they don't. And that's the beauty, it takes time and during that time people forget your prediction. So there is no downside to predicting doom.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Of course they don't. And that's the beauty, it takes time and during that time people forget your prediction. So there is no downside to predicting doom.

I've been here 7 years or so. I'm sure to be here a bit longer, and I know you won't forget. You certainly take all the opportunities to throw it out now, despite increasing evidence that I will be correct.